Connect with us

INTERVIEW

Highlights from the two sessions: High quality development and new productive forces

Published

on

Prof. Dr. Seriye Sezen, who has been following the CPC and the meetings of the National People’s Congress for almost 20 years, answered our questions about the ‘two sessions’: ‘Instead of being associated with economic problems, the Chinese leadership wanted to be in the international public eye with its policies on global problems and its foreign policy.’

This year’s meetings of China’s top legislature and top political advisory body (the National People’s Congress and the People’s Political Consultative Conference), known as the ‘two sessions’, are drawing to a close. The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference held its closing session on Sunday. The National People’s Congress will also conclude on Monday at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing.

2024 is seen as an important year for Beijing, marking the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China and the implementation of the 14th Five-Year Plan.

Growth target and quality economic development, financial system reform, private sector promotion and market stabilisation, new productive forces and quality development, accelerating quality opening up, ageing population and declining birth rate, military technology development were important agenda items at this year’s meetings.

We discussed the prominent discussions at the two sessions and their impact on international public opinion with Prof. Dr Seriye Sezen, a faculty member at Ankara University’s Faculty of Political Sciences and one of the closest followers of China in Turkey.

‘Attention was on the government report’

How do you assess the agenda, functioning and atmosphere of this year’s ‘two sessions’, considered the most important event in the Chinese political calendar?

This year’s meetings were the second session of the 14th National People’s Congress, which will be elected for a five-year term until 2023. It was a rather routine, business-as-usual session, with no agenda items such as major personnel appointments and legal regulations. The practice of keeping the meeting short due to the COVID-19 pandemic continued this year. As the meetings were held at a time when China’s economic problems were more on the agenda, attention was focused on the government report delivered by the Prime Minister, which included an assessment of the past year and targets for 2024.

‘An effort to be remembered for its policies on global problems rather than economic ones’

For the first time in thirty years, the Chinese premier will not hold a press conference at the end of the meeting. What do you think is the reason for this change? Is it the importance of the party leadership? Or is it what China calls ‘specialisation’?

The fact that a tradition that has existed for thirty years was not implemented this year, and that it will not be implemented during the 14th NPC term except in a special case, has attracted attention and led to various speculations. However, the ‘two sessions’ and the press conferences held in connection with them provide an opportunity for China to explain itself and its major policies to the domestic and international public. Officials at ministerial and vice-ministerial level met with the press, but the political weight and responsibility of the Premier is different.

Although the cancellation of the Prime Minister’s press conference has been associated in the Western press with the Party leadership’s priority, I disagree with this association. I think Premier Li Qiang is not in danger of overshadowing Xi’s leadership, as his predecessor Li Keqiang was. In addition, Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s press conference and statements received a lot of media coverage. This result made me think that Chinese leaders may have wanted to be in the national and international public eye with their foreign policy and policies on global issues, rather than their economic issues/problems, and thus may have tended to set the agenda according to their own preferences.

‘Optimistic realistic growth target’

What do you think about the prominent issues and decisions that have been discussed? For example, do you think the 5 percent growth target is realistic? The IMF forecast was around 4.6 per cent.

I think the 5 percent growth target is ‘optimistically realistic’. Since the legitimacy of the Communist Party of China depends to a large extent on its ability to promote economic prosperity, the leadership needs to maintain a growth rate that will sustain economic recovery. On the other hand, both the problems facing the global economy (slowing growth, regional conflicts hampering world trade…) and China’s domestic problems (insufficient demand for domestic consumption, high urban youth unemployment, population decline and ageing) suggest that this growth will be difficult to achieve. China today faces the risk of ‘ageing without getting richer’ and ‘falling into the middle-income trap’.

However, I cannot reconcile the government’s announcement of an unrealistic growth target with China’s policy of setting itself up for failure a year later. Another reason is that the announced macroeconomic and social indicators are determined after a long period of preparation, deliberation and discussion, in other words, by a rational method. The deliberations and discussions take place not only within the party, but also with the participation of experts and interested organisations. In addition, the government receives suggestions from citizens for the government report through media platforms. The report also analyses the internal and external conditions and emphasises that it will not be easy to achieve the goals under these conditions. Because it will not be easy, a more flexible expression is used for 2024, such as ‘around 5 per cent’, instead of a precise rate as in the last two years. This target is therefore not far from the IMF’s forecast of 4.6% or JPMorgan’s 4.9%.

‘No unusual increase in the defence budget’

How do you evaluate the 7.2 percent increase in the defence budget? In the Western press, it was interpreted as a sign that China’s attitude towards Taiwan would harden and its ‘aggression’ in the region would increase. On the other hand, Chinese experts argue that the projected increase is only 1.2 per cent of GDP and that it is ‘moderate and reasonable’.

There is no extraordinary increase in the defence budget; the same increase was foreseen for 2023. The average increase in the defence budget for 2018-2024 is already 7.2 per cent. Since 2015, the defence budget has increased by single digits. Since there is no extraordinary increase in 2024 compared to the past, it is a far-fetched interpretation to consider this rate as an indication that China’s attitude towards Taiwan will harden or its aggression in the region will increase.

But China needs a dynamic, globally powerful military, capable of using new technologies effectively, and it needs a defence budget to match this goal. Secondly, China’s policy on Taiwan is clear and the One China Policy has been adopted by the United Nations and the countries that have diplomatic relations with China, particularly the United States. China clearly states that it will intervene in Taiwan only under two conditions: if Taiwan declares its independence and if it is occupied by a foreign power, otherwise it is in favour of a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan issue. However, it is also known that the US has been pursuing provocative policies forcing China to intervene in Taiwan for the last two years and in this context, the discourse of intervention in Taiwan has been kept alive in the Western press. Therefore, it should be a logical conclusion that China should take into account the possibility of the realisation of the two conditions I have mentioned and make its preparations accordingly.

China is the second largest defence spender after the US, but its defence budget as a share of GDP lags behind many other countries. In 2022, these ratios are 3.5 per cent in the US, 2.7 per cent in South Korea, 2.2 per cent in the United Kingdom, and 1.6 per cent in China.

‘New productive forces complement the objective of quality development’

One of the most prominent themes was the concept of ‘new productive forces’ emphasised by Chinese President Xi Jinping. It has been argued that sectors focused on advanced technologies will not make a serious contribution to the Chinese economy in the short term. Is this a long-term plan? Is China investing in the future? Do you think these new forces can be realised in existing sectors?

This concept complements the goal of ‘high-quality development’ that Xi has presented as a new development model. The terms ‘innovation’, ‘science and technology’ and ‘high quality’ are frequently mentioned in the government report, and the goals of innovation, increasing total factor productivity through innovation, digital industry and transforming traditional industries into digital industries are included.

I do not see high-quality development as a new development model, but rather as an adaptation of Hu’s ‘scientific development’ model of the early 2000s. As far as I know, China is the country that has invested the most in artificial intelligence, and many plans and programmes have been drawn up under Xi that envisage a breakthrough in new technologies. China needs to do this to overcome the risks of ‘ageing without getting richer’ and the ‘middle-income trap’, and to achieve its 2049 goals. But the United States is determined to block this move. On the other hand, the problem is not only how to embody new forces in existing sectors, but also how to deal with the problems that this transformation will create for other sectors, for the workforce and for society as a whole. Therefore, the difficulties of transforming the country’s internal conditions and the competition with the US will not make this process any easier.

‘Taking the initiative in foreign policy’

Will the meeting have new implications for Chinese foreign policy? Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi sent clear messages to the US in his speech. He also stressed strong mediation on Ukraine and Gaza.

No, this meeting will not have any impact on foreign policy. Policy changes in China are not so fast, sudden and short-term. In China, the meetings where we will see macro-policy changes are the C congresses, usually held in November each year, rather than the NPC meetings. The NPC functions more as a complement to the legal process of the policies adopted at the Party Congresses and to ensure that the necessary regulations are put into practice. It is therefore necessary to follow both congresses together.

With Xi’s third term, China has moved towards a more active, initiative-taking foreign policy. Diplomatic visits, mediation initiatives and the successive publication of policy documents explaining China’s position on global issues are indicators of this policy. Wang Yi’s statements do not indicate a new discourse and policy shift, but rather a continuation of this approach.

According to your observations, are the two sessions being followed with ‘sufficient’ interest from Turkey and the world? If not, why not? If yes, what do you think is the reason for this interest?

I have been following the sessions of the CPC and the National People’s Congress for almost 20 years, and I can say that in parallel with China’s increasing weight in the international arena, these events have been followed with relatively increasing interest in the national and international media. But compared to Turkey, the international media interest is always higher. In Turkey, public and some private media organisations now have staff in Beijing. However, I still think that for a country like China, the attention paid to important political events is still insufficient and still heavily dependent on Western sources. But this is not unique to China; in Turkey, the traditional media’s interest in the outside world is generally weak.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

INTERVIEW

The West doesn’t have a project, we should build a platform of peace and solidarity

Published

3 days ago

on

26/04/2024

By

From April 18 to 21, hundreds of organizations and social movements from Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, the Middle East and Europe came together in Caracas, Venezuela, to discuss the problems, dangers, alternatives, struggles and most important issues that social organizations are facing today. In this framework, we had the opportunity to listen and learn from their collective experiences and from the great Indian intellectual Vijay Prashad, who gave us an overview of how the world is today and also the alternatives we have to confront what he calls “a decadent hyper-imperialism”.

Vijay Prashad and Venezuelan journalist Micaela Ovelar

Barbarism characterizes the world today: The Palestinian genocide

We live in a very barbaric world. It’s unimaginable, the barbarism that dominated the world today. The barbarism of apartheid Israel’s genocidal war on the Palestinian people. Now, 20 years ago, the barbarism of US imperialism against the Iraqi people, an illegal war, actually, a violation of the United Nations charter. Maybe 2 million people killed, displaced, injured. Not one Iraqi family was untouched by that war. Now, in Gaza, at least 300 families have been wiped out from history. 300 families their family names will not carry forward. That is the brutality of the Israeli bombing.

It’s actually quite stanning how brutal this bombing has been. It’s hard to explain to people who haven’t been into a war zone how ugly war is. War is loud. There’s a lot of noise. War in a modern period is ugly because a lot of toxic chemicals come out of buildings when they come down. And those chemicals poisoned generations of people. In Fallujah, In Ramadi, in Iraq, the United States used depleted uranium. Children are still born in Iraq with defects from that depleted uranium. That is the brutality, the barbarism of imperialism. That is the attitude of Monroism.

Monroism is barbaric. It’s brutal. Sometimes the word imperialism doesn’t capture emotionally how brutal imperialism actually is. How brutal, how barbaric, how inconsiderate it is towards the lives of ordinary people. 50,000 people have probably already been killed in Gaza. There are 7000 people missing, of them 5000 children. 15,000 children died in Gaza. A generation lost. That is the brutality, the callousness of imperialism.

The Israel’s war against Palestine and Iran

Well, Israel has been in the middle of a brutal genocidal war against the Palestinian people and people around the world have stood up to say Israel can’t do this to the Iranians. Some of those people, of course, have been the people of Iran, the people of other countries in the Middle East.

The Israelis, knowing that, attacked the Iranian embassy in Syria, in Damascus, and that’s the reason why Iran had to strike Israel militarily, because Israel first struck an Iranian embassy illegally in Syria.

I hope that the war between Israel doesn’t accelerate to include Syria and Iran in other countries, including Turkey, perhaps. I hope we are able to calm things down, have a cease fire, let the Palestinians recover. That’s the priority.

How to understand hyper-imperialism

We use the term hyper imperialism to capture some of that burtality of that barbarism. You see, the thing about hyper imperialism laid by the United States is that it is dangerous and it is decadent. It is both dangerous and decadent. I think it’s very important for us to recognize the danger and decadence of hyper imperialism. 75% of the share of global military spending is spent by the United States, its Nato allies, and its close Nato allies like Japan and South Korea.

75% of global military spending is spent by the United States and its allies.

I want you to think about that. When people say, well, China is a threat. When people say Russia is a threat. What are they talking about? China is a threat? That’s not a factual statement. China is responsible for 10% of world military spending. The United States and its allies are responsible for 75% of world militar spending. How is China a threat? How is Russia a threat? How is Venezuela threat? How is Cuba a threat?

The United States is the real threat

There is only one threat to the planet now, and that threat is hyper imperialism structure led by the United States and its close European allies. That’s the real threat. The only terrorist we have on the planet is the US government and its close allies, including Israel. That’s the terrorist. That’s the only terrorists. That’s the biggest threat to the planet that we face today.

But it’s worse than that. That’s dangerous, yes, but it’s worse than just being dangerous. It’s much worse than that. It’s also decadent. Look at the people who are leading the West: President Joe Biden (USA), Chancellor Olaf Scholz (Germany), Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (UK), President Emmanuel Macron (France), not one of these people has earned the respect of the people anywhere in the world. How is it possible that these countries with their immense wealth cannot produce even one intelligent world leader?

How is it possible that every single leader of the global North is mediocre? You see, it is no about Biden’s age. There are lots of people who are 80 years old, 90 years old, extremely lucid. It’s not about the age. It’s not about Donald Trump’s brutal manners. There are lots of brutal people in the world. They’re not all like Donald Trump.

It’s not about Olaf Scholz, who we don’t even see. When Olaf Scholz comes on a stage, it’s almost like he’s a shadow. He doesn’t even exist, at least, Angela Merkel has personality. Olaf Scholz doesn’t even have a personality. How is that France produced Emmanuel Macron? The country of the French Revolution. The country of the Paris Commune. The country of philosophers like Jean Paul Sartre.

Europe is not the solution either: They don’t have a project

Europe is not producing philosophers anymore. There is no Hegel in Germany today. There is no Sarte in France. There are no real intellectuals produced in the United States. The problem is in the age of Biden. The lack of personality of Schulz. The problem is that they don’t have a project. They don’t know what they’re doing. They don’t understand the dilemmas of humanity. They don’t understand how you need to transcend poverty.

They don’t understand what it means to have a real project to educate our children or helping the world. We saw the complete collapse of the global North during the COVID pandemic, but before the COVID pandemic, after the financial crisis of 2008, from which they have never recovered in that long term depression, we watched the global North struggle. With things like homelessness, with things like racism, homophobia and so on.

USA and Europe don’t have a project.

They don’t have any fresh ideas. In that sense, they are decadent. They’re not only dangerous, but they’re decadent. Hyper imperialism is dangerous. Yes. They don’t know how to build bridges anymore. They know how to blow them up. Hyper imperialism is dangerous, but it’s decadent as well. They can blow up the bridge. They don’t like building. They don’t have the money in public hands to build bridges. They don’t know how to build schools anymore. They don’t know what education is anymore. They don’t understand health care. The decadent aspect of hyper imperialism is very important for us.

It’s important for us because they are trying to convince the world because, they don’t have a project, that there’s no future. They’re trying to convince the world that what you have is what you have. What you have now is what you will have forever. Nothing can be improved. You should be lucky to have what you have now. Because it can get worse. They are decadent because they don’t have a future to offer for people.

Alternatives: Build a Platform of Peace and Solidarity

Those of us who believe in the people, those of us who believe in the possibility of a future, it’s not enough for us to just criticize imperialism. It’s not enough for us to just criticize the danger and decadence of the world leaders in the global North. It’s not enough to just criticize them.

We are very good at criticizing. We are the best anti-capitalist critics. We know how to say no. We know how to fight with them. We know how to say no to them. But if we want to build the biggest movement around the world, we have to have something through which people can say, yes, we need to have a project.

We need to have people build optimism. We need to be optimistic. I mean, you people to be optimistic not only for the future. But we need them to be all optimistic in our project. They need to believe that socialism is possible and necessary. It’s not enough to say another world is possible. We have to say socialism is necessary. Not only is socialism necessary, but socialism is possible.

It’s very important for people from around the world to come together on a platform of peace and a platform of development and reject war. We need to solve the problems of poverty, the problems of lack of education, problems of lack of health support. We need to solve those problems. We shouldn’t be wasting all our wealth on war. And that’s why it’s important for us to come together.

The Bolivarian Revolution and Hugo Chavez

Venezuela has been in the middle of a big struggle since 1998, when Hugo Chavez appeared to be a presidential candidate. Since that time, Venezuela has put a flag into the soil, insisting that the world can be different, that the problems we face now can be overcome. And so since 1998, Venezuela has been a place which has invited people from around the world to gather and think seriously about solving the world’s problems of the world.

Continue Reading

INTERVIEW

‘There is a migrant problem in Türkiye; if the situation in Afghanistan goes worse, it will be a serious problem’

Published

6 days ago

on

23/04/2024

By

Amir Mohammad Ramin, Afghanistan’s ambassador to Ankara, spoke to Harici. Assessing the economic, social, security and political problems in Afghanistan, Ambassador Ramin pointed to the role of the United States, which “came to the country without notice” and then left without any commitment to the economy, stability and security.

Ambassador Amir Mohammad Ramin answered our questions on the current situation in Afghanistan, relations with regional countries, security issues, recognition negotiations and foreign investment.

The US withdrew from Afghanistan, but left a big economic crisis behind and at the same time, hunger, poverty, epidemic, diseases, and many other problems remain. How do you think Afghanistan will recover? 

Unfortunately, contrary to the expectations of the general public and the people in Afghanistan, the United States came to Afghanistan without any prior notice through, of course, a UN Security Council Resolution, but also left Afghanistan very abruptly without any sort of commitment for Afghanistan’s economic stability, future stability and development. In Afghanistan, the economic situation has died. People are in a difficult situation. And the reason is that we have the development situation in post-August 2021. The new de-facto authority has not been recognized. And there are no formal economic relations with Afghanistan right now. And in certain ways, Afghanistan remains under sanctions. For example, the SWIFT doesn’t work in Afghanistan. So for all these reasons, Afghanistan is going through a very difficult time. There’s no doubt. When it comes to the general public’s rights, human rights, it is a very dire situation. So what can be done that the situation in Afghanistan can get better? The best thing would be to look at this from two perspectives. One, domestic perspective. Domestic perspective, I think the de-facto authorities need to open up, engage with the public, try to create a rule-based system, try to create a constitution, try to define the rules, regulations and the rights of the people. Unless peoples are given their important rights and unless people are listened to, it will not be difficult to address the situation in Afghanistan. The issue of domestic legitimacy is very important. And that will only happen through a kind of mutual interaction and understanding between the people and these de-facto authorities. The second thing is that once domestic legitimacy is addressed, it comes to regional and international legitimacy. And that, I’m sure, will naturally come once the issue of Afghanistan internally happens. But given the dire situation in Afghanistan right now, it is very important that we do not forget the 35 million or 40 million people, we need to get to their humanitarian needs. And that’s why I continue to encourage all international actors to continue to address the humanitarian needs of people in Afghanistan. In this regard, Türkiye is doing well. I’m very grateful to the humanitarian assistance that Türkiye is sending to Afghanistan right now. More than 60 organizations are active in Afghanistan. Most of them are involved in two areas, humanitarian assistance as well as education, which both are very important. But in the short term, humanitarian assistance, in the long term, the issue of education are vital because education is a long-term investment for Afghanistan. So those are my views on how the situation could get better and go forward.

The US confiscated Afghanistan’s money, so to speak. It is obvious that Afghanistan needs this money very much right now. Will there be an international initiative regarding this? How do you evaluate this incident?

The continues to remain frozen. But my understanding is that there are ways to make sure that the money can get to the people. And their needs can be addressed. There has to be certain ways to be used. I myself am not directly involved in this, because I know that some of our diplomatic missions in New York and Geneva, they are following these developments. But I personally do not follow. But it is my wish that if there will be a way to make sure that the needs of the people are addressed to the money, it will be very good. But the long term and actual solution will be to make sure that the situation in Afghanistan gets better. It gets changed. 

Let’s talk about the recognition efforts of the Taliban government. Iran, Russia, China and Pakistan, they have good relations with these neighbors. But it doesn’t seem that there will be as an official recognition of Taliban government. Do you have information, what is the calendar of Taliban government about recognition? Which clues do you get from other governments? 

So, my understanding is that recognition is legitimacy, international legitimacy. So, unless the issue of domestic legitimacy is addressed, -and it’s in this 21st century, governments has to have the support and backing of the people- and there has to be some principles on how a government indicates that it has the backing of the people; you cannot simply say that I have the support of the people without any indicators. So, there has to be a way. 

What is that way for Afghanistan?

So, the best thing would be to make sure that there is a framework in which there is some degree of public participation regarding the issue of domestic legitimacy. Unless that is not addressed, it will be difficult to see that international recognition will happen anytime soon. At the same time, I don’t think it will happen formally or officially anytime soon. Unles some very substantial issues are addressed such as the issue of the Afghanistan people’s rights, women’s rights and the issue of women’s access to education, women’s participation in the workforce, women’s participation in the society. Unless these issues are addressed, there will be, I think, no immediate solution to the issue of recognition, in my opinion. So, we don’t have a timeline for it.

Can you comment on Russia’s initiative that Russia announced they will invite Taliban government to Islamic summit in Kazan?  What will that bring? What is Russia’s aim and what will that bring to Taliban government? 

I think, it’s, what will happen is that it is sort of something that has happened over the past few years. There has been participation in various events, but it has not led to anything substantial or any major breakthroughs. For example, in 2022, in March, the Taliban delegation came and participated in the Antalya Diplomacy Forum. But nothing substantial came out of it. So, Kazan and the participation in the Islamic World Conference will only be a participation. I don’t think it will bring anything other than participation. 

But what Russia wants to do is to put a stance for Taliban. Is it true?

So, in my understanding, Russia has security concerns about Afghanistan, specifically when it comes to Daesh, because recently there was a Daesh-Khorasan attack in Russia. So, for Russia, as well as other neighboring countries, such as, although Russia is not a neighboring country, but it is impacted by the situation. For Iran, for Pakistan, I think for them is to see how they can manage the situation to make sure that it does not get much more difficult or worse. For example, imagine if the security situation gets bad or worse in Afghanistan, these neighboring countries and regional countries, including Türkiye, will be the first to be impacted. And that’s why they maintain some degree of engagement to make sure that the situation is maintained. So, it will be a continuation of the status-quo. It will not be a major breakthrough.

What about the foreign investments into Afghanistan? China and Russia have several projects. There is a railway project between Russia and Afghanistan, which is also involving some Turkish companies. What do we know about these projects? Can you just enlighten us on that? 

So, yes, the Chinese have made investments. Iran has made some investments in Afghanistan. Russia has made some investments. Turkish companies have invested in certain sectors in Afghanistan. My understanding is that there are about 11 different companies who have invested in Afghanistan, Turkish companies. Construction, but also hydropower, solar power… So, these are some of the sectors that they have invested. The Russians and Chinese are interested in mines. They have also invested in the oil. The Iranians have also had some investment in mines. The Russians would like to see what they can do. They don’t have any major investments yet. 

Does Russia not have any major investments? 

Any major investments, no, but right now the investment that they have made on the railway is one of the first ones. It is signed. And they will gradually start to construct. This will be the railway connectivity from Afghanistan to Iran, western Afghanistan, Herat province. And this could also potentially in the future connect Afghanistan to Türkiye. Because it could potentially come all the way to Türkiye. 

How does it connect Russia and Afghanistan? 

Right now, the other parts to connect all the way to Russia has not started. Because this is only the part that connects Afghanistan to Iran. In the future, once the situation is better, then of course this will go all the way to the two other countries that it will connect to Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. And then through Uzbekistan and Tajikistan it will potentially go all the way to both China and Russia. But that is not in an immediate plan. 

What is the calendar? 

Usually it’s quite difficult to talk about calendars in Afghanistan because the railway project that we are now discussing, this was discussed about 15 years ago. And because of the security incidents, it has always been delayed. Depending on the resources, investment and commitment by the companies and the security situation overall, I think, if the situation will be okay, the investment proceeds, the commitments for the investment proceeds, my understanding is that in the next five years there will be connectivity between Uzbekistan, Pakistan via Afghanistan, as well as way to Iran. And this will help to connect other countries such as Russia, China and India.

You have security problems regarding migrants in Pakistan? So, how do you evaluate this situation? And regarding the security of Afghanistan, is it actually very meaningful for the security of the whole region? This is what Ambassador Husrav Noziri, the Secretary General of Economic Cooperation Organization told me. He underlines that Afghanistan must be secure for the rest of the region to be secure. How will Afghanistan deal with these security problems? 

So, some part of the security problem is in Afghanistan. Another part is also regional, especially in Pakistan. In Pakistan they have ungoverned areas, like in Waziristan, federally administrative areas. The Pakistani army is not in full control of those areas. And that’s why those areas are now inside the Pakistani soil and territory has turned into a safe haven for some of the groups, including the TTP as well as the Daesh. I think also there are some areas in neighboring Iran that’s also the same. On April 4th, we had a terrorist attack in Iran by Jaysh al-Adl, which is called the Troops of Justice. So, there are some areas that are not strictly controlled by the three countries in the border areas and regions of the three countries. My understanding is that it will require close cooperation by the countries to make sure that the ungoverned areas are reduced. And these ungoverned areas are also inside Pakistan, because this is a very mountainous area like Waziristan and other places. But if the security situation in Afghanistan improves, it will have impacts on neighboring countries. If the security situation in neighboring countries such as Pakistan, improves, it will have an impact on the security situation in Afghanistan.

You were appointed as Ambassador to Ankara by the previous government. Have you been working with Taliban government?

We have 35 million citizens in Afghanistan. We need to help them. We need to be responsible for them. We do consular works, work for economic development and humanitarian assistance. Because of this, we work with the Taliban. I work for Afghanistan. Turkish mission in Kabul also work for people in Afghanistan very actively. Türkiye’s consulate is in Mazar-i-Sherif also works actively.

Do you have any diplomats appointed by the Taliban government in the Embassy?

We have two diplomats. One of them works in the field of law. For example, he works with the prisons and the law officers regarding the legal issues of Afghan citizens. The second one works in the economic field. He is focused on investments and humanitarian assistance. 

Decree of the first Turkish Ambassador appointed to Afghanistan, signed by Atatürk

How is the relation between Turkish government and Taliban government? How do you perceive a number of meetings held between two sides?

Türkiye works very pragmatically with Afghanistan. Because Türkiye sees the things like this: “I want to help them. I want to support them. At the same time, I want to improve the situation in Afghanistan. Because if the situation in Afghanistan improves, it will be a problem for Türkiye.” There is a migrant problem in Türkiye. If the situation in Afghanistan goes worse, it will be a serious problem for Türkiye. At the same time, the stability of the region is directly affected by Türkiye. Years ago, Türkiye’s economy was very good. There were different factors, of course, but main thing was that firstly, Syria, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan were stable. Because Türkiye was directly affected positively by the stability of the region. But now there is an economic crisis because there is still a crisis in Afghanistan, there is a crisis in Pakistan, there is a crisis in Syria, there is a crisis in Iraq, there is a crisis in Libya. This have directly affected Türkiye. 

Do you say Türkiye experiences economic difficulties mainly because of migrants?

Not only the migrants. There are many Turkish companies that work in Afghanistan. They got big projects from NATO, the US and Afghanistan. They got projects, which were equal to billions of dollars. Türkiye is directly affected in a good way by the good economic situation in Afghanistan previously. Because of this, Türkiye is working very positively, very pragmatically in this region. Because of this, some people in Türkiye say, -and this message comes from our citizens sometimes – Türkiye needs to stop these relations. I think this is not very logical and at the same time it is of no use. Because it can cause the situation get worse. Therefore, I think Türkiye’s presence in Afghanistan is very important. Afghanistan can change the situation with diplomatic, political, and assistance coming from Türkiye. Türkiye is doing very good things in this region.

Continue Reading

INTERVIEW

‘Georgian membership is not on the agenda tomorrow, this is a long-term process’

Published

1 week ago

on

19/04/2024

By

Toivo Klaar, the European Union’s (EU) Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the Crisis in Georgia, assessed Tbilisi’s relations with Brussels and the EU accession process: “These accession negotiations will last for many years. Georgia’s accession is not on the agenda tomorrow or the next day. This is a long-term process.”

Georgia applied for EU membership in March 2022 and was granted candidate status in December 2023, on the understanding that Georgia takes the relevant steps set out in the European Commission recommendation of November 2023.

So how will Georgia’s EU accession process work? What are the challenges ahead? Where are relations with Russia in this process? We spoke to Toivo Klaar, EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the Crisis in Georgia.

Georgia did not impose any sanctions on Russia regarding the Ukraine crisis. What do you think Georgia’s view of Russia as a country that went to war in 2008 and now not sanctioning?

Well, we, of course, are in constant contact, in constant discussion with Georgia. We have a very close relationship with Georgia. And for our point of view, the important thing is that we do not see a circumvention of sanctions. That is, that Georgia is not a conduit for large-scale circumvention of sanctions. And this is important for the EU. We believe that the sanctions are essential. And we are looking to our partners to make sure that their territories cannot be used for circumvention of sanctions. And in that regard, I think we have a good working relationship with Georgia.

Tbilisi is committed to the EU accession process now. So, what are the obstacles and challenges? How do you assess Brussels’ attitude towards Georgia given that it took a lot of time to reach that point?

Well, in the end, the fact that we did agree that Georgia and we did announce that Georgia can become a candidate country and the member states decided so, is only the beginning of a process. In the end, it is down to each applicant country to, then, prove that they fulfill the criteria, first of all, to start accession negotiations and then, of course, to actually finish accession negotiations. So, in that sense, we have opened the door. Now it is up to Georgia to step into the entrance way and then to start working towards actually being ready for membership.

What are those challenges?

I think there’s a lot of challenges. And I think, well, first of all, it is important to fulfill the criteria to start to open the accession negotiations. And then the question is then to start fulfilling all the criteria required for membership. And that’s not an easy process. So, all candidate countries have had a fairly hard time in preparing for membership. And this is no different for Georgia. Therefore, it will be incumbent on the Georgian authorities to take this seriously and to recognize that it is now really for the Georgian authorities to prove that Georgia is ready to proceed first to the next phase and then to actually succeed in the accession negotiations.

Newly appointed Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze said that further rapprochement with China is one of his government’s priorities. How does Georgia benefit from a rapprochement with China, according to you, while walking this road towards the EU?

Well, I think that every country has, of course, a right to be able to develop relations with third countries. And the same goes for Georgia. The question is that when it comes to alignment of foreign policy, that is obviously something that we’re looking for from a candidate country that we believe it is important that in the end. The EU and its member states talk with one voice and have a similar approach to third countries and to issues in world politics. And so, in that regard, I think, it is perfectly all right for Georgia to develop a relationship with China, which is all the EU member states have relationships with China. But the important thing is that we expect that the overall Georgian foreign policy approach will be more and more harmonized with that of the EU at large.

Tbilisi also sees economic cooperation with Russia as “highly beneficial”. How would you interpret the West’s reactions to Georgia on this issue?

The important thing again is that there is no circumvention of sanctions. That in that sense, there is no situation where a third country provides or allows the transit of goods or provides the supply of goods that we believe should not be supplied to Russia because of its war with Ukraine. And in that context, again, I think it is important that we see that Georgia does make sure that no sanctioned circumvention is taking place in the context of trade with Russia.

Do you think this is going to be a criteria for the EU to consider Georgia’s membership?

Well, again, first of all, Georgian membership is not on the agenda tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. This is a long-term process. It’s the process of accession. First of all, there has to be a decision to open the accession negotiations. And secondly, those accession negotiations are going to take many years. So, in that regard, I think it is purely theoretical to start talking about whether something is somehow a condition or not for actually joining. But I mean, something specific, in general terms, of course, what we do expect, again, what I mentioned before, is that a candidate country does ensure that its foreign policy becomes more and more harmonized with that of the European Union.

Under what conditions do you think it’s possible to unite with Abkhazia and South Ossetia? Could you tell us about the recent steps taken to resolve this issue? What is your perspective?

Well, I don’t think that this is an easy process. I think the key actor in this regard is, of course, Russia. And Russia should abide by the six-point agreement of 2008, where it committed itself to withdrawing its troops to the positions that were held prior to the conflict with Georgia. So, if Russia does that, if Russia also withdraws its recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and actually starts playing a constructive role in helping Georgians, Abkhaz and South Ossetians to overcome their conflict, then, I believe, it is possible to resolve this. As long as Russia remains obstructionist and the way it is right now, not keeping its troops in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and insisting on not fulfilling its obligations under the six-point agreement. As long as that’s the case, it will be difficult to actually resolve those conflicts. Russia is a major hindrance in this regard.

There’s a judgment that Georgian society is caught between the Soviet culture, the Soviet heritage and Western influence. As a part of the Western alliance like EU and also being an observer at the same time would you agree with that judgment? Do you think is there such polarization in the country among people?

Well, I think we see that an overwhelming majority of Georgians want to join the European Union. Obviously, there will be cultural differences and different views in this context in the context of this process. But I believe that this is a process of harmonization that will last for some time but that will ultimately end with coming closer and with also society accepting and learning to value the norms that the European Union is living by. And that is, I think, also an important aspect for the Georgian government to ensure and to promote that European values and understandings are promoted in Georgian society. And I think that probably more can be done in this regard also as far as pluralism, as far as really encouraging divergent views and tolerance for minorities is concerned. I think that’s a very important aspect of European culture. And I think there is still some work to be done in Georgia.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey