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

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

Escrito por ACM
12.10.16
mcavusoglu_replies_400


*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.

 

dora_bakoyanni_mep_400


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)...

 

 

kefalogiannis__agg__eu_parliament__eurofora_400

 


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...

 

sevres_lausanne_treaties_19191920_and_19221923_400
 

 

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) ?

 

(../..)


***

("DraftNews")
 

***




EUPartnersInvestors

Statistics

Visitantes: 18661551

Archive

Login Form

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

 

pace_freeze_meps_400_01

They voted to "freeze" UK Government's draft to put People in jail for 42 Days on "anti-terrorist" suspicion without charge, or they abstained. Don't they look suspect ?
-------------------------

CoE's debate on UK controversy stirs PanEuropean check of anti-terror suspects' imprisonment

Former Leftists of the Sixties would boil in hot water if they heard PACE's debate on the controversial 42 days detention without charge, currently drafted by the British Government :

A "Socialist" Government, a Socialist PACE Rapporteur and a Socialist Chair of PACE's Legal Committee, opposed a .. "Conservative" amendment (supported by .. Liberals, Democrats, etc), to freeze the measure, in order to protect Citizens' Freedom, by "waiting" until CoE's Venice Committee checks its conformity with Human Rights' principles.

"Left"'s support to Conservative-Lib.Dem's criticism, wasn't enough to obtain a majority, nor to make things as they were back in the good old days, when "Left" and "Right" had a clear meaning, as "liberty" and "restrictions"...

Conservatives and most Democrats were joined by the Left in voting for the "freeze", as well as Liberal Paul Rowen, while Socialist MEP Ivan Popescu, an experienced MEP from Ukraine (PACE Member since 1996-2008) abstained. But most Socialists, added to a few Liberals and EPP's Right, voted against.

Fortunately, someone inside PACE had the wise idea to shorten the Debate for less than 1 Hour, and put it on the Agenda only at the end of an exceptionally busy day, towards the end of the Evening, when most MEPs had already gone to taste wins and foods at various Receptions all around Strasbourg's "European" area : As a result, not even 42 MEPs weren't present..

Socialist Lord Tomlinson accused the leaders of the PanEuropean Assembly, in its highest body : the "Bureau", to "lack wisdom" by deciding to hold a Debate on an issue that neither the Socialist Chair of the Legal Committee, nor its Socialist "reluctant Rapporteur", did "not want to do", ...

tomllinson

Finally, everybody (critics and supporters alike) was happy to agree, in substance, that the controversial measure "may" gravely violate Human Rights, and therefore, PACE asked Legal Experts of Venice Commission to check UK Government''s plans.

But this might take more than .. 42 Days to do, since PACE's Rapporteur asked the Experts to enlarge their study in a PanEuropean comparison of all that is happening on "anti-terrorism" legislation in 47 CoE Member Countries, including Russia, Turkey and Azerbaidjan..

Bad lack : "The existing 28 days’ detention without charge in the UK is, in comparison with other CoE member countries, one of the most extreme : In Turkey, the period is 7,5 days, in France 6 days, in Russia 5 days, and in .. the U.S. and Canada just 2 and 1 days respectively", denounced Democrat MEP Ms WOLDSETH from Norway..

woldsteth

"Numerous respected human rights organisations, including Liberty and Human Rights Watch, have expressed serious concern" "The proposed legislation ...could easily lead to extensive abuses. ...Detention for 42 days means six weeks in which one is taken away from one’s family, friends, home and livelihood only to be let off without being charged. That will destroy lives and isolate communities", she added.

- "3 years ago, the UK Government sought to increase the period of pre-charge detention from 14 days to 90 days. Not long before that, it had been only 7 days. There was a vigorous debate ...and a ...compromise was reached of 28 days. We have to ask whether there are proper safeguards in place to extend the period to 42 days. I suggest that there are fatal flaws", reminded British Conservative Clappison.

- "What sort of society holds someone in detention for 42 days and does not have to tell the person who is in prison why they are there, or explain the suspicions that arose and led to their detention? What sort of society believes that that is the way to treat its citizens? That is an appalling injustice, ...A 42-day detention period will not make the UK safer. Instead, it will be the first step to giving in to terrorists; it is saying that we are prepared to sacrifice our democratic rights and the principles for which we have stood for centuries", criticized British Liberal Michael Hanckock

hancock

"Comments made ...by Norwegian delegates are unfortunate", replied British Socialist MEP Ms.Curtis-Thomas, accusing them to "besmirch the reputation of our police force, which is one of the Best in the World", as she said, believing that "there are significant safeguards ...to ensure that individuals are not subjected to unlawful detention"

curtis

PACE "has serious doubts whether ...the draft legislation are in conformity with the ...case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. A lack of ..safeguards may lead to arbitrariness, resulting in breaches of ... liberty and ...right to a fair trial". PACE "is particularly concerned that: ..the judge ..may not be in a position to examine whether there exist reasonable grounds for suspecting that the arrested person has committed an offence;"; that "... representation by a lawyer may be inappropriately restricted or delayed;" that "information on the grounds for suspicion of a person ...may be unduly withheld.. ;" that this "may give rise to arrests without the intention to charge;", and; in general, that "prolonged detention without proper information on the grounds for arrest may constitute inhuman treatment", says Klaus De Vries' Report, adopted with 29 votes against zero.

vries

Records don't say if it took him 42 Days to draft his Report, but, at least, he knew why...

Polls

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 ?

Mostrados

SMF Recent Topics SA

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