US embassy cable - 04ANKARA3603

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 003603 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EUR/SE, EUR/PD, NEA/PD, DRL 
JCS PASS J-5/CDR S. WRIGHT 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC, KMDR, TU, Press Summaries 
SUBJECT: ANKARA MEDIA REACTION REPORT, 
FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 2004 
 
 
THIS REPORT WILL PRESENT A TURKISH PRESS SUMMARY UNDER 
THREE THEMES: 
 
HEADLINES 
BRIEFING 
EDITORIAL OPINION 
 
HEADLINES 
 
MASS APPEAL 
President Bush: I would like to spend my holiday in Turkey - 
Hurriyet 
Bombs did not change Bush program in Turkey - Aksam 
FM Gul: No US demand for new Turkish bases - Aksam 
El-Al suspends Istanbul flights - Milliyet 
Iraqi hell: 100 killed, 320 injured - Sabah 
Socialist International meets in Istanbul - Milliyet 
Iran releases captive Britons - Sabah 
 
OPINION MAKERS 
Bush to urge NATO protection for Iraq at Istanbul summit - 
Zaman 
Bush to ask NATO to train Iraqi forces - Radikal 
Washington wants new defense deal with Turkey - Cumhuriyet 
Talabani suggests general amnesty for PKK - Zaman 
Turkmen: Unrest in Kirkuk may cause civil war - Yeni Safak 
Violence growing in Iraq - Radikal 
Resisters strike at five Iraqi cities - Cumhuriyet 
BBC to set up Arabic channel - Radikal 
Athens happy about efforts to reopen Halki Seminary - Zaman 
 
 
BRIEFING 
 
President Bush due in Turkey:  Turkish papers expect 
President Bush to voice support for Turkey's EU membership 
at the June 25-26 US-EU Summit in Dublin, Ireland.  Bush 
will highlight the constructive attitude of Turkey during 
the UN-backed negotiations for reunification of Cyprus, and 
will press EU leaders to grant Ankara a date for entry 
talks.  "Cumhuriyet" does not expect President Bush to 
announce a US package of measures about Cyprus.  US sources 
say that changes may be needed in some US laws and 
regulations in order to take steps forward. Therefore, 
discussion of a `Cyprus package' during the Bush visit are 
not realistic, "Cumhuriyet" reports.  Turkish papers also 
expect Ankara to urge President Bush to authorize US 
military action to remove the terrorist PKK presence from 
northern Iraq.  On Thursday, FM Gul denied news stories 
claiming that President Bush would convey a list of new 
military demands during his visit to Ankara. 
 
Washington wants new defense deal with Turkey:  Today's 
"Cumhuriyet" reports that the US believes the 1980 Defense 
and Economic Cooperation Agreement with Turkey is outdated, 
and that a new arrangement that would better fit the defense 
requirements of both countries.  Ankara thinks that the US 
is mainly interested in the defense aspect of the agreement, 
and did not care about its economic side.  Washington 
believes the world and the threat have changed since the 
agreement was signed, and that a new military approach 
should be developed in line with those changes.  In a recent 
visit to Ankara, US Assistant Secretary of State Lincoln 
Bloomfield said the future status of Incirlik Airbase 
depends on the outcome of the strategic dialogue between 
officials of the two countries.  Bloomfield's remarks were 
evaluated as an indication of Washington's efforts to bring 
a new definition to its strategic cooperation with Turkey. 
Talabani calls for amnesty for PKK:  Patriotic Union of 
Iraqi Kurdistan (PUK) leader Jalal Talabani on Thursday 
called for a general amnesty for members of the outlawed 
PKK/Kongra-Gel.  Talabani said the PKK was now divided into 
three, and said that the more pacifist wing led by Osman 
Ocalan was supporting a political struggle.  "Most PKK 
members would return to their houses if a general amnesty 
were declared," Talabani stressed.  Talabani also noted that 
he did not expect the US to launch a military operation 
against the PKK, and said the Iraqi interim government 
should take a decision for such an action. 
EDITORIAL OPINION: 
 
--POTUS Visit 
--NATO Summit 
 
"President Bush's Visit" 
Hasan Mesut Hazar commented in the conservative Turkiye 
(6/25): "A majority of the Turkish public thinks that 
President Bush has created a great deal of chaos in the 
world through his mistaken policies.  They believe that the 
American fight against terrorism is really an effort to gain 
hegemony over the region and its oil resources.  President 
Bush is to arrive in Turkey in this negative atmosphere. 
Moreover, the PKK issue makes things even worse.  His 
arrival highlights the unmet promise by the US side about 
the elimination of PKK terrorism in northern Iraq.  These 
issues, which are of particular interest to Turkey, 
naturally overshadow the NATO summit.  It is hard to 
understand the US silence about the PKK and its bloody 
terrorism.  It creates a serious credibility gap for 
President Bush, because he is using the fight against global 
terrorism to justify his every policy, whether right or 
wrong.  Let's hope President Bush is going to make some 
gestures and announce measures on this issue so that the 
overall negative atmosphere decreases.  Otherwise, both his 
Ankara trip and the efforts to add new missions to NATO are 
doomed to fail.  Turkey and the US need the strategic 
partnership more than ever before." 
 
"What is NATO's Aim?" 
Taha Akyol commented in the mass appeal Milliyet (6/25): 
"At the moment the Middle East is a region in crisis.  Most 
likely it will continue to be the world's most problematic 
region for another fifty years.  Public unrest, corrupt and 
repressive regimes, unresolved border claims, terrorism, and 
oil all contribute to the dangerous mix.  Just like the 
Balkans at the beginning of the 20th century, today the 
Middle East affects the whole world through its instability. 
Turkey is considered by many as a kind of solution to this 
problem.  However, clashes of interests and opinions are 
preventing a further definition of this solution. 
Therefore, if NATO tries to spread its activities to a 
broader geography, it will lose its effectiveness and cracks 
within its own structure could widen.  NATO should be very 
careful, especially on the Middle East.  The US 
representative to NATO, Nicholas Burns, during his speech in 
Prague on October 19, 2003, said that `NATO's main duty is 
still to defend North America and Western Europe.  But, I 
don't think we can fulfill this duty from where we sit.  We 
have to direct our attention and military power to the south 
and east.  I believe NATO's future is in the south and east, 
it is in the Greater Middle East.'  Burns' formulation is 
problematic.  It is certainly true that the Middle East is 
in crisis, but the solution is not to be found in NATO. 
Counter-terrorism is a must, but the necessary changes in 
the Middle East must be realized through economic and social 
development.  NATO's new function should not be to create 
more enemies, but to support security, stability and 
development." 
 
EDELMAN