US embassy cable - 02ANKARA9055

C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 009055 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/17/2012 
TAGS: IR, KICT, PREL, TU 
SUBJECT:  REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF 
TURKEY REGARDING IRANIAN TERRORISM 
 
REF: A. (A) SECSTATE 191487 
     B. (B) ANKARA 7270 
 
 
 (C) Classified by Ambassador W. Robert Pearson. 
Reason:1.5(b)(d). 
 
 
1. (U) Action recommendation - para 5. 
 
 
2. (U) Per ref B, GOT MFA has provided Embassy with court 
documents involving two cases purportedly establishing and 
illustrating Iranian support for terrorism in Turkey.  These 
cases are in the public domain; the documents, in the 
original Turkish, will be sent to Department via pouch. 
 
 
3. (U) According to the MFA, the cases were adjudicated 
before Ankara State Security Court No.2. 
 
 
- One case (documents provided by MFA are dated July 2002) 
alleges a relationship between Iran and the Tevhid Group.  It 
refers to the murders of Ugur Mumcu, Bahriye Ucok, Muammer 
Aksoy, Ahmet Taner Kisali, Abdulgani Bedevi, Victor Deam 
Marwick, Ehud Sadan, and Kaya Kaman.  The case involves 
alleged confessions by perpetrators establishing their 
relations with Iranian intelligence personnel in Ankara and 
Iran.  The verdict is pending; according to the MFA, no date 
has been set for final decision. 
 
 
- The other case, brought in 1997, purports to demonstrate 
ties between Iran and the "Turkish" Hizbullah, a largely 
Kurdish group operating in southeastern Turkey.  The case 
makes reference to the notorious events of January 31, 1997 
in Sincan muncipality of Ankara, at which Islamists attending 
a "Jerusalem Night" rally supported the then Iranian 
Ambassador's public criticism of the secularist Turkish 
State. 
 
 
-------------------------- 
COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION 
-------------------------- 
 
 
4. (C) Despite MFA's assurances that the cases are admissable 
in other, international court proceedings, there are 
potential procedural questions which argue against the USG's 
using these cases in international fora.  The Tevhid case 
may, for example, include uncertainties as to whether police 
methods used to extract confessions were legal.  As for the 
"Turkish" Hizbullah case, we note that the "Jerusalem Night" 
events in question became the focal point of the "February 28 
Process" -- the military-orchestrated ouster later that year 
of the then Islamist-led government of Turkey -- and the 
start of what is widely regarded as Turkey's "post-modern" 
coup d'etat.  As such, it probably reflects in part the MFA's 
diplomatic defense to the world of Turkish State efforts to 
control or interfere with elected civilian governments having 
Islamic coloration -- and is thus even more problematic 
regarding both the utility of such a case and its 
implications for USG-GOT relations. 
 
 
5. (C) Action recommended: with regard to para 4, post 
recommends against USG including these materials in any 
action before the Hague (per ref A) regarding Iranian support 
for terrorism. 
PEARSON