Last year, the Economist magazine slotted Ethiopia as the fourth fastest growing economy in the world, ahead of China. The World Bank report “Doing Business 2010” ranks Ethiopia in the top 10 African nations in terms of the ease of doing business. The Ethiopian government is trying to strengthen local and regional businesses and attract foreign direct investment.

Martin Savidge, Ethiopian businessman Ermyas Amelga and economics professor Phillip LeBel discuss how easy it is to do business in Ethiopia, who’s investing and what this means as Ethiopia moves from an agrarian society to a more urban society. The entrenched poverty hinders the robust investment environment, saddling the country with drought, food shortages and inadequate infrastructure.

Some highlights from the show:

• Ethiopia is not a resource-based economy. The sectors that are thriving in Ethiopia are real estate, construction, services, manufacturing, textiles and commercial agriculture with arable land leasing
• A growing population topping 80 million people make Ethiopia a strong consumer society
• Major investors in Ethiopia: China, India, Turkey and Egypt — the U.S. is not a major investor
• Ethiopia’s poverty-stricken image and government-controlled electronic communications and the Internet are potential hurdles to foreign investment
• Ethiopia’s Diaspora community is driving Ethiopia’s real estate boom

Martin Savidge hosts the following guests:

Ermyas Amelga is an Ethiopian businessman based in Addis Ababa. In 1996, he returned to Ethiopia after academic training and working in investment banking in the U.S. He has founded or acquired 11 companies, overseeing more than 2000 employees in the mining, oil, agriculture and financial services sectors. Ermyas also consults investors on entering the Ethiopian market.

Phillip LeBel is an economist and business professor at Montclair State University in New Jersey. He specializes in economics of developing countries, with emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia. This Spring, he was a Fulbright senior fellow in Addis Ababa teaching natural resources economics. He has consulted for USAID, the World Bank, UNESCO, WHO, FAO and the U.S. State Department on various subjects pertaining to economic policy issues.

For more coverage on Ethiopia, watch Worldfocus’ signature videos on the coffee industry, a remote village and Ethiopia’s history and beauty. Watch the PBS Wide Angle film “The Market Maker” about one woman who has created a commodities exchange and revolutionized agricultural distribution in the country.

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti and Ben Piven

Martin Savidge hosts Gareth Jenkins, a British analyst and author, and Mustafa Akyol, a Turkish journalist, to discuss whether Turkey is leaning West or moving East. Some highlights from the conversation include:

• The ruling Justice and Development (AK Party) has been accused of being both too Islamist and too pro-Western
• Islamism in Turkey has more to do with values and identity than imposing Sharia law
• While Islam is more prominent in Turkey today, the paradox is that the Islamicization of Turkish society began with secularist military after the 1980 coup
• Turkey’s religious minorities feel more threatened by hard-line (secular) nationalists than the ruling AK Party
• It’s wrong to think that Turkey’s Islamist groups are posing threats to democracy while the secular groups are serving democracy — it’s not simply black and white
• On eroding relations between Israel and Turkey, when Israel bombed Gaza, Turks sympathized for the plight of the Palestinians and the level of anti-Semitic rhetoric rose in Turkey, but before the Gaza war, Turkey was trying to establish peace between Israel and Syria
• The Turkish government has not been critical of other ruling Muslim governments — like Sudan — for human rights abuses
• On Turkey’s increasing resentment toward the European Union, there have been racial and religious prejudices by prominent members France and Germany
• Do Arab countries fear a dominant neo-Ottoman Turkey in the Middle East? Or, is there a growing sympathy in the Arab world for Turkey asserting its Muslim identity?
• A Turkey that has prestige in the Muslim world and keeps its ties with West is good for peace and stability in the region

GUESTS:

Gareth Jenkins is a British analyst and author based in Turkey since 1989. His book Political Islam in Turkey: Running West, Heading East? was published last year, and his history of modern Turkey is forthcoming.

Mustafa Akyol is a Turkish journalist and a regular columnist for the Istanbul-based Hurriyet Daily News. His upcoming book on liberalism and Islam addresses the East-West divide. Having criticized both secularism and Islamic extremism, he has lectured extensively about faith, science and tolerance.

For more on Worldfocus’ coverage of Turkey:

• Watch the Worldfocus signature video: Rising Islamist groups challenge secularism in Turkey
• Read Do Islamist groups pose a threat to democracy in Turkey? by Dr. Ömer Taşpınar, the director of the Turkey Project at the Brookings Institution

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti and Ben Piven

Correspondent Gizem Yarbil and producer Bryan Myers report on how traditional religion and modern democracy are trying to coexist in Turkey today.

For more on secularism in Turkey:

• Read Do Islamist groups pose a threat to democracy in Turkey? by Dr. Ömer Taşpınar, the director of the Turkey Project at the Brookings Institution
• Tune in to Worldfocus Radio: Turkey torn between East and West where we examine push and pull factors

Dr. Ömer Taşpınar is a professor at the U.S. National War College and the Director of the Turkey Project at the Brookings Institution.

For more on secularism in Turkey: Watch the Worldfocus signature video: Rising Islamist groups challenge secularism in Turkey Tune in to Worldfocus Radio: Turkey torn between East and West where we examine push and pull factors

Dr. Ömer Taşpınar and Worldfocus producer Gizem Yarbil discuss the role of several important conservative religious groups in Turkey, including the Gulen movement, which is the largest, and the Mustazaflar-Der, which is influential in the predominantly Kurdish Southeast.

Gizem Yarbil:  How influential are Islamic groups like the Gulen movement and Mustazaflar-Der in Turkey politically and socially?

Ömer Taşpınar: Particularly, the Gulen movement is very influential in the social, economic and cultural (particularly education)  field. The members of this brotherhood are probably in the millions. I think of this movement as a pious Muslim version of freemasons.

It’s essentially a solidarity network and a civil society organization with religious proclivities. Some analyst are bothered by the movement’s cultish attachment to its leader but this is not uncommon in Turkish/Anatolian political culture.

The movement is also getting stronger politically, mainly because of a self-defense instinct. The staunchly secularist Kemalist military considers the Gulen movement as a very dangerous network infiltrating the civilian bureaucracy in order to slowly Islamize the country.

Gizem Yarbil:  The Gulen movement is the most mainstream of all the Islamist groups in Turkey and the one with the most influential network of supporters. Do you think they pose a threat to the secular foundations of Turkish politics and society as some Turks fear?

Ömer Taşpınar: I personally think that the Gulen movement is not willing to confront the secular tradition of the Turkish Republic. The last thing the movement wants is to clash with the state tradition of Turkey. In that sense, the movement is very nationalist and not willing to become anti-secular or anti-Kemalist.

It is still a mainly education, culture, social life oriented movement.  But it has a potential to turn political and support anti-military coup investigations such as the currently unfolding “Ergenekon case.” The movement feels very much threatened by the radical secularism displayed in some segments of the Turkish military.

Gizem Yarbil: Do you think Islamist groups will become a bigger force in Turkish politics and society?

Ömer Taşpınar: I think the movement is fueled by urbanization, the weakness of social and economic services provided by the state, and a new Muslim bourgeoisie. It will continue to grow as long as Turkey maintains a democratic, free-market oriented system.

Gizem Yarbil: In general, do you see Turkey in the future looking  more to the East or to the West? And what will the implications be on the strategic relationship between Turkey, the U.S. and the E.U.?

Ömer Taşpınar: I think rather than going towards the East or West, Turkey is becoming more like itself.  It is rediscovering its Ottoman past and coming to terms with its history and multiple identities. As long as Turkey remains democratic it will be Janus-faced, looking both to the Islamic world and Europe, just like the Ottoman Empire did for centuries.

Only a few days after Turkey excluded Israel from a joint NATO war exercise, a new crisis is brewing between the two Middle East allies.

The problem is a television drama series that Israel condemns as state-sanctioned “incitement.”

“Separation,” a 13-part TV series that aired on Turkey’s state-run television channel for the first time on Wednesday, has several controversial scenes. In one, a Palestinian father holds his new-born above his head in front of Israeli soldiers at a check point. A few seconds later, one of the soldiers shoots the baby dead. In another scene, Israeli soldiers kick and beat elderly Palestinians on the streets and one soldier shoots a teenage Palestinian girl on her chest.

Here is an excerpt from the television drama “Separation:”

The drama outraged Israel. The Foreign Ministry summoned the deputy chief of mission at the Turkish embassy to complain and protest. “Such a drama series, which doesn’t even have the slightest link to reality and which presents Israeli soldiers as murderers of innocent children, isn’t worthy of being broadcast even by enemy states and certainly not in a state which has full diplomatic relations with Israel,” said Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

The coordinator of the Turkish drama replied by saying that none of the incidents in the show were “imaginary.” “It is possible to find photographs of what Israelis did to Palestinians on the Internet,” said Bulent Erdinc, the series coordinator.

The Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu also shrugged off angry Israeli protests over the show saying the Turkish state “has no right to comment on the quality of broadcasts or the opinions expressed in them.” This statement should be met with some skepticism as Turkey’s record on freedom of speech issues is not known to be very high.

The controversial scenes in the drama are subjective. I’m sure some people will think they’re simple propaganda and some will think them a reflection of reality. In general, Turkish films, especially TV dramas and soap-operas, do tend towards exaggerated melodrama.

But a broader question here is whether filmmakers should care about the sensitivities of those they depict.  For example, should the producers and writers of the drama series “24″ have taken into consideration the fact that their depiction of Muslim terrorists may have possibly led to suspicion against ordinary Arab-Americans?

The TV drama is airing on Turkey’s state-owned channel, TRT. This channel, according to law, has to be “autonomous and impartial.” However, since the Islamist-based ruling AK party came to power in Turkey, TRT has been criticized for its religious/conservative programming, and also for appointing party sympathizers. I think it’s quite possible that the government officials knew what this television drama, which has been advertised in Turkey for a long time, was going to entail. And I imagine they could foresee the reaction it would draw from Israel.

In that case, considering the already strained relations between the two “allied” nations, the question becomes, is the Turkish government interested in enlarging the rift between the two countries? And if so, what would this say about the future of the Middle East?

- Gizem Yarbil

Photo: Gizem Yarbil

Correspondent Gizem Yarbil, a native of Turkey, recently reported with producer Bryan Myers on the signature story Female soccer players shoot down Turkish taboos. Gizem shares how women are pioneering a place in traditionally male-dominated sports.

Turks are mad about football (soccer), but most of them are unaware of a new development in the field: A new professional women’s football league. Now, a group of brave girls is trying to challenge the gender divide in Turkey.

The new league has been met with resistance, and some boundaries have yet been broken down. Many in Turkey still believe that women should be confined to the home, and that the football field is no place for women.

The team we followed is from a conservative city called Sakarya in the northwest corner of Turkey near Istanbul. I got to know the girls on a 12-hour bus ride en route to a crucial away game.

The girls we interviewed grew up playing ball on their neighborhood streets. Parents opposed them playing football — thinking it un-ladylike. And there was a concern that girls were too physical with guys on the streets.

But despite disapproval and some jeers, these girls continue to pioneer their new league, trying to prove to all of Turkey that football is not only a men’s sport. I read a New York Times story about how men are going to their games and heckling them from the bleachers.

“We should play you” some of the men yelled sarcastically, implying they’d beat them right away.

“To them, we’re just women,” says the team captain Esra Erol.

To me, our story about women’s football in Turkey is about women being capable of doing anything. We still have a long way to go in Turkey. And, it’s not only soccer. I recently read a story about a Turkish woman who won an international weightlifting competition.

The female weightlifter talked about how she wasn’t accepted by the weightlifting community. For Turks, weightlifting is one of the most important national sports and it’s also emblazoned as men’s turf. The female weightlifter explained how professional coaches did not believe in her because she was a woman and how they thought it would be a waste of time to train her. But she proved them all wrong.

It’s a huge improvement to have a professional women’s football (soccer) league in Turkey after it’s been established in so many European countries for many years. Girls playing football or lifting heavy weights for competition are at the beginning of a long road to establish total equality for women and men in Turkey.

It’s not going to be easy, but these women — from the Sakarya women’s football team to the victorious female weightlifter — insist on proving they can be and do anything they want.

- Gizem Yarbil

As Worldfocus correspondent Gizem Yarbil and producer Bryan Myers discovered, part of the resistance to women playing soccer is religious and part of it is cultural.

Also, explore an interactive feature and Q&A on women’s soccer around the world.

New NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen (left) with U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Multimedia producer Ben Piven writes about new NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, whom he interviewed last fall.

His youthful chuckle echoed throughout the reception chamber. The premier was delighted that I used the Danish term for “tax daddy” in a question about windmill subsidies.

This was September 2008. I was interviewing then-Prime Minister of Denmark Anders Fogh Rasmussen. He had just given a speech about energy policy at Columbia University’s World Leaders Forum, in which he emphasized how the U.S. should mimic Danish initiatives. Even with a barrage of tough questions, the seasoned political warrior appeared at ease.

The charismatic politician’s free market economics and anti-immigration policies have often roused the ire of defenders of the Danish welfare state. Rasmussen also has a history of tense relations with the Muslim world, which will make his new mission in Afghanistan even more difficult.

Known for breaking complex political questions into simplistic statements, Rasmussen has begun his tough work as the twelfth secretary general of NATO, the embattled transatlantic military alliance. Much of his work will involve cosying up with NATO member states from France to Turkey.

During Rasmussen’s second day as NATO chief, he moved to implement a new operational command structure for Afghanistan.

Rasmussen has said that he will enlist the full participation of NATO members in defeating the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Since the ostensible end game is to attain peace and democracy, the real work may involve cooperation with moderate Taliban forces.

Rasmussen recently shared his Afghanistan strategy with the Danish newspaper Politiken:

There’s definitely a hardcore section of the Taliban with whom it’s impossible to reach any kind of agreement…But there are some groups you can at least talk to in an effort to achieve some sort of rapprochement within the Afghan community.

There is also speculation that the charming 56-year-old statesman will attempt to smooth over NATO ties with Russia and seek to expand the alliance to include Australia and New Zealand.

Rasmussen’s eight year reign as Danish prime minister was almost the same time period as George W. Bush’s two terms. The amicable center-right Dane was known as Bush’s best friend in Europe. When visiting Camp David, he often went on rigorous mountain bike rides with the American leader. The pals exchanged thoughts about free markets and the spread of democracy.

The leaders’ similar views on Islam and the West were instrumental in preserving Bush’s tainted image in Europe, given France and Germany’s opposition to Bush’s jingoistic agenda in Iraq. While Italy and Poland were also enrolled in the coalition effort, Denmark’s government often seemed to be America’s most trusty ally on the other side of the Atlantic.

It would seem ironic, then, that it was President Obama who firmed up Rasmussen’s campaign in April to become the NATO Secretary General. Turkey had objected to the appointment of the Dane on the basis of Rasmussen’s support for the free speech rights of the artist who drew the controversial Mohammed cartoons.

Turkey also objected to Denmark’s decision to grant the Kurdish Roj channel rights to air in Denmark. Obama’s compromise deal required that NATO would appoint a Turkish assistant to the secretary general and place Turkish generals in key command posts.

A NATO resurgence will depend upon the skills of the eager new top dog.

- Ben Piven

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Downing Street under a Creative Commons license.

Conflict in Turkey’s Kurdish southeast has claimed 40,000 lives.

Selma Şevkli is a freelance reporter currently based in Bodrum, Turkey. She describes how the country has struggled to define its “Türküm,” which translates as Turkishness.

In 2005, Turkish lawmakers made it a crime to insult Turkey or Turkishness. Until last year, criticizing Turkishness was even punishable with up to three years in prison. Even as Turkey moves forward in the process of acceding to the European Union, it has moved further into its nationalistic bubble.

Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code — criminalizing insults against “Turkish identity” – was used famously to incriminate writer Orhan Pamuk for accusing the Turkish government of complicity in murdering 30,000 Kurds and one million Armenians. The law has since been used to indict publishers, journalists and novelists. Our freedom of speech is hampred by our undying nationalistic political culture.

Turkish flags at a 2006 demonstration in Istanbul.

What is Turkishness? Is it a sort of nationality? A form of ethnicity? Or the name of one specific citizenship? As almost one-third of Turkey’s population consists of Kurds who are legally referred to as Turkish, the question has become increasingly significant.

As I was researching secular Turkish nationalism for my graduate thesis, my first question to the people I interviewed was “What is Turkishness?” The answers varied widely, but for many people, it was a race or ethnicity. My second question asked whether Turkishness should include other ethnic groups in Turkey — Kurds, Armenians, Greeks and many other smaller groups. After all, who qualifies as a Turk?

Turkish nationalism has been integral to the official discourse in Turkey since the beginning of the Turkish Republic in 1923. But for most of Turkey’s history, we have largely pretended that all our citizens are ethnically Turkish. The various ethnic and religious minorities have generally been ignored, forced to emigrate or assimilate. The issue of Turkish nationalism only became visible when the Turkish state was compelled to assess its ignorance and change its policies toward minorities — in soliciting an invitation to join the EU.

For many years, there was a total ban on Kurdish language and culture, as well as political pressure and economic restrictions in the Kurdish-populated region of the country. But things are changing now. Turkish state TV established a channel that broadcasts in Kurdish, which is a major departure from the language ban. Significant violence is ongoing, though less intense than ten years ago. It seems that policies dealing with cultural rights are making a difference.

Kurds are finally moving one step forward in Turkey, even though it is largely symbolic. Other minorities are not mentioned as much as the Kurds in the media, since their numbers are not as significant and they do not assert their rights as aggressively.

The Turkish state is suffering from its enduring ignorance towards other ethnic groups and an inability to adapt itself to the contemporary world. Although political reforms and new cultural policies seem to indicate a gradual shift, there needs to be a sea change in order to implement reforms more effectively and sincerely. For one thing, minorities should be mentioned in history class as essential parts of Turkey — instead of cited as national enemies. Patient and devoted, Turkey’s minorities have chosen to be a part of this country, and so it is time to recognize their rightful place in our society.

- Selma Şevkli

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

“Remember Me”: A bust commemorating Kemal Ataturk. Photo: Bryan Myers

Worldfocus producer Bryan Myers is currently reporting from Turkey. He writes from Istanbul about the country’s love for one of its most famed figures, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who appears on everything from office buildings to lapel pins and souvenirs.

It’s not a sight an American is accustomed to encountering when checking into a large hotel. Instead of the usual flowers or water fountains, in Istanbul, it’s a bust accompanied by the words “Remember Me.”

Those words, and the image above them, belong to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the modern Turkish Republic. And in Turkey, they are as inescapable as minarets and kebab shops. They are emblazoned everywhere — on the walls of schools, in public parks, at entrances to bridges and even in the lobby of private office buildings. Visit the souvenir shops in Istanbul, and they’re there too. Ataturk wrist watches seem to be the hottest item.

This Ataturk omnipresence isn’t merely a gesture of respect — it’s worship. That observation isn’t meant to belittle his memory. In fact, to do so is a crime in Turkey. It’s just that as an American, it is rare to see a politician so beloved. The last time I can remember seeing a politician’s face on a watch in America was Nixon or Agnew in the early 1970s, and I’m pretty sure those watches weren’t meant to be a tribute.

Having forgotten much of my high school world history lessons, I decided to do a little boning up. Kemal Ataturk rose to prominence as a military officer in World War I. Unfortunately, Turkey — then called the Ottoman Empire — picked the wrong side, allying itself with Germany and the other Central Powers. After its defeat, Turkey was carved up by the British, French, Italians and Greeks (mention of the Greeks’ role in World War I in particular seems to irk the Turks, but perhaps that’s a topic for another blog).

Ataturk led the army that chased the foreigners out and unified the country once again (his official bio goes on to note his love of animals and his prowess as a ballroom dancer). The name “Ataturk” literally means “father of the Turks,” and was bestowed on him by the Turkish parliament in the 1920s. According to fellow Worldfocus producer Gizem Yarbil, herself a native Turk, the Ataturk story is so moving, it’s been known to reduce small children to tears when taught in elementary school.

But for adults, the image of Ataturk has become a potent political symbol, and I think that gets to the root of why his image is found all over town. Besides being a war hero, Ataturk was also a fierce advocate of a secular state. He thought the only way to bring Turkey into the modern era was by rejecting traditional ways rooted in religion. That was a bold stand in a country that was just about entirely Muslim. And today, while many Turks are not devout Muslims, some are, and they’d like to see a return to the Islamist ways of old.

So it is that today, an Ataturk lapel pin or portrait on an office wall quickly identifies one as a “secularist,” and in their view, a modernist more closely in tune with the West than the East.

All of this got me thinking about the early planning for our trip to Turkey, and our visit to the Turkish consulate in New York for visas. As often happens when journalists stop by for a consular visit, we were loaded down with books and pamphlets intended to introduce us to the country. One contained a series of official portraits of the presidents of modern Turkey, beginning with Ataturk. It is the photograph most commonly seen of Ataturk, in which he’s dressed in a white tie and tails.

I’m speculating here, but I’m guessing he picked this somewhat unusual outfit because at the time it was considered the the height of formal European fashion, and as such symbolized a clear rejection of traditional garb. That style was mimicked by all the other Turkish presidents in the book up until the 1970s. Perhaps they were hoping that by doing so, a little bit of the public’s affection for Ataturk would rub off on them.

“Remember Me?” After several weeks in Istanbul, it will be hard to forget Turkey’s founding father.

- Bryan Myers

Watch for Worldfocus’ signature series from Turkey in the coming months.

President Barack Obama greets U.S. troops during a visit to Camp Victory, Iraq.

Wednesday marks Barack Obama’s 100th day in office — a benchmark that has long been used to measure progress made by world leaders.

Juan Cole is a professor of history at the University of Michigan and writes at the “Informed Comment” blog to examine how the president has fared in the Middle East.

Obama’s First Hundred Days in the Greater Middle East

The hundred day benchmark for journalists sizing up a new administration is probably inappropriate on foreign affairs, which are complicated and move slowly. Still, we can assess the changes in approach and tone between the Obama administration and its predecessor this winter and spring, to try to get a sense of where things are going.

Obama has engaged in a number of acts of public diplomacy toward the Muslim world that were intended to change the image of the United States in the region and to marshal for his purposes American soft power, which is among its largest assets in the region. (Contrary to what the American Right used to confidently assert, the Muslim world does not hate “our way of life,” but rather loves the idea of democracy and loves US media. What they say they don’t like is a lot of sleeping around and tolerance of gays; in other words, Muslim public opinion is not so different from that of many Americans in the deep red states).

Obama did an interview with al-Arabiya, the Dubai-based Arabic satellite news station, soon after he got into office. He offered a hand of friendship to Muslims, insisted that you can’t stereotype 1.5 billion people with the actions of a few terrorists, and implied that al-Qaeda seemed to be running scared that it had lost George W. Bush as a recruiting tool.

Obama was making an important point. Radicalism in the Muslim world is very much wrought up with anti-imperialism, with a desire to push back against what local people see as an overbearing and arrogant American dictation to them of how to live their lives.

Obama’s public diplomacy extended to Iran, which he addressed on the occasion of the Persian New Year. He stressed the opportunity for Iran to re-enter the world community through diplomacy with the US.

[...]The big moment for public diplomacy, however, was Obama’s trip to Turkey. In 2000, the last year of the Clinton administration, 56 percent of Turks had a favorable or very favorable view of the United States. By late in the Bush administration eight years later, that percentage stood at 9%. Bush was barely more popular in Turkey than was Bin Laden. But nearly 40 percent of Turks say that they have confidence in President Obama, making him the politician in Turkey with the very highest approval rating!

In an address to the Turkish parliament, Obama declared that the US is not and never will be at war with Islam the religion. (To be fair, Bush had said similar things when in Turkey, but his policies were so unpopular that it was difficult for him to be taken seriously on this point).

The Obama administration has succeeded in changing the tone of US diplomacy with the Greater Middle East. Note that a better job could have been done.

[...]Still, tone is easy, where there is a will. Substance is hard.

To read more, see the original post.

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Army.mil under a Creative Commons license.

Neighbors Turkey and Armenia have reportedly agreed on a road map to normalize relations. Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993.

Turkey and Armenia have worked out a framework to normalize relations, the Turkish Foreign Ministry announced on Wednesday.  The U.S. welcomed the news, which came weeks after President Barack Obama encouraged talks between the hostile neighboring countries.

Armenia has long wanted Turkey to acknowledge that the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks between 1915-1917 constituted genocide.

The Foreign Ministry ’s announcement comes just before Armenia marks Martyrs’ Day, a day to commemorate the killings, on Friday.

Earlier this month while in Turkey, Obama avoided using the term “genocide” to describe the killings, drawing anger from some Armenians.

Blogger “artmika” is skeptical about the sincerity of the announced “road map:”

I genuinely do want to see the normalilsation of relations between Armenia and Turkey but all these empty statements which contain only abstract words, without any details provided, seem to be too staged to trust. It’s like the ‘normalisation’ was specifically ‘achieved’ 1 day before the expected Obama statement re Armenian Genocide. I think this is made to ‘justify’ Obama’s not using the G-word. I do not feel that the real agreement is there yet. Let them prove me wrong.

The “Life in the Armenian Diaspora” blog is also wary, writing that the announcement will merely serve to allow Obama to again avoid addressing the genocide question:

So an announcement like this can only mean one thing. It’s April 22nd, and Turkey is worried Obama will say GENOCIDE in his April 24th statement. After making all those announcements before Obama’s Turkey visit about how close they were to normalizing relations, Turkey has said three times in the last few days that it will absolutely not normalize without the Karabakh precondition. So now everything is all settled? Just yesterday Turkey pulled their Ambassador to Canada because Canadian officials attended a genocide related event. I will say this, I just can’t wait to see this roadmap.

Will Obama keep his promise, or will the Turkish games win the day? I want to believe that good will prevail, that this time, the campaign promises could be believed, but… the doubt is strong in me.

Doug Merrill of “A Fistful of Euros” takes a more optimistic tone, noting that Armenia will benefit from normalized relations:

[...]Quick two cents’ worth: Normalization is clearly a big win for Armenia. Open borders to the west would substantially improve its links with the world, while also making it less dependent on Russia as its main great-power ally. Also a win at the margins for Georgia, as a larger regional role for Turkey means a relatively lesser role for Russia. Normal Turkish-Armenian relations also means clearer paths for European institutions, if only because it means one obstacle less. For Turkey, this will help to lessen an irritant in its relations with the rest of Europe. If the current Turkish position on the massacres (whatever that turns out to be when relations are resumed) is good enough for Armenia, Turkish emissaries will surely contend, it ought to be good enough for France and the rest of the EU.

The “Yandunts” blog disagrees, saying that Armenia is losing out, though the “road map” with Turkey could impact Armenia’s internal politics:

Coming on eve of April 24 it is essentially a fig leaf for President Obama to be able to obviate his repeated pre-election pledges to recognize the genocide with some pretense of Armenian rationale.

So if Turkey neutralizes the annoying resolutions and Obama gets his fig leaf, what does Armenia get?

Nothing good as far as one can see right now. May be an invitation for Serge Sargsian to visit Washington? Maybe. But this is an awfully high price to pay considering this contributes to eroding Sargsian’s legitimacy at home. And besides, without clearly outlined foreign policy priorities a visit to U.S. is likely to be just protocol and tourism.

[...]One possible positive outcome of this development could be a political realignment in Armenia and creation of a credible patriotic opposition ahead of the elections for Yerevan city council. That remains to be seen.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Bob* under a Creative Commons license.

Today, Turkey is wielding influence once again in the Arab world — not militarily, but through its soap operas. More than a dozen Turkish soaps have aired on Arab television, offering an escape from the hard daily realities of life.

Worldfocus producer Mohammad Al-Kassim reports on this new Turkish invasion.

A memorial in Armenia.

Visiting Turkey on Monday, U.S. President Barack Obama encouraged dialogue with Armenia, acknowledging the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks between 1915-1917 but stopping short of calling them “genocide.”

During the 2008 campaign, Obama had used the term “genocide” on his Web site, writing “The Armenian genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence.”

Turkey and Armenia are participating in negotiations aimed at restoring full diplomatic ties.

Onnik Krikorian is a freelance photojournalist and writer from the United Kingdom based in Yerevan, Armenia. He writes at the “Frontline Club” about Obama’s goals in Turkey and the Armenia question.

Obama Talks Turkey

History has the unfortunate habit of repeating itself as Armenians know only too well. This is especially true when it comes to U.S. presidential elections. Without fail, candidates running for the White House promise to recognize the WWI massacre and deportation of as many as 1.5 million Armenians living in the then Ottoman Empire as genocide only to have them  renege on such campaign promises when in office.

This time round, however, the large and influential Diaspora lobby in Washington had hoped things would be different with Barack Obama in power, and not least because of the inclusion of activists such as Samantha Power in his transition team. The arrival today of the U.S. president in Turkey, on the other hand, does not bode well. Of course, Armenians shouldn’t be surprised. There are other far more pressing matters for Obama to concern himself with.

To begin with, sending out the right message from secular Turkey to the Islamic world is vital in order to repair the damage caused by his predecessor, George W. Bush. Moreover, the U.S. continues to need Turkey’s help in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since the August war between Georgia and Russia, Turkey’s potential role as a counterbalance to Moscow’s influence in the South Caucasus has also become apparent.

When it comes to Armenia, the issue becomes especially complicated. While many in the Diaspora seek recognition of the genocide if only to punish Turkey as well as validate demands for territorial reparations, Armenia instead desparately wants the border with its historic foe opened. Closed during the height of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, Armenian forces occupied 14 percent of Azerbaijan, Turkey’s main ally in the region.

Effectively blockaded by both, most of Armenia’s trade presently transits via Georgia and the August war with Russia effectively cut off its main access to the outside world. There are also hopes that normalizing relations between Armenia and Turkey will benefit regional stability and contribute to finding a peaceful solution to long-running Armenian-Azeri conflict. More significantly, perhaps, a historical commission to examine the genocide will also be established.

That the massacre and deportation of most of the Ottoman Empire’s Armenian population constitutes genocide is hardly disputed, and not least because the events of 1915-17 were used as a case study by Polish lawyer Raphael Lemkin when he coined the term in 1943. Nevertheless, the precise number of those who perished is still unknown, as are some aspects of the actual events themselves, with some believing that comprehensive study is still necessary.

Of course, it is not impossible that Obama will refer to the killings as genocide, but most independent observers consider that to be unlikely. This is especially true given the arrival tomorrow of Armenia’s foreign minister in Istanbul to coincide with Obama’s visit. Many suspect that the two events and their timing are more than coincidental, especially as April is also the month when Armenians worldwide remember the tragic events of 1915-17.

To read more, see the original post.

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Rita Willaert under a Creative Commons license.

The forum opened to the sounds of protest, as activists voiced their opposition to the privatization of water, chanting slogans like ”water is people; it’s life. It’s not for sale.” Police broke up protests with tear gas.

The water issue is a sensitive one in Turkey, where the government is building a massive hydroelectric dam on the historic Tigris River in the southeastern part of that country.  It says the dam will provide much-needed power and irrigation — but activists claim it could cause irreparable harm to the environment and the people who live there.

The “Istanbul Calling” blog summarizes the dam debate in Turkey:

The Ilisu dam project in southeast Turkey has been one of the country’s most controversial energy and infrastructure plans for years. The proposed dam, which would be Turkey’s 2nd largest, would lead to the displacement of tens of thousands — mostly Kurdish villagers — and the flooding of Hasankeyf, a unique, historic town on the Tigris River. The Turkish government claims the dam is an important part of a larger plan to bring economic development to the struggling region, but locals believe the damage caused by the project will outweigh any of its benefits.

Turkish pop star Tarkan has campaigned to stop the construction of the Ilisu Dam and also composed an environmentally-themed song, “Uyan” (Wake Up), featuring a dry Turkish landscape as seen in the YouTube video below. Read a translation of the lyrics at the “TreeHugger” blog.

Blogger “CitizenReporter” takes issue with the Water Forum’s corporate attendees, arguing that it will be difficult to see water as a human right given the heavy presence of self-interested water companies:

Looking around at what organizations and individuals are attending, one could argue that the concerns about protecting access to water, quality and affordability especially, is definitely on the agenda.  But as with the previous 4 meetings, the big name water companies like RWE and Suez will also be there, corporations that have been busy buying up water systems throughout the world for more than a decade.  Naturally if any discussions are going to take place, it makes sense that all stakeholders in the water management world are a part of them. Yet the record of many of these players call into question any serious claim of wanting water as a human right and an essential resource for life, to be protected and respected. The spirit of viewing water as a commodity is very much still out there.

Blogger Chris Brown argues that water should be privatized, and that the free market could solve the water issue:

In a free market, no shortages would exist. In fact, it is very unlikely any of the earth’s resources would be used up. This is because the (futures) price would rise almost to infinity as supply decreased, which (again) would encourage higher prices, lower consumption, a natural rationing, innovation and competition, and an increase in the availability of substitutes.

The “Bellum” blog writes that the water problem has always been a source of conflict, pointing out that it is difficult to both serve all human interests and build the infrastructure needed to provide safe water:

[A]s demand for water increases, so does the likelihood of conflict. Descending on Istanbul, in addition to the diplomats and scientists, are the requisite protesters, including the UN’s own water czar. The protesters oppose the “privatization” of water, arguing that access to it is a “human right” and chanting, “Water for life, not for profit!”

For all the talk of good governance, improved technique, best practices, and so forth, the Water Problem has always been with us. If water is a human right, as the Istanbul protesters declare, will God build the infrastructure? If water is a commodity that should be privatized and sold to take advantage of market efficiencies, are we comfortable letting people die if they cannot pay the proper price? As the answer to both is “No,” we muddle through the discourse…

For more on water use worldwide, see our map of global resources: The world according to energy.

The U.S. abstained from voting as it waited for the results of talks between Hamas and Israel mediated by Egypt.

Countries like France and Turkey are also involved in trying to mediate an end to the conflict.

Robert Pastor, a professor at American University and senior advisor to the Carter Center on conflict resolution in the Middle East, joins Martin Savidge to discuss diplomatic efforts by the United Nations and others to end fighting in Gaza. They discuss the rejection of the cease-fire resolution, communication with Hamas and the level of American influence in the region.

A policeman watches an anti-Israel protest in London.

The fighting in Gaza has sent thousands of protesters into streets around the world.

In the Palestinian-controlled West Bank, children joined marchers waving flags and banners on Wednesday supporting the Palestinians in Gaza. In Lebanon, a crowd in Beirut cheered calls to back Hamas and to be ready for more Israeli attacks on Arab countries.

Hundreds of Palestinians in Argentina marched to the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires demanding that Israel withdraw from Gaza, while in Turkey, protesters gathered outside a basketball game scheduled between an Israeli and a Turkish team — forcing riot police to protect the Israeli team members as they fled before the game could be played.

A blogger at “My Random Compulsion” writes from Nablus, a town in the West Bank, about marching in protests there.

Blogger “Yohay” writes about an anti-war demonstration in Tel Aviv and posts pictures.

Blogger “Rayyan” describes anti-Israel demonstrations in London, which marched across the city to the Israeli embassy. Another blogger, ”Sunny” of The Guardian’s “Comment is Free” blog, writes that he attended the same demonstration but was troubled by the religious overtones and other aspects of the march.

Anti-Israel protests in Paris turned violent, and the “ParisDailyPhoto” blog posts images of the resulting damage.

The “Islam in Europe” blog provides an overview of protests across Europe, including some in Germany, Finland and Greece.

In Iraq, a mass rally against the Israeli offensive turned deadly when a suicide bomber blew himself up near the protest.

Blogger “Pamela” writes that a pro-Israel rally in New York City drew wide support.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Joe Cross under a Creative Commons license.

Turkish immigrants began to enter Germany 50 years ago under a guest worker program, and brought Islam with them. Today, the country is home to 2.6 million Turks, who face challenges integrating with German society.

This year, for example, a fire in the German town of Ludwigshafen killed nine Turkish people and led to accusations of racially motivated violence.

But Germany’s 3.2 million Muslims — most of them Turks — are becoming more visible and vocal. On Oct. 25, the largest mosque in Germany opened in Duisburg. And there are plans to build more like it — sparking fierce debate in the country.

Worldfocus correspondent Martin Seemungal reports from Cologne, Germany — home to 120,000 Muslims — where the city’s first official mosque is pending constructing.

Below, bloggers weigh in on the Turkish-German immigration debate.

The “PoliGazette” blog writes about protests in Cologne, claiming that both immigrants and native Germans should acknowledge responsibility for their role in creating social problems before the society becomes more deeply divided.

The “Impudent Observer” blog writes about planned meetings of the German Pro Cologne group — a group opposed to the Islamic “invasion” of Europe — arguing that despite the demands of Islamic countries to put a stop to the meetings, repressing free speech would only encourage hate.

The “Jihad Watch” blog argues that the Islamization of Europe is a threat, and that equating anti-Islamization protesters to Nazis is misrepresentative.

As a signal of integration and trust among Turks and Germans, the first co-leader of the German Green Party with an immigrant background was elected on Saturday. Born to Turkish Muslim parents, Cem Ozdemir is now the highest-ranking Turkish politician.

A blogger at “A World View” writes that the Green Party has made a step in the right direction by electing Ozdemir, comparing the new leader to U.S. President-elect Barack Obama.

An opinion piece in the German news site “The Local” writes that comparisons of Ozdemir to Obama are unfounded, and that Germany still has a long way to go in easing Turkish-German relations. As the immigration debate heats up in Germany, mosques are popping up and Turkish immigrants are rising up through the political system. /files/2008/11/th_germany_immigratent.jpg /files/2008/11/th_germany_immigratent.jpg ]]> http://worldfocus.org/blog/2008/11/17/turkish-immigrants-cement-islam-in-germany/2729/feed/ http://worldfocus.org/blog/2008/11/07/blog-censorship-silences-free-speech-around-the-world/2416/ http://worldfocus.org/blog/2008/11/07/blog-censorship-silences-free-speech-around-the-world/2416/#comments Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:56:08 +0000 Worldfocus http://worldfocus.org/?p=2416

Internet censorship and surveillance are contentious issues around the world.

In Malaysia, blogging remains one of the few ways to exercise free speech, although the government has begun to crack down on sites and bloggers, blocking malaysia-today.net (since redirected) and jailing its publisher.

Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad joins his country’s bloggers in criticizing the government under Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, his chosen successor.

The EU recently criticized Turkey for its free speech violations, when the government blocked 850 sites, including Blogger and YouTube. The blockage of wordpress.com last August met a firestorm of criticism, as documented by “Global Voices” blogger Sami Ben Gharbia.

Australia is making headlines for its new Internet censorship legislation, which is being criticized by both bloggers and traditional journalists. Blogger “Stilgherrian” leads a discussion about the new laws that includes a direct reply from a member of Parliament defending the laws.

Egypt faces its own free speech struggles, as explored by a Worldfocus signature story and an interview with blogger Hossam el-Hamalawy, who claims that online free speech rights are severely limited by the government. He also started a debate at Flickr, where he feels his photos of Egyptian political demonstrations have been censored.

Bi Yantao of the “Fool’s Mountain” blog reports that China – perhaps the country most famous for Internet censorship and its “great firewall” — tightened its Internet censorship as the Beijing Olympics finished and foreigners left.

Fred Stopsky of “The Impudent Observor” shares a Finnish report stating that older Finns accept Internet censorship to prevent the spread of violence and “certain ideas.”

British blogger “Charlotte Gore” responds to member of Parliament Hazel Blears’ attack on political bloggers by insisting that “the blogosphere does not answer to the government.”

“DailyBits” provides a succinct top-ten rundown of Internet censorship, and the OpenNet Initiative provides in-depth tracking and analysis of Internet filtration and censorship around the globe.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user wolfcat_aus under a Creative Commons license.

Fireworks erupt at Republic Square in the Armenian capital of Yerevan.

Over the weekend, Armenia celebrated the 17th anniversary of its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 — on the same day as the International Day of Peace.

Armenia has dealt with challenges on many fronts recently, accepting people fleeing from Georgia and forging a less volatile relationship with neighbors Turkey and Azerbaijan. Armenia, Turkey and Azerbaijan may all meet at the U.N. summit in New York this week.

“Armtown” outlines some of the day’s events, and a YouTube user provides video of Armenia’s 2007 independence celebration.

“Hayastan” celebrates independence but wonders, “Is Armenia’s heartbreaking past an excuse for the institutionalized injustice in the Republic of Armenia today?”

“The Armenian Observer Blog” assesses the future of Armenia-Turkey relations. Armenia is embroiled in ongoing struggles with Turkey rooted in Turkey’s refusal to acknowledge the 1915 genocide that killed over 1 million Armenians.

Marie Yovanovitch recently took over as the U.S. ambassador to Armenia — a move that the “Life in the Armenian Diaspora” blog rejects.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Michel S under a Creative Commons license.