Erdoğan convinced Brussels but...

I got curious and talked to the representatives of nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs, following the visit and members of the European Commission and the parliament. Then I asked the following question:

"What was the impression you had with Turkish Prime Minister? Did he end your doubts? Did he defend Hamas? Answers I got were quite different from what we have read in the Turkish media coverage.

The EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn clearly said, "If Turkey-EU relations are to make a jump whenever he comes here, Erdoğan should come more oftenÉ"

The European Commission stressed that Hamas and the Gaza crisis were not the focal point of official talks and they rather concentrated on mutual relations. "Erdoğan mentioned about the Gaza crisis on his first day during an NGO meeting but didn’t dwell on it," said a commission source adding, "Erdoğan came here to convince both the commission and the parliament and he succeeded. That is to say Erdoğan showed that the EU project is not in the freezer, he will not give up on the EU project and the lingering period is over. He convinced the commission. Now the expectation is that he should make up his mind over the Nabucco project and if there would be any progress in negotiation chapters. Meaning, until proven otherwise this was a positive trip and a new process has begun."

All observers in Brussels agree that the Russian-Ukrainian natural gas crisis urged Europe to diversify energy sources and Turkey is seen as a savior in this aspect. Turkey’s star is shining and it should use this opportunity.

During technical meetings in Brussels tomorrow and the day after, we will see if Turkey could use this opportunity. If Mr. Prime Minister says, "You convince Greeks and made the energy chapter to be opened, we’ll adopt a positive approach toward Nabucco," or in other words, if he reaches a point of a deal or a blackmail, the situation seems to change.

A commission official who said, "We see the Greek veto is unnecessary. However, if Turkey transforms into a condition openly, we cannot do it. Let us solve this," continued, "If Turkey makes a move in Nabucco and two negotiation chapters, we may take a turn in a brand new process." In summary, Mr. Prime Minister expressed his intention. Let’s see if solid steps to galvanize this policy will follow.

We hosted Güney on conditionÉ
The state-owned TRT-2 channel interviewed Tuncay Güney; an interview that is still being discussed. The channel is being criticized for not taking pains over rebut.

I partially do not agree with such criticisms.

The timing of the Güney interview was perfect and it was a quite successful example of journalism. If the TRT-2 on that day hadn’t allowed Güney to appear on the screen, we were to have him at the 32. Gün (32nd Day), in the next Thursday evening. We were in contacts with him but Güney preferred TRT.

The reason is self-evident.

To appear on the state’s television is something prestigious. So, a comment like, "if a person appears in an interview on a state television he may not regarded as a guilty one," may not be wrong all along. The story could’ve been read more carefully but this is not important. Moreover, as the TRT General Director İbrahim Şahin put, if the TRT’s functions are shifting from the functions of a state institution to that of real journalism, I may say, "This is a good start." The only unfortunate thing was that it was live so there was no way of filtering Güney’s unproven claims.

We hosted Güney at Kanal D. But the 32nd Day did not broadcast live. We limited the airtime with 1 to 1.5 hours; therefore got a chance to intervene if he made any accusation. In fact, when the interrogation tapes were revealed, we had to exclude the parts on how he was tortured, which this could be a response to the criticism that "Güney doesn’t look like he has been tortured." Because Güney was telling how he was tortured with police clubs. Even we couldn’t have guts to see the tape. Besides other guests at the program were journalists having background information about Güney and following the incidents very carefully. They questioned Güney. We didn’t steer a middle course.

We were honest with Güney and so let him know that we will scrap off the part if he makes any accusations by violating laws.

In the end, the TRT did a right thing by having a timely interview with Güney. They lost the control and let him talk freely for four hours. This was their only fault. Besides, TRT cleared the way for him to express his worldviews as if he is an opinion leader. I wouldn’t know if the channel tried to ease the prosecutors’ job but if they had watched our previous two interviews with him, TRT wouldn’t have been trapped. Inexperience or a deliberate choice may be something to be criticized.