Turkey is right.. Olli Rehn is not..

Let me issue a reminder. Denmark’s Prime Minister Rasmussen ran a candidacy for NATO’s secretary-general. He was a candidate who was supported by 27 members of the European Union. Turkey was the only country that opposed his candidacy. Everybody was surprised since nobody expected such a thing. In the past, Turkey was a country that did what Washington and Brussels told it to do. A Turkish revolt with NATO was inconceivable.

Turkey had two reasons to react:

The first and the most important was the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK’s mouthpiece Roj TV’s broadcasting from a base in Denmark. Despite Turkey’s requests, demands and even reactions, Denmark Ğ maybe acting upon good grounds according to itself Ğ did not respond to these demands, pointing to human rights and freedom of expression, and the country’s own libertarian laws.

Let’s not beat about the bush! Denmark protected the Roj TV for bureaucratic reasons in order to support the PKK or to use it as a tool for pressure. Turkey applied to Rasmussen over the issue many times but failed to get a reply. The second reason was that Rasmussen did not offer an apology in relation to the broadcast of the caricatures which deeply offended the Islamic world.

Meanwhile, Rasmussen ran as a candidate for the NATO post of secretary-general and wanted Turkey’s support. Ankara said "NO."

At first, there was a general belief that Turkey would say "Yes" finally. However, Turkey kept saying "No" until the last minute and lifted its veto only when U.S. President Obama intervened and gave promises about some subjects whose details we still do not know. I am a person who has criticized Prime Minister Erdoğan’s many approaches but I think he did the right thing this time.

"At last, someone came out and rejected to abide by everything they say," I thought and calmed down.

Some should account for now ...

I do not think that Turkey’s stance over the caricature incident is consistent. It is an event that happened two years ago. It upset the Muslim world, but it passed. Even Iran and Saudi Arabia forgot the incident and what is more interesting is that they did not oppose Rasmussen’s candidacy to the NATO post of secretary general by pointing to the incident.

So, why did we oppose it? Behind this stance, there is not a will to make Rasmussen offer an apology but to draw the sympathy of the Muslim world. Raising this matter has increased the prestige of Muslim Turkey, a member of the Western world. Turkey showed that it is not a toy dog that does everything the West says and it can utter the sensitivities of the Muslims. "I can convey your sensitivities to the Western World when required. And I can call them to account for," was Turkey’s message to the Islamic world. When compared to the past, it has adopted a different stance.

Erdoğan’s second reason was Rasmussen’s stance about Roj TV. Indeed, what was done is a part of a play but this time, Ankara played its part well. If Turkey suffers because of PKK terror, a TV channel supports this terrorism and a country, which accepts us as an ally, protects the channel, then I have a right not to fulfill what this country demands. The prime minister raised the tension and made U.S. President Obama intervene. By this way, before Obama’s visit to Turkey, the prime minister had clearly showed him how much further he could carry his sensitivity over the PKK. He did the right thing. We cannot know whether the promises that were made thanks to Obama will be fulfilled. However, Turkey delivered its message and showed its sensitivity on the subject. Even this is enough.

Olli Rehn’s unnecessary challenge

Those, who follow my articles, know that I am a person who supports Turkey’s membership to the EU very much and maintains the support without getting tired. Moreover, I am closely acquainted with Olli Rehn and I know that he is in favor of Turkey’s full membership. However, his statement that Turkey’s veto would adversely affect its membership process to the EU, which he made in the middle of the debates over NATO’s secretary-general, was a complete "disaster." What does this mean? Should Turkey do everything that the EU says in order to become a member of the EU? When was the NATO’s secretary-general issue included into the Copenhagen criteria?

If we veto Rasmussen, the EU membership process will be adversely affected. Turkey accepted Rasmussen’s getting the post of secretary-general, what will happen now? Will the membership process gain speed? For example, will the eight chapters, which have been suspended because of energy and Cyprus issues, be reopened? I think Rehn must have realized that he unknowingly made an ill-fated statement. I am glad that Turkey conditionally said "Yes" to Rasmussen. Maybe, in this way, Europe sees that it cannot make Turkey accept everything it says while casting it out and prolonging the negotiation process. Turkey played its cards well without exaggerating.