US embassy cable - 04ANKARA1752

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 001752 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE 
 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/23/2005 
TAGS: PGOV, PREL, PHUM, TU 
SUBJECT: MINORITIES BOARD REVIEWING APPOINTMENT OF 
NON-TURKS TO ORTHODOX CHURCH'S HOLY SYNOD 
 
REF: ISTANBUL 381 
 
 
(U) Classified by Polcouns John Kunstadter; reasons 1.5 (b, 
d). 
 
 
1. (U) Summary: Caught off-guard by Ecumenical Patriarch 
Bartholomew's appointment of six non-Turkish citizens to his 
Holy Synod, Turkish officials are not certain how to react, 
but say GOT is reviewing the move.  Part of the difficulty 
the authorities face is that Bartholomew's move exposes the 
law of rule vice rule of law approach the Turkish State has 
used since 1923 to keep the Ecumenical Patriarchate boxed in: 
there is no Turkish law governing the Synod and the State has 
relied on decrees from the Istanbul governorate and 
enforcement by a heretofore secret watchdog subcommittee. 
End summary. 
 
 
2. (U) Nezih Dogan, Interior Ministry SecGen, told us March 
19 the GOT is awaiting a report from a newly formed 
minorities board before responding to the pathbreaking 
decision of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I to appoint six 
non-Turkish citizens to the Orthodox church's Holy Synod 
(reftel). 
 
 
3. (U) The GOT in January abolished the Minorities 
Subcommittee, established by secret regulation in 1962 to 
monitor minorities as potential threats to the Turkish State, 
and replaced it with the Board to Assess Problems of 
Minorities (the new Board regulation was also secret, though 
it was leaked to the press).  The former Subcommittee 
included representatives from the Turkish National 
Intelligence Organization, the Turkish General Staff, and the 
National Security Council, among other government agencies. 
The military and intelligence agencies were excluded from the 
new Board, which includes representatives from MFA, the 
Education Ministry, the Interior Ministry, and the State 
Ministry overseeing the Directorate General of Foundations. 
Dogan said the GOT has been slow to respond to the Synod 
issue because it is still in the process of establishing the 
new Board.  Nevertheless, Board members met for the first 
time the week of March 8 for the express purpose of reviewing 
the Synod issue.  At the meeting, various members were tasked 
with specific areas of research. 
 
 
4. (U) Dogan averred that the Board considers the matter 
urgent, and will move "as quickly as possible," though it is 
unlikely to take action before the March 28 local elections. 
The Board will review Turkish law, the Lausanne Treaty and 
its deliberations, and international law.  If the Board 
determines that the law either prohibits or protects the 
Patriarch's actions, it will render a final decision. 
Otherwise, it will submit a recommendation to relevant 
Cabinet officials for a political decision.  Dogan asserted 
the standard line that Turkey, since Ottoman times, has 
always been tolerant of different religions.  He said the GOT 
will be as flexible as possible under the law, but cannot 
accept a "fait accompli" from the Patriarch: "We will see if 
this is being done with good will, or if there is another 
intention behind it." 
 
 
5. (U) Mustafa Yurdakul, first secretary in the MFA 
Department of Greek Affairs, told us the Board will not find 
a solution in the law.  He said there is no law governing the 
Synod, and that even the edicts from the Istanbul Governor's 
Office requiring that the Patriarch be a Turkish citizen and 
setting rules for Patriarchal succession do not establish 
clear citizenship requirements for the Synod.  Nevertheless, 
until now the Patriarch had appointed only Turkish citizens, 
and the GOT will have to adopt a policy regarding this 
unprecedented situation.  While making their decision, 
Yurdakul averred, GOT officials will have to consider the 
implications for Turkey's EU-related reform efforts. 
 
 
6. (C) Comment: The appointment of six non-Turkish citizens 
to the Synod is a bid to keep the Ecumenical Patriarchate 
alive and viable in Istanbul as much in a physical sense as 
in the fact that the Patriarchate represents something beyond 
time.  The appointments represent absolutely no threat to 
Turkey's interests; indeed, by strengthening the Ecumenical 
Patriarchate, Turkey enhances its position.  However, 
reflecting the culture of suspicion lying behind Interior 
Ministry SecGen Dogan's words, elements of the Turkish 
Kemalist (secularist-nationalist) Establishment as well as 
the coalescing Islam-oriented Establishment remain incapable 
of seeing the benefits to Turkey. 
7. (C) Comment, contd.: In this latter regard, there are two 
broader points.  First, the cost to Turkey from the secular 
and Islam-oriented Establishments' paranoia and lack of 
normal analytic abilities.  This mentality, combined with 
the two Establishments' continuing refusal to acknowledge 
both the Patriarchate's ecumenical essence and the 
inestimable value of maintaining the Patriarchate in 
Istanbul rather than having the Russian Orthodox Church 
gain the paramount status it and the Russian State have 
sought for centuries reflect both Kemalism's and the 
Islam-oriented Establishment's retrograde and inward-looking 
definition of state interests.  Second, this paranoia is 
another measure of how far Turkey still must go before 
it understands and practices true religious tolerance. 
EDELMAN