European Turkey in the EU!

We have read the article titled “La Turquie dans l'UE? C'est toujours non!” in your newspaper dated as of 29.01.08, not without a certain amount of resignation. Our surprise and indignation at similar comments has indeed been steadily decreasing since French politics entered its era of Sarkozian domination.

The authors of the passionate letter begin by stating the need for clear geographical borders for the EU to exist as a political entity. They then go on to claim that Turkey is not geographically European because some of her territory is located in Asia Minor. This is a much utilised argument by those against Turkish membership to the EU. However, a certain EU Member State is currently situated much more to the East than most of Turkey’s territory. This detail seems to be always deliberately left out. Furthermore, some Member States regard this phenomenon simply as a geographical aberration and try to correct the matter. For example, recent Euro coins will not feature Turkey on the map. Southern Cyprus, which should also disappear from the map in all logic, has been literally fictionally moved westwards and squeezed into the map . These Orwellian efforts would have been extremely entertaining if they were restricted to the realm of comedy. Since they are not, these are sobering indicators of the level of xenophobia and political manipulation in the EU. Fortunately, it is currently impossible to make Turkey disappear. That being said, Turkey’s sense of identity is distinctly European. With all due respect, it is not up to any politician or the authors of the aforementioned comment to define Turkey’s identity.

The geographical “question” aside, the authors go on to base their objections to Turkey’s membership on seemingly more tangible subjects. To put it simply, it is all about money. The authors claim that Turkey’s membership to the EU would cost too much and disqualify some current EU regions from structural funds. These assertions would be true if Turkey’s accession happened today. However Turkey is not expected to become a member before the next financial perspective of the EU is prepared. Therefore, the earliest date for accession is projected as 2014. This target was also confirmed by the Turkish government in its harmonisation program published in April 2007. In the meantime, Turkey continues to record very high growth rates year after year. Consequently, by the time of accession these numbers will no longer hold any significant meaning. The time for those considerations is still a long way away. Furthermore, one of the foundations of the EU is solidarity. Those considerations were never voiced this loud with previous enlargements and the fact that they are done so now raises suspicions of some pathological enmity.

This brings us to other assertions in the unfortunate letter. The authors claim that it is impossible to integrate a state which does not recognize the “Armenian genocide”. There is no legal basis to that claim in terms of EU treaties and agreements, so we perceive this assertion as a moral issue. That period of history was extremely painful for everybody involved regardless of ethnicity. Recent years brought a resurgence of interest about the subject in the Turkish society. However, the insistence of some EU member states on the recognition of the events as “genocide” is seriously detrimental to the reconciliation of the societies. Moreover such seemingly moral claims look especially groundless when contrasted against the historical conduct of some member states. Mr. Sarkozy himself said that “leaders should focus on the future and not beat their breasts” on a recent visit to Algeria . According to Mr. Sarkozy, “the sons should not be hold accountable for the mistakes of their fathers” . Comments like these makes one wonder about the source of Sarkozian moral authority. “The Kurdish question”, as the authors put it, is intimately tied to the larger democratization process ongoing in Turkey. More representative politics and respect for minorities is the main issue here. To that effect, there have been many reforms since the recognition of Turkey as a candidate in 1999 and new reform packages are on the way.

The authors also make a point of the Cyprus question. What they omit is that the current situation is the result of EU’s faulty strategy. This much was admitted by EU leaders and bureaucrats of the time. It was the Turkish Cypriots who voted for the reunification of the island and the Greek Cypriots who refused in the referenda for the Annan Plan in 2004. The EU however, went on to accept Southern Cyprus as a member representing the whole of the island. One of the fundamental tenets of EU enlargement policy concerns relations with neighbours. Yet S. Cyprus was made a member regardless of its problems with its neighbours. Besides creating double standards, today the EU is isolating some of its own citizens! Turkey is still supportive of a UN sponsored solution to the problem.

The 301st article of the penal code is a disgrace. The government is working on a reformulation which will prevent abuses of the article. Moreover, a new constitution is currently being prepared which will bring new freedoms. That being said, the existence of restrictions on freedom of expression is not particular to Turkey. While this does not diminish the disgraceful nature inherent to articles limiting freedom of expression, many EU member states have similar articles in their penal codes .
Turkey cannot become an EU member state without completing the necessary democratic reforms anyway, so the anxiety of the authors about integrating an undemocratic Turkey is simply unfounded. What is more, the democratization process coincides with the accession process and sometimes the promise of membership acts as a catalyst. But it is never intended solely as a compromise in return for membership. It is realized for Turkish citizens, first and foremost. Prime Minister Erdoğan said it best when asked what would happen to Turkey’s reform process if accession negotiations were halted: “We will transform the Copenhagen criteria into Ankara criteria and continue on our way”.

The signatories to the letter go on to state that “negotiations with Turkey should end up in a privileged partnership because it is necessary to have commercial relations with your immediate neighbours”. The tone of this sentence permeates the whole letter. What the signatories fail to mention is that this “necessity” has already been taken care of by the Customs Union which went into force in 1996. Turkey has been a “privileged partner” of the EU for 12 years now. In fact without accession, the rules governing the Customs Union offer no net “privileges” to Turkey in the long run. The accession negotiations between Turkey and the EU are part and parcel of the acquis communautaire. Going back on that 45 year old promise now would be the real death of the European idea, as it has been conceived by Robert Schumann and Jean Monnet.

Turkey is European. It is becoming even more European with every new reform it adopts. But there is a part of Europe which is short-sighted, intolerant and xenophobic. Turkey wants nothing to do with that part.


Economic Development Foundation
İstanbul, TURKEY

ABHaber 02.02.2008 İstanbul

EFFector Vol. 21, No. 03 January 24, 2008
editor@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier
Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 456th Issue of EFFector:
* Action Alert: Your Photos and Videos Needed at
StopTheSpying.org!
* Opposition to Telecom Immunity Swells
* AT&T's Proposed Net Filtering Plan Gets
Attention
* Time Warner Puts a Meter on the Internet
* DHS Issues REAL ID Standards; Congressional
Leaders
Respond
* Filtering and Copyright Extension Fail to Find
a Home in
EU
* Cyberlaw and Cyberlawgs
* Come See EFF at the O'Reilly Emerging
Technology
Conference!
* miniLinks (4): DoJ, ACLU Cool to Specter's
FISA Deal
* Administrivia

For more information on EFF activities & alerts:
http://www.eff.org/

Make a donation and become an EFF member today!
http://eff.org/support/

Tell a friend about EFF:
http://action.eff.org/site/Ecard?ecard_id=1061

effector: n, Computer Sci. A device for producing
a desired
change.

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* Action Alert: Your Photos and Videos Needed at
StopTheSpying.org!

Let's show our elected representatives that we
the people
-- concerned Americans and voters from across the
country
-- oppose telecom immunity. Visit
StopTheSpying.org for
details on making photos and videos to drive the
point
home: no immunity for lawbreaking telecoms!
http://www.stopthespying.org

The Senate has begun discussing telecom immunity
and the
FISA Amendments Act on the Senate floor, and by
many
indications a vote is imminent. Congress needs to
hear from
citizens like you on this issue!

It is likely that there will be several rounds of
amendments and filibusters in the Senate. In
addition, the
House version of the surveillance bill does not
include
immunity for telecoms, setting the stage for an
inevitable
reconciliation of differences in the House and
Senate bills
if the Senate does pass retroactive immunity.
Congressional
champions that have so far remained resolute in
rejecting
telecom immunity to defend the rule of law and
privacy
rights need your support now more than ever!

So visit StopTheSpying.org now to speak out
against telecom
immunity!
http://www.stopthespying.org

For the campaign's Flickr page featuring
submitted photos:
http://flickr.com/photos/stopthespying

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* Opposition to Telecom Immunity Swells

With Congress back in session and the
Presidential election
season in full swing, the fight to prevent the
Administration from granting immunity to the
telecoms for
illegal spying is heating up once again.
Activists and
bloggers alike are keeping the heat on.

First, Credo Mobile (formerly Working Assets)
urged its
members to write to Senators Clinton, Obama and
McCain, the
three presidential candidates who are still in
the Senate
and who have said that they would oppose
immunity. The
results were tremendous: 67,000 emails were sent
to the
Senators.

Meanwhile, Jane Hamsher from Firedoglake has been
urging
folks to write to former Senator Edwards. Edwards
can make
telecom immunity a debate issue for the
presidential
candidates who still have a vote in Congress.

And of course, the amazing Glenn Greenwald
continues to
point out how Senator Harry Reid has the power to
help stop
the immunity train by supporting Senator Dodd and
the
handful of others who are willing to lay down on
the
tracks, but instead, Senator Reid seems to be
shoveling in
more coal.

Additionally, the Melman Group, a national
polling
organization commissioned by the ACLU, recently
published a
poll finding that 57 percent of likely voters
opposed
immunity for the telecommunications carriers that
participated in the government's warrantless
surveillance
program, while only a third supported letting the
telecoms
off the hook.

For the Melman Group poll:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/strong-majority-voters-oppose-telecom-immunity

For the complete post by EFF Senior Staff
Attorney Kurt
Opsahl:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/strong-majority-voters-oppose-telecom-immunity

For this complete post by EFF Legal Director
Cindy Cohn:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/bloggers-and-others-push-presidential-candidates-immunity

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* AT&T's Proposed Net Filtering Plan Gets
Attention

The Internet brought us three terrific
discussions about
AT&T's plan to filter the internet this week.

First, over at Slate.com, Tim Wu asks: "Has AT&T
Lost Its
Mind?" pointing out that the company risks losing
its
immunity from copyright liability if it takes an
active
role in selecting which content can travel over
its
network. He says: "An Internet provider
voluntarily giving
up copyright immunity is like an astronaut on the
moon
taking off his space suit."

Second, filtering was discussed again in lively
debate on
the New York Times Bits Blog between Tim Wu and
Rick Cotton
of NBC Universal.

Finally, in an act of media heroism, Joel Johnson
of Boing
Boing Gadgets went on the AT&T-sponsored The Hugh
Thompson
Show and did the unspeakable: instead of
discussing gadgets
he talked about AT&T's plan to filter the
Internet and
asked the audience whether they wanted AT&T to be
reading
their emails and instant messages. Not
surprisingly, even
the AT&T-picked studio audience thought turning
the phone
company into Big Brother was a bad idea. The
producers
stopped the interview after a few minutes, then
sanitized
it with another take, but Joel had a friend tape
the
original and posted it.

Let's hope this is the start of a trend. The
tombstone on
this bad idea should read: "Internet Filtering:
Killed by
the Power of the Internet."

For Tim Wu's article "Has AT&T Lost Its Mind?":
http://www.slate.com/id/2182152/

For the online debate between Tim Wu and Rick
Cotton of NBC
Universal:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/bits-debate-should-internet-providers-block-copyrighted-works/

For the video of Joel Johnson discussing
filtering on an
AT&T sponsored show:
http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/01/21/talking-about-atts-i.html

For this post by EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/3-things-ts-proposed-net-filtering-plan

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* Time Warner Puts a Meter on the Internet

Time Warner Cable has confirmed that it will be
rolling out
metered pricing for Internet access in Beaumont,
TX. On
balance, we think this is a fair choice among a
bunch of
bad options. Providing transparent, metered
access is
certainly preferable to Comcast's arbitrary,
undisclosed
practice of selectively hobbling particular
protocols.

Overall, business models that keep ISPs thinking
of
themselves as "pipe" rather than "content" are
good. Better
that your ISP worry about the tolls to pay for
the highway,
rather than scheming to force you to use their
preferred
offramps and eat in their preferred diners.

Transparency also encourages innovation and
competition.
Already, Verizon is gloating publicly, saying
that its more
modern FIOS fiber-optic service will not have
caps. This
also may encourage new broadband technology
providers to
enter the market, as they will have another way
to
differentiate their offering from cable
broadband.

However, there are some serious potential
drawbacks, too.
First, if metered Internet access becomes
widespread, it
may discourage users from indulging in new,
high-bandwidth
activities, thereby foreclosing innovative new
technologies
and markets. For example, we might never have had
a YouTube
or a Napster if people were fretting about their
bandwidth
consumption.

Second, much will depend on the pricing of these
new
metered plans. The new plans could beneficially
be used to
bring basic broadband in at a lower price, or it
could be
used badly as a cover for price increases on
existing
customers. And the pricing for "overages" should
bear some
relation to costs, rather than being exploited
for windfall
profits. Broadband industry observer Dave
Burstein has
pointed out that the wholesale price to Time
Warner for
40gb for a month amounts to about $3.

The last word goes to Harold Feld: "The real
solution, of
course, is policies that build out more capacity
so that it
becomes too cheap to meter." Now if only we had a
real
national broadband policy to get us there.

For Howard Feld's blog post about Time Warner and
metered
pricing:
http://www.wetmachine.com/totsf/item/1006

For the complete post from EFF Senior Staff
Attorney Fred
von Lohmann:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/time-warners-puts-meter-internet

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* DHS Issues REAL ID Standards; Congressional
Leaders
Respond

On January 11, 2008, the Department of Homeland
Security
(DHS) released the final regulations for the
implementation
of the REAL ID Act, the flawed plan to create a
national
identity card system.

The REAL ID Act was signed into law in 2005 and
forces
states to standardize drivers' licenses in a way
that turns
them into a national ID. The Real ID Act will
create grave
dangers to privacy and impose massive financial
burdens
without improving national security in the least.

Several congressional leaders, including Senate
Judiciary
Chairman Patrick Leahy, spoke out against the
Real ID
regulations, arguing that the provisions pass the
cost to
taxpayers, do not improve national security, and
do not
protect the privacy of Americans.

For more about the REAL ID Act:
http://www.eff.org/issues/real-id

For this complete post:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/dhs-issues-real-id-standards-congressional-leaders-respond

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* Filtering and Copyright Extension Fail to Find
a Home in
EU

The EU's Committee on Culture and Education
(CULT) recently
voted on the final form of its report on the
Cultural
Industries in Europe and chose to listen to their
constituents, not the music industry's lobbyists.
Amendments proposing ISP filtering and blocking,
as well as
a last-minute request for an EU directive
extending
copyright terms, were either voted down or
withdrawn by
their proposers.

It's not quite over -- the report still has to
pass a
plenary meeting of the Parliament, where there
could be a
final attempt to introduce yet more loaded
language into
the document. But thanks to the many EU citizens
who called
and emailed their representatives, many more
politicians
across Europe now understand that these "feasible
and
reasonable" proposals, as IFPI called ISP spying
in its
lobbying documents, are nothing of the sort. As
ever, the
more who hear from you, the better the chances
for sensible
IP policies in every part of the world.

For the complete post by EFF International
Outreach
Coordinator Danny O' Brien:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/filtering-and-copyright-extension-fail-find-home-eu

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* Cyberlaw and Cyberlawgs

Eric Menhart may call himself a cyberlawyer, but
we think
he has a lot of learn about cyberlaw -- and
common sense.
Menhart is the author of a blog about cyberlaw
issues
called, logically if not innovatively,
"Cyberlawg." (As he
says in the top right corner, "Cyberlawg =
Cyberlaw +
blog.") And he is "principal attorney" in a firm
called
"CyberLaw P.C." OK, OK, we get it, he practices
technology
law. Based on this, he's applied for a trademark
on the use
of the term "cyberlaw" in connection with the
practice of,
um, cyberlaw. That's like a soda company claiming
a
trademark in the use of the word soda in
connection with
the sale of soda. Or an apple farmer claiming a
trademark
in the use of the term apple in connection with
the sale of
apples. Or ... well, you get the picture. What is
worse,
he's threatening other lawyers with legal action
based on
this silly "mark."

I wish I could say I was surprised by this one,
but such
overreaching invocations of intellectual property
(IP)
rights are all too common -- even where, as in
this case,
there are no actual "rights" to speak of. But an
IP lawyer
should know that courts (and trademark examiners,
and many
tech companies that might be potential clients)
don't look
kindly on efforts to abuse trademark law to
control
everyday language. Here's hoping Menhart figures
that out
fast.

For the complete post by EFF Staff Attorney
Corynne
McSherry:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/cyberlaw-and-cyberlawgs

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* Come See EFF at the O'Reilly Emerging
Technology
Conference!

Heading to San Diego for the O'Reilly Emerging
Technology
Conference (ETech) in March? Plan to catch EFF's
"On A
Brighter Note..." panel, where EFF lawyers and
activists
will put on their rose-tinted spectacles and
describe our
best case scenarios: near-future technology that
will help
you defend your rights, real world policy
initiatives that
could help save the Net, and techniques and
tricks that you
can bake into your work now that will help
preserve all our
freedoms, for now and for good.

Also, don't forget to come to EFF's Pioneer
Awards ceremony
on March 4. And don't forget to visit our booth
and grab
some EFF schwag during exhibit hours.

The O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference
(ETech) takes
place March 3-6 in San Diego, CA. ETech hones in
on the
ideas, projects, and technologies that the alpha
geeks are
thinking about, hacking on, and inventing right
now. From
robotics, health care, and space travel to
gaming, finance,
and art, ETech explores promising technologies
that are
influencing everyday life and inspiring the
future.

The good folks at O'Reilly are offering a
discount to
EFFector readers; enter code "et08eff" when you
register
online to save 20%!
http://www.oreilly.com/go/et3cheff

For more about ETech:
http://conferences.oreillynet.com/

For more information about O'Reilly:
http://www.oreilly.com

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* miniLinks
The week's noteworthy news, compressed.

~ DoJ, ACLU Cool to Specter's FISA Deal
Parties on both sides of the issue are
unenthusiastic about
Senator Specter's offer of a compromise on FISA
reform.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/doj-aclu-cool-to-specters-fisadeal-2008-01-17.html

~ Supreme Court Declines To Hear Orphan Works
Case
An appeal brought by Open Content Alliance
founders was
turned down by the Supreme Court.
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6523163.html

~ Are the 59 Million Users of Facebook Suckers?
UK Guardian reporter says Facebook was founded by
right
wingers with an agenda.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook

~ Social Networking Gets Political
A new website aims to give ordinary people the
same
knowledge currently limited to lobbyists and
insiders
through social networking.
http://www.opencongress.org/

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :
. : . :

* Administrivia

EFFector is published by:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)
http://www.eff.org/

Editor:
Richard Esguerra, EFF Activist
richard@eff.org

Membership & donation queries:
membership@eff.org

General EFF, legal, policy, or online resources
queries:
information@eff.org

Reproduction of this publication in electronic
media is
encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily
represent
the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles
individually, please contact the authors for
their express
permission.
Press releases and EFF announcements & articles
may be
reproduced individually at will.

Current and back issues of EFFector are available
via the
Web at:
http://www.eff.org/effector/

Click here to unsubscribe or change your
subscription
preferences:

http://action.eff.org/site/CO?i=WptQcajpBnLFOF4VDsAZOIk7y2FUmK87&cid=1041

Click here to change your email address:
http://action.eff.org/addresschange

This newsletter is printed on 100% recycled
electrons.


To unsubscribe from all future email, paste the
following URL into your browser:
http://action.eff.org/site/CO?i=2zDs3lBbA1fmAQaYF59Z7wQQauZq70u4&cid=1041
10 ) { msg.style.visibility = "visible"; } if ( callCount 0 ) cssAttribs.push( ' height:' + newHeight + 'px;' ); cssAttribs.push( '}' ); try { ssxyzzy.sheet.deleteRule( 0 ); ssxyzzy.sheet.insertRule( cssAttribs.join(""), 0 ); } catch( e ){} } } function imgsDone( msg ) // for Firefox, we need to scan for images that haven't set their width yet { var imgList = msg.getElementsByTagName( "IMG" ); var len = ((imgList == null)? 0 : imgList.length); for ( var i = 0; i

Domination of the U.S. by Corporations