• RETRIAL OF LEYLA ZANA AND COLLEAGUES: COURT REJECTS ALL DEFENCE MOTIONS, BAIL.  On 17 October, the Ankara N°1 State Security Court (DGM) rejected, once again, any release on bail of the defendants and adjourned the trial to 21 November. The eighth hearing of the former Members of Parliament — Leyla Zana, Orhan Dogan, Hatip Dicle, and Selim Sadak — took place before many observers, including European and Turkish Members of Parliament as well as representatives of Human Rights Defence organisations.

The Turkish Court contented itself by rejecting all the demands formulated by the defence, including cross-examination and calling of witnesses. The prosecution read out the written accusations of a PKK “repentant” accusing Leyla of visiting Abdullah Ocalan in the Bekaa plain in October 1991 and rejected the defence demand that this be checked with the Ministry of the Interior records. At the date in question, Leyla Zana was in the heat of her election campaign, and thus fully in the limelight. As Mr. Yusuf Alatas, the leading defence lawyer, remarked, all one had to do was ask the Diyarbekir Prefecture to check their records of Leyla Zana’s movements during her election campaign, or the Ministry of the Interior on her journeys abroad at the time in question. The Public Prosecutor, Dilaver Kahveci, retorted that these checks would have no bearing on the basis of the case and the Court followed him in this.

Mr. Hasip Kaplan, another defence lawyer, for his part, raised the unconstitutional Nature of the State Security Court (DGM), whose legal basis does not conform with the rights of the defence, which are stipulated and protected by the Constitution, or with International Conventions which turkey has signed. “For any equitable justice” he argued, “the DGM must be abolished”.

• MOST IRAQIS OPPOSE TURK TROOP DEPLOYMENT;  BARZANI THREATENS TO RESIGN FROM COUNCIL; TURKEY THREATENS KURDS.  On 7 October, at the end of a two and an half hour closed session debate, the Turkish members of Parliament approved, by 358 votes for and 183 against, the project of authorising the deployment of an substantial contingent of Turkish troops in Iraq — an operation desired by the United States — for a maximum period of one year that may begin in November. Apart from the arguments of the Prime Minister, the members of parliament were, no doubt, affected by Washington’s gesture of accepting, at the end of September, to provide a financial aid of  $8.5 billion in the form of a loan to Turkey on condition that it commit its troops in Iraq …  “Every action carries its own dangers (…).  But by sending troops we may be have some voice in the outcome. We must go for the good of Turkey and of its future” Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared to members of his own party before the vote. According to the Turkish authorities, the deployment of a Turkish contingent could take place around Salahaddin and Takrit, in the Al Anbar region along the banks of the Euphrates or in the Region to the North of Al Anbar.

But the Transitional Government Council, whether Sunni Arabs, Kurds or Shiites, as well as public opinion in Turkey and in the Arab countries, are substantially opposed to any deployment of Turkish troops in Iraq. And the statements of General Ilker Basbug, the Turkish Army’s N°2, have sharpened Iraqi anxieties, especially amongst the Kurds, who are particularly hostile to any presence of Turkish troops on their territory. The General in question indicated, in a Press Conference, that the Turkish Army would retaliate if its military convoys were attacked by Kurds during their deployment in Iraq. “If we go into Iraq, we will have to use certain major logistic routes of Northern Iraq. If our convoys are attacked we will retaliate” the General declared.

Massud Barzani, President of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and member of the Transitional Government Council, threatened to resign from the council if it approved the Turkish decision. He recalled that the Government Council had opposed, on 12 October, any deployment of Turkish troops and had asked for the support of the Arab League for this position. “We reject the deployment of any troops from Turkey or any other country in the region and we have asked for support in this from the Arab League” declared Mr. Barzani, after a meeting with the General Secretary of the Arab League, Mr. Mussa Amr, in Cairo. Mr. Barzani considered that “the sending of Turkish troops or those of any other neighbouring country could only increase the tension in Iraq and would provide no protection for anyone”. Mr. Mussa Amr, for his part, declared “the League will support any position of the Transitional Government Council on the subject of sending of Turkish troops or those of any other neighbouring country”. In his view “the sending of any troops to Iraq must receive the assent of the Government Council and take place in the context of UN resolutions”. “All the Iraqis with whom I have been in contact, whether in the Government Council or out outside this body have declared that they were opposed to the sending of Turkish troops or those of any other neighbouring country” Mr. Mussa further declared.

On 11 October Mr. Barzani had declared, during a visit to Kuwait where he had met Emir Jaber al-Ahmed al-Sabah and his Prime Minister Sabah al-Ahmed al-Sabah, that “the Iraqis unanimously consider that the deployment of forces from the region would not stabilise the country …  On the contrary, that could only lead to an escalation of tensions”. He had added that the Transitional Government Council would continue to oppose this deployment even if Washington and Ankara “went ahead with their project”.
Many other Iraqi leaders have reaffirmed their rejection of a deployment of the Turkish Army as desired by Washington. The leader of the principle Shiite movement, the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCRII) and member of the Baghdad executive, Abdel Aziz Hakim, stated, “there is no need to bring in anyone from outside”. Dr. Mahmud Ali Osman, another member of the Transitional Government had remarked on 11 October “We have differences of opinion. The Americans think that it is a positive measure and we consider it a superfluous one”. “Sending Turkish troops will delay the return of Iraqi sovereignty” declared, for his part, Nassir Kamal Chaderji, a Sunni member of the Council. “I am against the sending of Turkish troops, or the troops of any country neighbouring on Iraq, because we do not want our relations with these countries to deteriorate” he added. Even Ahmad Shalabi, a Shiite of the Iraqi National Council (INC), a member of the Council and considered close to Washington, gave Ankara’s decision a cool reception. “Any foreign troops should be invited to Iraq by a sovereign Iraqi government. At this time such a decision depends of the Government Council” stated Mr. Shalabi’s spokesman Entifadh Qanbar.

For his part, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, stated “the basic position is that the Government Council does not want any neighbouring country to take part in peace-keeping operations”.  Barham Salah, a senior official of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) warned that such a deployment would constitute “a factor of deterioration in the security situation” and that “Turkish troops would face difficulties if they entered Iraq”.

Furthermore, in a televised speech on 16 October, the Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, considered that the Turkish Army should not be deployed in Iraq in a warlike spirit. Hosni Mubarak considered that the Turkish statements were “devoid of any subtlety”. “Do not have the attitude that you are going to war. Iraq is a Moslem country, like your own and your thoughts should be appropriate to the circumstances in which we are living” declared the Egyptian President.

King Abdallah II of Jordan had also, on 13 October, called on the Turkish Army not to take part in military operations in the country. “I do not think that a country that has borders in common with Iraq should play an active role in Iraq” the King declared tom the Press during a meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEFT) in Singapore. “Regardless of whether it takes place under US or UN supervision, I persist in thinking that we cannot be honest collaborators, simply because we all have certain desires of our own regarding our bilateral relations with Iraq” the King declared.

Similarly, the spokesman of the Saudi Ministry of defence declared “Saudi Arabia will only send in troops at the request of a legitimate government, in the context of a UN mandate and on the basis of an Arab agreement”.
Iraq is likely to be the subject of all sorts of dissentions at the Islamic Organisation Conference Summit (IOC) on 16 October in Malaysia, at which an Iraqi delegation will be present. Ankara’s representatives have called on the member countries to get involved in Iraq right now, without waiting for a UN mandate that they consider hypothetical.

On 14 October, a week after the Turkish Parliament’s green light, the driver of a car blew himself up in it at the entrance to the Turkish diplomatic mission in Baghdad, wounding two of the Embassy staff and four civilians, including the kamikaze driver. “Turkey is playing a role in this region … We should expect that will be at a certain price” declared the Turkish Ambassador to Baghdad, Osman Paksut, on Turkish television.

• 405 TURKISH SOLDIERS ON TRIAL FOR RAPING AND TORTURING KURDISH WOMAN.  The trial of several hundreds of Turkish soldiers, accused of the gang rape and torture of a young Kurdish woman detainee began on 10 October before a Mardin court. The trial was adjourned till 5 November for procedural reasons, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Rayhan Yalcindag indicated.

The 31-year-old Kurdish woman, identified by her initials S.E., accused the troops of having inflicted on her physical and sexual violence and torments after blindfolding her — hence the case against 405 soldiers who were on duty in the Mardin region at the time when she suffered this ill treatment.  S.E. indicated that she had been tortured and raped by paramilitary forces at each of her periods of detention between November 1993 and March 1994  — a period of intense fighting between the Army and Kurdish fighters. Her allegations were confirmed by medical examination. During her last beating up at the hands of troops she had even lost consciousness and only came round after nine days in hospital. Moreover she had no police record to explain these multiple detentions. S.E. who, as a consequence has suffered from serious psychological problems, later moved with her family to Izmir. From there she eventually secured political asylum in Bochum, Germany, where she is still living today. “We do not regard this as a personal matter. Our principal objective is to persuade the victims of Human Rights violations to ask for justice and secure some results, here in Turkey, without having to go through the European Human Rights Court” declared Mr. Yalcindag.
The Turkish authorities have always balked at enquiring into allegations of torture and rape by the security forces in the Kurdish provinces. Members of the security forces have never been found guilty of rape in Turkey, although dozens of cases have been filed, observed Mr. Yalcindag. Indeed, none of the accused was present at the hearing.

Turkey’s application for membership of the European Union is kept pending mainly because of its incapacity at eliminating torture and other breaches of Human Rights.

• CLASH BETWEEN PKK AND TURKISH FORCES: 5 DEATHS IN ONE WEEK.  A Kurdish fighter of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK renamed KADEK) was killed on 17 October during a search and destroy operation in a rural region near Dicle, to the North of Diyarbekir. Kurdish fighters had attacked a police station near Dicle on 15 October, slightly wounding a policeman.

Furthermore, four other PKK activists were killed on 10 October by the Turkish Army in the course of land and air operations in the mountains of the Tunceli region.

Clashes, which had fallen to a virtually zero level at the beginning of the year, have been multiplying over the last few weeks.