STAR- Columnist Semih Idiz writes on the stance of the Nationalist Action Party (MHP) regarding Turkey’s relations with the EU. A summary of his column is as follows:
We won’t have to wait for long to understand if the MHP is pursuing a sound policy in Turkey’s best interests. Their tendency will come out into the open in two years at the latest. I don’t believe we will even have to wait that long. Turks will either be grateful to the MHP or curse the day it was established. The reason why there will be such a definite and sharp distinction lies with the MHP itself. Pursuing such a policy is the MHP’s democratic right. It has a concrete ideology it has to comply with and hardliner voters it has to retain. That is, the MHP is a completely different party compared to Ciller’s True Path Party, of which it is impossible to understood what it is defending. In brief, the MHP has always been consistent in view of its basic ideals. Today it is clear that the execution of Ocalan, and the prevention of everything that sounds like ‘rights’ regarding the Kurdish issue, have important places among these ideals. However, there is one important issue the MHP has to understand. The logical result of its stance against the EU would come to mean Turkey’s moving away from the West in stages. The real problem is not Ocalan or the Kurds. It is the basic principles which require being in the same league with the West. The MHP itself has turned these issues into ‘Ocalan’ and ‘Kurdish’ problems. The military, which share the same views with the MHP on these issues, avoids voicing its opinions taking this into consideration. It has understood that that such an approach will come to mean Turkey’s moving away from the West. In fact, one doesn’t have to be a genius to figure out that Turkey needs the West for its defence. If not, we would not have insisted on NATO that much. Chief of General Staff General Staf Gen. Huseyin Kivrikoglu is not saying in vain that EU membership is a geostrategic necessity for Turkey. MHP leader Devlet Bahceli has explained the Western values he dislikes the most. Among them are criticisms coming from the free press, ‘lobbying’ activities carried out by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as the Turkish Industrialists’ and Businessmen’s Association (TUSIAD), and abolition of the death penalty. Therefore, it is unnecessary to ask how he views yesterday’s meeting held by a joint civilian initiative. In fact, there was nothing new in what he said. He clarified his views supported with angry terms. Even though he has clarified his party’s views on the issue, Deputy Prime Minister Bahceli still is not doing one thing. That is, he is not showing any geopolitical alternatives for Turkey moving away from the West. Parliament Speaker Omer Izgi, formerly a MHP member, has followed the same approach. He said that although the EU was only one of the alternatives for Turkey, Turkey was the only alternative for the EU. However, he did not explain what he thinks these alternatives are. He didn’t delve into the logic of Turkey’s being the only alternative to the EU, as these are more slogans which mean little. Just like the MHP’s slogan that Turkey wants an honorable partnership with the EU, as if the EU is granted a dishonorable partnership to anyone. If complying with the ‘sine qua non’ criteria accepted by all members and candidates to the EU are considered to be dishonorable, the MHP has to say so. In fact, the MHP is playing a reactive game instead of a proactive one. While doing so, it is trying to harp on the sounds which would seem most favorable to a strongly patriotic nation. However, it is ignoring the point that the most important issue for the country is to elevate the living standards of the people. The MHP is forgetting that a country where the living standards are not high, cannot take its place among ‘equals’ as a global power.
SOURCE: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PRESS AND INFORMATION