The routinely published European Parliament report regarding Turkey came onto the agenda only with its sections concerning the oppressions on the journalists. As soon as it came onto the agenda it was utilized as materials for political purposes.

 

In fact, it is something less likely not to be utilized but the fact that those utilized it take offence of what to what extent in this tradition of reporting is another exemplary. Those who suddenly embraced the EP report due to the section regarding the recent enforcement on the journalists accused of having relationship with the Ergenekon terrorist organization, in fact, didn’t even esteem the report in the past while the subjects of report were regarding the Cyprus or Aegean issue, Kurdish issue or Armenian issue, human rights violation, minorities in Turkey and etc. This is not something to pass off so easily.  

 

First of all, this is not the first time that this report says something concerning journalists, media, and freedom of expression. The case of journalists under detention was on the agenda in the former rapports as well. However, in any case those sections of the report weren’t taken into consideration as much as this time. The report was even criticized due to the respective sections. More interestingly, the respective cases still cover a significant space in this report. But nobody cares.   

 

All the issues discussed in the section regarding the Turkish Foreign Policy is based on the Cyprus issue and it is irritatingly stated that Turkey should set a pace in this case. Furthermore, Turkish foreign policy is criticized for her policy in the Middle East and relations with Israel. It is claimed that Turkey conducts these policies without taking the policies of the EU into consideration and it is demanded that Turkey should mend the fences with Israel.  Where does  this “Attention” advice given to Turkey resonate from while none of the European countries has a specified policy regarding the aforementioned policies? In fact, this is a case that sometimes the politicians of the EU members confess as well. The best policies that Turkey made on behalf of the EU as a candidate are the policies in the Middle East and the Central Asia. Why is the EU disturbed by the reconciliatory policies of Turkey with the priority of the regional cooperation and development? Moreover, Turkey has already stipulated the solution of many problems on the condition of EU membership because the paces that Turkey would set without being a member are not profitable to Turkey. Why should Turkey make so many disadvantageous regulations while it is not a member yet and moreover while the possibility and conditions of the membership has gradually decreased to a significant extent?  

 

The report is irritating the national feelings in this term and in fact as Beril Dedeoğlu also stated the report also contains inciting elements intending to acerbate Turkey on the track of EU membership. Nevertheless, the sections regarding the journalists were focused on more than these sides of the report. Interestingly, it was stated that the part regarding Nedim Şener and Ahmet Şık was added to the report at the last moment.

 

Why is this “rush” in such a report?

 

Does the Dutch reporter have a special knowledge about this issue while nobody in Turkey has gotten the correct nature of the case yet? It is obvious that he doesn’t have any idea but for being under the influence of the winds in Turkish media regarding this issue. Some call these winds as “conscience,” some other call them something else. However, when these winds have passed the realities will remain out. 

 

There is a lawsuit going on and the prosecutor has stated that these arrestments are not related to the journalism but they are related to certain proofs which are not appropriate to explain. Then, this case cannot be evaluated as if this statement hasn’t been made or the real purpose of this statement is not clear. However, we hope that the prosecutor will eventually make an explanation satisfying the public. I used the phrase “hope” on one hand but on the other hand we also hope the contrary on behalf of those arrested. 

 

However, interestingly enough it is stated in same report that the Ergenekon Case is a historical opportunity for Turkey in terms of developing a democratic and transparent administration; thus, the inquiry should be kept on deepening. In an inquiry of a structure at the scale and characteristics of the Ergenekon in which any kind of conspiration has been conducted, it is quite normal that some surprising things come out. Nobody assumes a transparent structure with a declared statute, accountable in its activities, method and relations, do they? The process of inquiry is a difficult process; it is full of confusion and dilemma. It is an instructive on one hand but irritating on the other. 

 

Apart from the discussions about the journalists and the solidarity that the journalists attempt to establish among so called “colleagues”, “friends” or “acquaintances” following these arrestments, it is thought-provoking on behalf of the EP that a person who prepares a report directing the EP forejudging and removing all of the ambiguities regarding these discussions includes them in the respective report in a rush … 

 

In short, this judgment expressed without leaving any place for prudence is quite instructive about the nature and content of these reports. Perhaps this case will teach us not to take these reports seriously or to what extent should we take. It also teaches us a lesson regarding how and where in Turkey these reports of the EP are sold.