Turkish Armed Forces Cannot Be Against E.U.

ISTANBUL - Deputy Chief of the General Staff General Yasar Buyukanit said on Thursday, ''it is a fact that not all the nations on earth are fully prepared to realize the political, economic and security criteria of Globalization.''
Addressing ''Globalization and International Security Symposium'' organized by the General Staff Military History and Strategic Research Chairmanship, Buyukanit said, ''in order to benefit from globalization and achieve effective outcomes for the benefit of human beings; economic power must be sufficient, political, social, cultural and legal arrangements must be suitable, education institutions must be well structured and fully functional.''
''Taking into consideration this symposium's subject and content, it might be appropriate to define globalization as; having all nations, especially starting with the 1990's, forced to adopt common values, approaches and attitudes against global problems as a result of being tied more closely to each other in various fields such as economy, security and culture within the framework of rampant developments in information and communication technologies as well as free and rapid circulation of goods, services, capital and intellectual movements. Naturally, you may define the same term differently from the viewpoint of other approaches,'' he noted.
Buyukanit said that he believed that it would not be wrong to say that the broad consensus in the world to name the period they lived in as the ''globalization era'' was forcing them to converge at a common point.
''In fact, even those who are against globalization due to their political and academic views accept that globalization is a phenomenon that cannot be denied,'' he stated.
Buyukanit said, ''when we look at globalization from the perspective of the developed countries and the developing ones, the views and perceptions differ significantly. In fact, I believe it would be justified to argue that it is this diversity which lies at the very heart of the existing differences and conflicts with regard to the issue of globalization today.''
''With the end of the Cold War, the world has entered a rapid process of transformation. As we all closely follow, the international security environment has become highly volatile and almost unpredictable. Depending on their accurate or misguided perception of this process of change, societies will affect their future either in a positive or a negative way.
Buyukanit added, ''with the process of globalization, the concept of 'power' which was once associated with parameters such as military capability and economic capacity, has come to be defined as the ability to access and use knowledge. The reason behind this is the foregrounding of the human factor in the globalization process. Countries that have the possibility and capability of making maximum use of their human sources have reached a point where they can influence the political affairs, economic policies and security strategies of others.''
Buyukanit said ''Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) cannot be against the European Union, because EU is the geo-political and geo-strategic ultimate condition for the realization of the target of modernization which Mustafa Kemal Ataturk chose for the Turkish nation.''
Stating that Turkey, with its philosophy of life, democratic and secular state understanding, and with its state structure had the characteristics to serve as a model for many countries, Buyukanit said, ''within this framework, our country which applied to European Union for full membership in 1987 is still in the status of a candidate country to the Union. Turkey has openly declared its preference on this issue to its counterparts in the European Union. It is a fact that Turkey, as a full member of EU, will contribute to the cultural richness of the Union and enable it to gain a geo-strategic depth.''
He said, ''as you know, Central and Eastern European countries which gained their independence after the end of the Cold War join the Union as full members in 2004. However, our country is in the unique position of continuing its relations with European Union only within the framework of the Customs Union.''
''In our consideration, there is another important aim of Turkey in wanting to join the European Union. We are struggling with meaningless and unsubstantiated prejudices claiming that our civilizations, cultures, and our religions are different,'' he stated.
Buyukanit said, ''I would like to underline that within this process, the EU member states must also deal with the membership of Turkey without any prejudice and they must perform their responsibilities.''
Noting that when they took into consideration the decisions taken at the Copenhagen Summit, they might say that there was no common view within the Union about creating a common European culture yet, he said, ''on this issue I would like to emphasize another point. On the issue of the European Union, Turkish Armed Forces have been the target of an unfair attack. In inner and foreign circles, without having any justified reason, a widespread opinion has been formed claiming that Turkish Armed Forces are against the European Union. I openly declare that such claims are not true.
''Turkish Armed Forces cannot be against EU, because EU is the geo-political and geo-strategic ultimate condition for the realization of the target of modernization which Ataturk chose for the Turkish nation,'' he stated and noted, ''at the same time , this necessity overlaps with social, political, economic and security targets of Turkey,'' Buyukanit said.
''EU target of Turkey cannot be compatible with the archaic and separatist goals of those who have different views on the secular regime and unitary structure of the state. It is also unthinkable that the European Union will be in harmony with ideas having such aims,'' he stated.
Buyukanit said, ''those who see the European Union and the supreme ideals of this Union as a means of realizing their archaic and separatist goals are doomed to be disappointed. My remarks are for such groups and persons who have such ideals.''
He said, ''on the other hand, I would like to underline that the efforts of foreign circles to achieve their own goals in Turkey by putting forward the supreme ideals of the EU and bringing the Turkish Armed Forces into the agenda on every occasion will be counterproductive both for Turkey and for Europe. Once again I emphasize that Turkey is a part of Europe and it will join the European Union. Even if this judgment contradicts with the opinion of some circles, it is a clear expression of the determination of Turkey and the Turkish Armed Forces. And it is also a clear response to the circles which try to draw a negative image of the Turkish Armed Forces to the community at all times.'' ''Throughout the history of Republic, Turkish Armed Forces, driving and pioneering force of Ataturk's Revolutions, that removed the fanaticism and aimed at making Turkey a dignified member of the contemporary and enlightened world, will continue to be dauntless protector of unitary, secular and democratic Republic of Turkey. This basic approach is in full compliance with the EU's principal philosophies,'' he added.
Buyukanit said, ''there is no doubt that threat perceptions constitute the first steps of security considerations. These are of utmost importance, not only in global but also in regional and national considerations.''
Buyukanit said that with the French Revolution in 1789, three important terms appeared on the world stage of civilization simultaneously.
Noting that these terms which formed the basis of a new world order, were 'liberty', 'equality' and 'peace', Buyukanit said, ''the quests for equality were first seen in the political arena. Instead of giving power to the rule of one dynasty, power was to belong to the people. Hence the foundations of today's political order were laid.''
''Liberty formed the social, political and economic basis of the new order. Individual enterprise, private ownership and the market mechanism which complemented these features led to the establishment and flourishing of the economic and social systems we currently live in,'' he said.
Buyukanit continued, ''peace became more than just a wish and came to be felt as a significant principle in social life. It played a very crucial role in the nation-building process of peoples. It became the mortar of the nation-state and hence the generator of the values we identify with today.''
Noting that however, throughout the years, those principles developed in their own paths and diverged from each other, Buyukanit said that even though they stemmed from the same political, social and economic structure, they gradually lost their original meanings. General Buyukanit stated, ''those who set out for equality were confronted with racism; freedom-followers struggled against totalitarian regimes and, finally, those who wanted peace found themselves amidst many bloody wars. Search for order continued despite the challenges that were experienced during the development of civilization. However, people gathering around common interests within the framework of nation-state did not succeed in ensuring the same unity for all humanity. World peace could not be achieved. The power gained from scientific and technological innovation could not be utilized for the peace and welfare of the humankind. We witnessed instances when modern technology was used against mankind to win wars. Nevertheless, the belief that such developments need not be the destiny of the humanity never disappeared; on the contrary, it grew stronger.''
Stressing that he was also aware that the path to the security dimension of globalization passes through the economic, political and social dimensions of globalization, Buyukanit said, ''There is no doubt that threat perceptions constitute the first steps of security considerations. These are of utmost importance, not only in global but also in regional and national considerations. Can the threat perceptions of developed and powerful countries, and those of developing or undeveloped countries, intersect on the same axis? Or, are the developing countries to accept the threat perceptions of developed countries unconditionally? How secure are the less powerful countries whose security policies are based on such imported threat perceptions? On the other hand, how much attention, sensitivity and care do the powerful countries globally accord to the real and national threat perceptions of developing countries? Or do the powerful countries tend to harm the national interests of weaker countries by means of imposing their threat perceptions that are defined in line with their own national interests?''
''Answers to these questions, which I tried to list above, will form the fundamental principles shaping the security problems at the global dimension,'' he said.
Noting that he felt the need for touching upon the threat perceptions of the developed countries, Buyukanit said, ''any negative approach or obstacle, which prevents the developed countries from maintaining and augmenting the level of prosperity they have achieved, is viewed as a threat. Terrorist acts, directly threatening their national interests and social orders, are described as a threat. However, far from perceiving such acts as a threat, some powerful countries accept terrorist activities that do not harm their social and economic interests as 'worthy of support', especially if they see these acts in line with their interests. This may be seen as a trigger of terrorism in some countries.''
He continued, ''while illegal migration, demographic movements and drug trafficking are perceived as serious threats; powerful countries overlook the fact that such activities are encouraged globally by their internal dynamics and legal regulations of these countries. While powerful countries possess all types of weapons of mass destruction, they accuse some countries, which attempt to access such weapons, as posing a threat in the regional and global context; they also perceive the use of all weapons of mass destruction for terrorist aims as a natural threat. All of these are the realities of the world where we live in.''
Buyukanit said that when they looked at the threat perceptions of the developing or underdeveloped countries, they came across a completely different picture, and it was seen that security policies of those countries were largely based on imported threat perceptions.
Noting that the necessity of acting upon such approaches which usually contradicted national interests inflicted damage on those countries, Buyukanit said, ''in our era, developing countries are under the threat of political, economic and social applications rather than military ones. Global economic manipulations, exploitation of economic sensitivities, exploitation of domestic ethnic sensitivities and the transformation of these issues into political pressures are the most important threat perceptions of those countries. At this point, the most crucial issue is whether developing countries will formulate their defense policies according to the threat perceptions imposed on them by the powerful countries or according to the issues that I have mentioned above. These issues require serious deliberation.''
''My first observation is that, within the context and dimension of globalization, considerations reflected by powerful countries to the less powerful countries are not first and foremost military options. In other words, at first glance, these less powerful countries are not exposed to the military threat of the powerful countries. The military threat is the final chain of all security considerations and represents the last resort,'' he said.
Noting that before the military dimension of the globalization, there were the political, economic and social aspects, Buyukanit said, ''these aspects of globalization work together to shape the new world order or rather the new world disorder as I tend to describe it. Security needs arise with the reflection of political, economic and social practices to the security dimension. We must deal with the political, economic, and social dimensions of globalization that influence the security dimension.''
Stressing that their first stop should probably be the political approaches that affected the security dimension of globalization, Buyukanit said, ''the most significant global approach of the powerful countries to the less developed ones, that is to say to the peripheral countries, is the phenomenon of imposing their policies. These impositions are strengthened by the supports provided at the economic and social dimensions.''
''The second dimension of the imposition in the context of globalization is in the economic sense and is closely associated with direct security implications. The demands of powerful countries from the less powerful ones with regard to the economic aspect of globalization are quite clear. All the obstacles to free movement of the international capital must be removed. State organizations and bureaucracy present the most important obstacles for the free movement of the capital and must be removed. Addressees of international capital should not be state institutions but rather local administrations and private organizations. The conceptions and practices related with being a nation-state hinder the free movement of the capital. Therefore they must be removed and replaced by more liberal approaches and practices,'' he stated.
Stressing that social dimension of globalization was probably the most significant dimension of the global approach, Buyukanit said that developed countries were the ones that had transformed their economic welfare to social peace and social welfare within their countries.
Noting that in those countries there were no internal social conflicts or threats of micro nationalism, separatism and terrorism which threatened their security, Buyukanit said, ''however, strangely enough, some developed countries may undertake an effort to exert systematic policies, under the name of Globalization, that aim to exploit ethnic diversities, enlarge the cracks among social groups, and damage the social stability in developing countries. In other words, the economic, social and political dimensions of Globalization may have negative reflections on the security policies of the developing countries.''
Buyukanit said on Thursday, ''unless all nations adopt a common understanding and attitude, unfortunately terrorism will cost many more lives.''
Buyukanit said, ''the struggle against terrorism is a universal responsibility of mankind. The period we are living in requires closer and a permanent cooperation.''
''Turkey, suffered greatly from terrorism for years, lost thousands of its citizens in the struggle against terrorism and faced major financial loses,'' he stated.
Buyukanit said, ''Turkey has become successful in the fight against terrorism with its determination'' and stated, ''I would like to reiterate once again, the readiness of the Turkish Armed Forces for exchange of information, international cooperation and solidarity in the light of the painful experiences we gained in the fight against terrorism.''
''However, at this point, I would like to draw your attention on one issue. While we were fighting against terrorism that was threatening Turkey's integrity and its structure as a democratic, secular and social state governed by law, we were deeply disappointed by the support given to these terrorist activities by some countries who were trying to teach us human rights,'' he noted.
Buyukanit said, ''it is an established fact that certain so-called friendly countries, instead of supporting our fight against terrorism, protected the leader of the terrorist organization, provided training support to terrorist organizations and used the values such as human rights and the rule of law as a shield against these enemies of mankind.''
''Terrorism, environmental threats, international crime organizations, global diseases, production, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, regional conflicts of ethnic and religious origin, illegal migration and its effects on neighboring countries as well as the international community are the threats that we face today and they all affect our world,'' he noted.
Buyukanit said, ''taking into consideration all these threats, the fact that Turkey is encircled by instabilities and insecurities must be kept in mind. Most of the potential scenarios foreseen by NATO as crisis situations cover Turkey and this supports my remarks.''
''Please do not perceive my observations as prejudiced, ideological and anti- globalization. I do not have such an intention and do not have an idee fixe approach. I would like to underscore this with great emphasis,'' he noted.
Buyukanit said, ''those who blame Globalization tend to overlook its benefits. Globalization has lessened the feeling of isolation in many people who live in developing countries; it has also enabled many people in these countries to access information at a similar level with those words, now they have a chance to access information which they would normally obtain one hundred years later.''
''It also means the lifting of artificial obstacles in the cross-border transfer of goods, services, capital, information and human beings,'' he stated and noted, ''and we, the soldiers, must perceive the security implications of these aspects very well and reflect them on our assessments without prejudice. However, we must not perceive them as the paradigms reflected to us from outside but perceive them in light of the realities of our countries.''
''And we must create our paradigms in the light of our countries' realities. If we yield solutions and approaches with the mindset of others, they only work for estranging our bodies and minds. Probably this is the most important security dimension of Globalization,'' he stated.
Buyukanit said, ''it must not be forgotten that still many nations are slaves of various fears. Those living in developed countries are afraid of terrorism, unemployment, immigration and economic crises, and they want active participation of the rest of the world in the process of solving these problems.''
''On the other hand, the fears of developing countries are due to different reasons. The reasons for those people's fears are problems such as terrorism, economic difficulties, imbalances in income distribution, starvation, poor education and health. They hold developed countries accountable for this situation, and want those nations to begin to act so as to change the current situation,'' he stated.
He noted, ''however, it is possible to say that there is still no consensus on a common denominator for intercultural tolerance and problem-solving.''
Buyukanit added, ''one of the most important aims of this symposium is to make a scientific contribution to the effectiveness of the international security architecture that was established against the increased and diversified threats in the Globalization process.''

(EÖ-Öª) 29.05.2003