english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow Turkish MFA at the CoE : Lausanne Peace Treaty = "Disadvantage" ?...

Turkish MFA at the CoE : Lausanne Peace Treaty = "Disadvantage" ?...

Written by ACM
Wednesday, 12 October 2016

*Strasbourg/CoE/Angelo Marcopolo/-
Surprisingly evoking "Freedom of Expression", Turkish Foreign Minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, indirectly but clearly, indicated Ankara's recent Dislike of the Lausanne Peace Treaty, which, despite its controrsial points, has at least Succeeded to Safeguard against War South-Eastern Europe, and particularly the Greco-Turkish relations, while also being traditionaly considered as an Historic Founding text for Turkey itself, almost 1 Century after the Collapse of Medieval former Ottoman-Turkish Empire, all the way between 1923 - 2016.

He was Replying to the 1st Question raised by a MEP at CoE's PanEuropean Assembly Today in Strasbourg, on behalf of the Biggest Political Group of MEPs, that of ChristianDemocrats/EPP, by Experienced, former Foreign Minister, Dora Bakoyannis, from Greece, currently President of CoE Assembly's Committee on OECD and BERD, and former President of its Political affairs Committee, who pointed at some Recent Controversial Statements made by Turkish President Tayip Erdogan, against the 1923 Lausanne Peace Treaty, particularly in relation of the OverMillenary Greek Islands at the Aegean Sea, facing what is (since then) Turkey's Coasts, on the occasion of the 2015-2016 Unprecedented "Tsunami" of 1,5 Million Mass Asylum Seekers/Irregular Migrants tresspassing into the EU through Turkey.



Curiously, despite his own, Personal Experience, precisely at CoE's PanEuropean Assembly during more than a Decade, and even, briefly, at its Top Job, (instead of a Russian Top MEP, Margelov, who was reportedly supposed to take over that Key post in the Past), Cavusoglu did Not even Try to Deny, Limit, Downplay, or, at least, Alleviate, Nor Soften in any way, Erdogan's reportedly Negative Criticism against the 1923 Lausanne Treaty.  Instead, he Focused mainly on searching Excuses for Erdogan's Criticism, obviously Dangerous for the Stability of the whole South-Eastern area of Europe, by invoking that same "Freedom of Expression", that he notoriously Denies to many (currently Prosecuted massively) Dissident Turkish Journalists, both of the Right and of the Left, etc...

Moreover, he also prefered to Add some supplementary Negative Wording, by Hinting f.ex.,on this occasions at "International Agreements" that Turkey may "Not Like", and/or "Believe" to be In"Correct" and Not "Justified", merely because, Suddenly, it might, eventualy, Feel that such an International "Convention... may be to the .... DisAdvantage of Turkey", as he pointed out in his Reply.

In this regard, "of course", as a matter of General Principle, "all Countries must honour International Agreements and Contracts", Cavusoglu admitted after Bakoyannis Question, But, nevertheless, "Everyone can Express Opinions", and "Mr President (Erdogan, of Turkey) can, of course, Freely Express his Opinion about (such a) Convention".

- "This is Freedom of Expression, and Not a Threat against Greece, or any Other Country", (f.ex. EU Member Bulgaria, etc), he Claimed in conclusion, (withOut, however, saying Anything at all in order to ensure that Turkey will not attempt to Violate, in any way, even that Peace Treaty)...





At this point, it naturaly becomes inevitable to, at least, Timely remind a Recent Reaction to those Erdogan's controversial Statements, by the President of EU Parliament's Committee on relations with Turkey, mainstream MEP Kefalogianis from Greece, who, Speaking to "Eurofora" Last Week at EU Parliament in Strasbourg, spontaneously Smiled, and Found "Logical" and "a Good Point", that he'd like to use, at the simple Idea that, If Turkey doesn't really Like, No more, that 1923 Lausanne Treaty, then, we should Get Back to the pre-existing 1919-1920 Sevres' Treaty, (which, by the way, had been Signed by all the Succesful Winners of the 1st World War in Europe, and some among the Best and most Popular Political Leaders that those European Countries had ever had in their Modern History, (including, f.ex., Lloyd George and -Young- Winston Churchil in Great Britain, President Alexandre Millerand in France, President Woudroy Wilson in the USA, etc):

- Indeed, it's enough to simply Compare the 2 MAPs resulting by that Initial Peace Treaty of Sevres, at 1919-1920, and the subsequent, 1923 Lausanne Treaty, (See Photos Attached herewith), in order to immediately understand that, naturaly, with that Initial Peace Treaty, EU's External Borders at the Greek Islands of Aegean Sea, (Neither Bulgaria's Borders vis a vis Turkey), would Not have had Any Problem, Today, of the kind of what Europe has Now to Face, since that Unprecedented, Sudden "Tsunami" of 1,5Million Mass Asylum Seekers/Irregular Migrants tresspassing via what is Nowadays Turkey's Coasts. (Not even a bloody Kurdish Issue, Nor an Armenian Problem, No Cyprus' Issue, Neither ISIS Terrosists at Today's Turco-Syrian Borders, No Turkish Military Invasions in Syria and/or Iraq, presently Denounced by Both Countries' Governments, (etc), for Obvious reasons...




Is that, perhaps, what Mr. Erdogan had wished for, by launching loud Accusations against the subsequent, Lausanne Peace Treaty (of 1923, i.e. just After the Massacre of the OverMillenary Population of Greeks at Smyrne on 1922, renamed Later "Izmir", who were all Massively and Violently Expelled and Chassed Away from their Family Homes and Ancestral Land, those Resisting being Burned alive, Lynched, or otherwise Killed, as, f.ex., even the Old ArchiBishop of that Ancient City, as everybody knows, thanks also to a well-known,Dramatic Historic Book/Testimony by the American Consul who worked then at Smyrne, etc) ?






Enterprises' Competitiveness for 2014-2020


Visitors: 26299421


Login Form

Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account


RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3

Other Menu


The official presentation of a "Program" respecting People's choices voted in the June 7, 2009 EU Elections, to be debated in EU Council and EU Parliament during its 1st Session on July in Strasbourg, is the No 1 Priority, according to Democratic principles, for the Franco-German axis, said the main winners at the ballot box, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angie Merkel.

They stressed  that the New EU Commission's President must have a "Program" in favor of an EU which "protects" its Citizens, regulates financial markets and aims at a "Political" Europe" : a wording they have used as incompatible with Turkey's controversial EU bid.

They also declared ready for a "political" endorsment of "Mr. Barroso's candidacy" in June's EU Council, considering that an official decision would have to be made after EU Parliament's debates and votes, possibly from next month (July), with the legally necessary final acceptance shortly after Lisbon Treaty's entry into force, hoped for September or October.

- "A Program, and Mr. Barroso" : This resumes, in substance, the anouncements made by Sarkozy and Merkel, on the question of current EU Commission's President, Barroso's declared wish to succeed to himself for a second mandate, to be extended during the following 5 years.

 In their 1st meeting after EU Elections, they observed that "the Franco-German axis counted in European Elections' campaign... But, we both keep a realistic view : We saw the number of those who abstained, and we must absolutely give them an answer. We also see the disilusionment of an important number of Europeans vis a vis Europe, and we are aware of the responsibilities we have".


 - The "Duty" of the new EU Commission's President, after June 7, 2009 EU Elections' result, "is to act for a Europe which protects the Europeans, to commit himself into working for a better Regulation of Financial transactions, ... and to have a Political will for Europe", underlined Sarkozy.

Therefore, "we have asked M. Barroso... to clarify, to officialy present the intentions he has", he anounced.

- "We want to speak also about the Programme", explained Merkel.

- "It's important that for the next EU Parliament's mandate (2009-2014) we take the right Decisions for Europe.  Obviously on Persons, but mainly Decisions on Issues", she stressed.

- "It's not simply a question of a Person, it's also a question of a Programme". We are "really asking Mr. Barroso to commit himself on a Program, and on Principles, on Values", Sarkozy added.

EU President-in-office, Czech Prime Minister Jan Fischer, accepted the Franco-German stance :

- "Barroso must present his Programme. The Czech Presidency agrees with that", Fischer reportedly said later, after meeting Sarkozy.

But Press reports from Brussels claimed that Barroso had preferred to be officially appointed by EU Council since June, (i.e. next week), "because this was implied by the current Treaty of Nice, according to him", and considered any delay until the possible ratification of the new, Lisbon Treaty on September/October, as "undemocratic".

- "At any case, independently of what Germany and France ask, it's also EU Parliament's wish". "We shall propose Mr Barroso's candidacy... But even in the framework of Nice Treaty, EU Parliament has to be associated in this Decision", the French President observed.

If this is correctly done, then "we support Mr. Barroso's candidature", and "if the (EU) Parliament agrees, we might ratify this decision since July", (i.e. next month), they both said.


- "France and Germany support Baroso's candidacy, But we want to speak also on the Program. We believe that this Program should be established in close cooperation with EU Parliament, and that's why we have followed an appropriate way", said Merkel.  - If EU Parliament wants, this election can take place on July,  but this must be done in full agreement.

- "We shall support Mr. Barroso's candidacy, without doubt", said Sarkozy. "But we have asked from Mr. Barroso, as I told him yesterday, to put into detail.. his intentions, at the eve of his 2nd mandate, if the situation avails itself.

    France and Germany "don't want to take an Official Legal Decision by writting" during "the next (EU) Council" (on June 18-19), declared Sarkozy.  Because they prefer, at this stage, only "a Political decision" on June, "so that we (EU Council) can work together with EU Parliament", which starts to meet only Next Month, since July in Srasbourg, "leaving a Legal decision by writting for later".

    - "If the Conditions are fuillfiled in EU Parliament, we (EU Council) are ready to give the agreement and make it offficial", said Merkel

    - "But, now we are working in the base of Nice Treaty. If tommorow we want to work in the spirit of Lisbon Treaty, we have to find a proper way", she added.

    - "Of course it's Legally complicated, because we are going to make a Political proposal to the forthcoming Council, for an EU Commission's President, on the basis of Nice Treaty : So, we (EU Council) will not appoint the Commissioners. Only the President.  If EU Parliament agrees, it could endorse this position on July", explained Sarkozy.

    But, on Autumn, "if Ireland ratifies Lisbon Treaty, there will be, at any case, a 2nd Decision, to appoint the Commission's President, this time on the basis of Lisbon treaty, and then, we, the EU Member States, would have to appoint (also) the EU Commissioners", he added.

    As for the precise Timing :  - "Everything is suspended until the Irish vote... Now, we must all make everything possible to help Ireland to say "Yes"" to Lisbon Treaty... The Irish Referendum, ..will take place either on September or on October. It's a Question which depends on the Irish. And,  then, we shall have the Choice of the Candidates for the permanent Institutions of Europe".

    However, "if Ireland says No, we, French and Germans, have to assume our responsibilities, and we'll do so", he concluded.

    But British and Swedish governments were reportedly eager to have a final EU Council decision on Barroso since this month, on June's European Council. While the other EU Member Countries are divided, several of them preferring to wait until EU Parliament pronounces itself, on July, and/or until Lisbon Treaty might be ratified by Ireland at the beginning of the Autumn. Barroso's current mandate ends on November.

    There are also various, contradictory and/or unpredictable reactions inside EU Parliament vis a vis Barroso's wish to continue a 2nd mandate, because many MEPs are openly or secretly opposed, reluctant, or hesitating.

    In the biggest EU Countries, as France and Germany, EU Citizens voted on June 2009 EU Elections for a renovated, non-technocratic but Political Europe which cares for its Citizens, with an Identity, Values and Borders, declared incompatible with Turkey's controversial EU bid, by mainstream, pro-European Governing Parties. Similar choices were also supported in several other small or medium EU Countries.

    On the contrary, whenever, in other Countries, Governing and other mainstream Parties didn't make these choices or eluded them, EU Citizens massively voted for euro-Sceptics whenever they were the only ones to to promise anti-bureacratic change and oppose Turkey's demand to enter into the EU, (f.ex. in the UK, Netherlands, etc).

    It's seems to be an Open Question whether Sarkozy and Merkel's conditions will be really accepted by Barroso, who was appointed on 2004 in a different political context, (with Socialist Prime Ministers in Germany, France, etc), had rejected in the Past the idea of EU becoming "equal to the USA" as "ridiculous", and pushed for Turkey's contoversial EU bid, trying to "soften" or contain the changes desired by the People who voted for Merkel and Sarkozy with another policy vis a vis Turkey on 2005 in Germany and on 2007 in France, as they did all over Europe on 2009.

    In addition to many EPP Governments, it's 3 remaining Socialist Prime Ministers : Gordon Brown in the UK, Zapatero in Spain, and Socrates in Prortugal, who support Barroso, as well as Liberal Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt. But their Parties lost the June 2009 EU Elections.

    Questioned whether there was still "Time" for "other" possible "Candidates", Sarkozy and Merkel did not deny, nor made any comment on that, but simply said that "it's not for us to make publicity for any candidates. We anounced our choice ("A Program, and Mr. Barroso"). But we respect any other candidate".

    Among various other names cited are former Belgian Prime Minister Verhofstadt, former UNO's Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson of Ireland, Italian former EU Commission's vice-President Monti, etc. Meanwhile, Luxembourg's PM Juncker, (who had been unanimously accepted by EU Council for EU Commission's Presidency on 2004, but refused), announced his intention to resign from "EuroGroup"'s Chair. Thus, he might be available for another Top EU job.

    As "EuroFora"'s "opinion" said (See publication dated 9/6/09) : - "If the current candidates (i.e. Barroso, etc) to the Top EU jobs promise and guarantee to respect People's democratic choices, then, it's OK".

"Otherwise, Europe must find new candidates, really motivated and able to implement these democratic choices of the People."

    Because, "in Democracy, the forthcoming choices for EU's Top Jobs,...should be made according to EU Citizens' Votes in June 7, 2009 European Elections, and main EU Governments' strategic policies".



2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?


SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.