Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 25 Feb 1999

Vol. 158 No. 8

Kurdish Population: Statements.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Dr. Moffatt)

The arrest by the Turkish authorities in recent days of Abdullah Ocalan, leader of the PKK, has focused attention on the problems concerning the Kurdish population in Turkey and on Turkey's relations with the member states of the European Union. To understand the issues it is useful to look briefly at the background to them.

The situation of the Kurdish population is highly complex. Questions of human rights, cultural identity, territorial integrity, the fight against terrorism and Turkey's important and increasing role as a regional power straddling Europe and the Middle East are all closely interwoven.

The historical background to the issue is well known. Following the break-up of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the modern Turkish state and other states in the region, the Kurdish population of more than 20 million found itself dispersed within several borders.

While detailed statistics are not available, there are approximately 12 million people of Kurdish origin in Turkey, 4 million in Iraq, 5.5 million in Iran and 1 million in Syria. Around 500,000 live in the Caucasus region of the former Soviet Union. Since the 1960s, large numbers have settled in various European countries, where they frequently form part of a much larger Turkish immigrant community.

In Turkey, people of Kurdish origin form just under 20 per cent of the total population. While a large number now live in urban areas, the majority are located in the south-east of the country. Since the establishment of the modern Turkish state, based on Ataturk's principle of "one nation, one state", the policy pursued toward the Kurdish identity has been largely one of involuntary assimilation.

The modern Kurdish movement for cultural autonomy as well as economic development of the Kurdish region dates from the 1960s when Kurdish intellectuals allied themselves with the political left in Turkey. However, splits within the political left saw the rise of radical revolutionary movements inspired by Maoism, which formed into various revolutionary communist groups within Turkey. Among this trend was the Kurdistan Workers' Party, known as the PKK, established in 1978. This combined Kurdish Nationalist and separatist demands with a Marxist-Leninist ideology. From the outset it was committed to armed struggle to achieve its objectives. The PKK openly declared its guerrilla campaign against the Turkish state in 1984, the objective being an independent Kurdish state. In the same year the National Liberation Front of Kurdistan, the ERNK, was established. The leader of both the PKK and the ERNK was Abdullah Ocalan.

The military conflict between the PKK and the Turkish armed forces over the past two decades has tended to overshadow the fact that various Kurdish political forces have sought to advance the interests of the Kurdish population within mainstream Turkish politics. There have been diverging approaches on the issue of political status for the Kurdish region ranging from integration to various forms of regional or local autonomy. However, these Kurdish political forces have shared the objective of recognition of the Kurdish cultural identity, political and democratic rights and the economic and social development of the region. The difficulty of separating these aims from the objectives of the PKK and its terrorist campaign has contributed to the absence of progress towards a political solution. Since 1984 an estimated 30,000 people have died in fighting between the Turkish army and the PKK.

It is reported that in October last, Turkey put considerable pressure on its neighbour Syria to expel Abdullah Ocalan who had been based there for a number of years. He was forced to leave Syria and left initially for Russia. On 12 November 1998 Ocalan was arrested at Rome airport on foot of arrest warrants issued by Turkey and Germany. He sought political asylum in Italy but the Turkish government demanded his extradiction. Under Italian law, Ocalan could not be extradited to Turkey because of capital punishment there. Germany did not pursue his extradition. On 16 December 1998 he was therefore released from house arrest in Rome. He left Italy on 16 January although his political asylum application continues to be processed there.

As Turkey stepped up its campaign against the PKK the issue became highly charged internationally. Ocalan subsequently made a number of unsuccessful attempts to gain entry to various European countries before eventually being given shelter in the Greek embassy in Nairobi. It is understood that Greece began exploring among neighbouring African states the possibility of political asylum for him there. The Kurdish issue is politically highly sensitive in Greece, not least because of difficulties in Greek-Turkish relations on a number of issues. In 1996 both countries narrowly avoided war over disputes in the Aegean. The question of political asylum in Greece for Ocalan is thus understood to have been ruled out.

Ocalan apparently left the Greek embassy in Nairobi on 15 February intending to try to gain entry to the Netherlands. The course of subsequent developments remains unclear. However, shortly afterwards, the Turkish authorities indicated that he was in Turkey and that he would stand trial. The US, Israel, Kenya and Greece have all been accused by Kurdish supporters of collaborating with Turkey or being complicit in a covert operation to snatch Ocalan. All have denied involvement in his capture.

As soon as Ocalan's presence in Turkey was known there were demonstrations by Kurdish supporters worldwide. These targeted Greek embassies and consulates as well as US, Israeli, Kenyan and UN installations. In many cases there was violence, buildings were occupied and hostages taken. Several arson attacks were carried out on Turkish businesses. In a number of incidents Kurdish supporters set themselves alight. Three Kurdish protestors were shot dead while attempting to storm the Israeli consulate in Berlin. The sieges of buildings have now ended and all the hostages have been released unharmed, but demonstrations and violent clashes continue.

The serious consequences of the affair continue to affect European states. In Germany, there is public concern about internal security. There are around 500,000 Kurds in Germany among a population of approximately two million Turks. Chancellor Schröder has stated that any Kurdish or Turkish immigrants involved in violence in Germany may be deported. As a result of the violent developments in neighbouring countries, Luxembourg restored its border controls. Greek Foreign Minister Pangalos and the Ministers for the Interior and Public Order have resigned over the case and tensions in Greek-Turkish relations have dramatically increased, with both sides exchanging heated accusations. In Kenya, the head of the immigration service has been dismissed by President Moi.

While many Kurdish demonstrators are seeking guarantees concerning Ocalan's safety, non-imposition of the death penalty and negotiations with Turkey on the Kurdish problem, the PKK has called for an intensification of the armed struggle against Turkey and specifically threatened attacks if Ocalan's physical safety is undermined.

Within Turkey and the surrounding region, the Turkish authorities have stepped up their action against the PKK. In tandem with this, Prime Minister Ecevit has appealed to young PKK activists to surrender. He has held out the prospect of a general amnesty for them under a draft repentance law, which he has undertaken to have approved by the parliament following the April elections.

Ocalan himself is being held in the fortress prison of Imrali island in the Sea of Marmara. Following the completion there of his interrogation, he was formally arrested on 23 February and charged with treason. Under Turkish law he was not allowed to have contact with lawyers before being charged. The trial will take place in a state security court where a military judge will be among the three presiding. It is understood that the Turkish prosecutors have asked for the death penalty, although no executions have been carried out in Turkey since 1984. Turkish Prime Minister Ecevit and Foreign Minister Cem have given assurances that Ocalan will receive a fair trial in keeping with international conventions and both are reported to have said that they do not favour the death penalty.

However, calls for the presence of foreign observers at the trial have been rejected by Turkey. A team of international lawyers who wished to represent Ocalan have been refused entry to Turkey. The authorities have insisted that, under Turkish law, legal representation at trials may be carried out only by Turkish lawyers. A team of 15 Turkish lawyers are understood to have applied recently to the Turkish authorities to be allowed to represent Ocalan.

There have been widespread calls, including those by the European Union, the UN, UNHCR, the Council of Europe and countries worldwide, for a fair trial for Ocalan conforming to international standards and for the presence of independent observers. Similar calls have been made by the international NGOs, Helsinki Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. While the Turkish Government has advised the President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe that it would not favour a visit by him to Ankara at the present time, the Council of Europe hopes to be able to send a delegation to Turkey in the coming weeks.

Ocalan himself has asked the European Court of Human Rights to intervene on his behalf, referring in his application to various articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, including the right to liberty and security, the right to life, the prohibition on torture and inhuman and degrading treatment and the right to a fair trial. He is seeking action by the court against Turkey under rule 39 of the court, which relates to interim measures. At a meeting held in camera on 23 February a chamber of seven judges decided it was not appropriate to apply rule 39 at this stage but decided to seek clarification from the Turkish authorities on a number of points concerning Ocalan's arrest and detention and his access to lawyers.

At the EU Foreign Affairs Council on 22 February, which was attended by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the issue of Ocalan was discussed. The EU issued a declaration taking note of the assurance of the Turkish Government that Abdullah Ocalan will have a fair trial. However, the Union made it clear it expects this to mean fair and correct treatment and an open trial according to the rule of law before an independent court, with Ocalan having access to legal counsel of his choice and with international observers being admitted to the trial. The Union also underlined once more its strict opposition to the death penalty. Ireland strongly supported this. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, speaking in the Seanad last week, vigorously underlined Ireland's strong position of principle on the abolition of the death penalty and once again calls for an open trial according to the rule of law before an independent court.

In regard to the demonstrations by Kurdish supporters, the EU strongly deplored the fact that the arrest of Abullah Ocalan has sparked massive unrest and violent acts which have resulted in death, hostage taking, intimidation and extensive destruction. It reaffirms its position that such acts of violence are inadmissible and, under no circumstance, tolerable.

The EU reiterated its condemnation of all forms of terrorism and stated that the legitimate fight against terrorism must be conducted in full respect of the human rights, the rule of law and democratic norms. Legitimate interests must be expressed through a political process, not through violence.

The EU fully upholds the territorial integrity of Turkey. At the same time, it expects Turkey to resolve its problems by political means with full respect for human rights, the rule of law in a democratic society and in full accordance with Turkey's commitments as a member of the Council of Europe. In this context, the EU welcomes all genuine efforts to separate the fight against terrorism from the search for political solutions and to promote conciliation. In support of this, the EU has indicated it stands ready to contribute, including through the provision of continued financial assistance. Turkey's efforts in dealing with these problems in this spirit cannot but affect EU-Turkey relations positively.

In Strasbourg, there was a joint call from the President of the EU Parliamentary Assembly and the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe to the Kurdish leaders to cease violent action and to the Turkish authorities to guarantee justice for Ocalan in full conformity with the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted a statement along similar lines and also called for the presence of observers at the trial and for the death penalty to be waived.

Ocalan never sought political asylum in Ireland nor made any attempt to land here. Neither the PKK nor the ERNK has a presence in Ireland. The Kurdistan Solidarity Group, based in Dublin and with a predominantly Irish membership, produce and distribute information on the situation of the Kurdish population.

The Government is seriously concerned about the Kurdish population of south-east Turkey. We attach the greatest importance to the protection of the human rights and basic freedoms of the Kurdish population. These concerns have been conveyed to the Turkish authorities in our bilateral contacts.

The Government strongly believes it is crucial that Ocalan be treated strictly in accordance with international law and with full respect for human rights. The Government is opposed to the death penalty and without in any way prejudging the outcome of Turkey's legal proceedings, we have made it clear we would have concerns about the use of capital punishment.

The Government strongly supports the efforts by the European Union to achieve a free and fair trial for Ocalan in the presence of independent observers. In addition to the human rights issues and related security concerns surrounding Kurdish protests in Europe, there is the fact that in the context of enlargement discussions, the EU has stressed that the strengthening of Turkey's links with it depends on Turkey's political and economic reforms, the alignment of human rights practices with those in force in the EU and respect for, and protection of, minorities.

The Government firmly believes that Turkey must find a lasting peaceful solution to the Kurdish problem. In the words of a resolution of the European Parliament, Turkey must examine the means of permitting Turkish citizens of Kurdish origin to express their cultural identity while guaranteeing and respecting the territorial unity of Turkey. Ultimately, Turkey must take effective steps to foster tolerance, co-operation, solidarity and reconciliation.

Mr. Connor

I welcome the Minister and am delighted that the House, in the light of recent events, has organised this debate. The Minister briefly referred to the historical background to the Kurdish question, but I think he might have gone a little further. He said:

The historical background to the issue is well known. Following the break-up of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the modern Turkish state and other states in the region, the Kurdish population of over 20 million found itself dispersed within several borders.

That is true, but in the early part of this century the Balfour declaration eventually led to the establishment of the State of Israel. Kurdish representatives were present at the Versailles conference following the First World War. We know that the Versailles conference supervised the break-up of the empires, including the Ottoman Empire and the great European empires which found themselves at war in what is known as the Great War. It was generally agreed at the conference that there would be provisions made for the establishment of a separate Kurdish state. The Treaty of Serves was signed by the new Government in pre Ataturk Turkey which agreed to the setting up of a new Kurdish state in the future which would straddle Turkey, Syria, Armenia, Iran and Iraq where the Kurdish population is currently dispersed.

I wish to speak of the situation within the Kurdish region and the way the Turkish Government deals with it. I must declare an interest as I am a member of the migration, refugees and demography committee of the Council of Europe which has done some work on the Kurdish question, has sent rapporteurs to Turkey and has prepared a report.

Martial law was established in the south eastern provinces of Turkey in the early 1970s in response to activities of various Kurdish and leftist political movements, both armed and peaceful. Serious armed conflict in the region began in 1984 when the Kurdistan Workers' Party, known as the PKK, attacked police stations. The Turkish forces responded with repression and the establishment of a village guard system. The village guards constitute a force of approximately 50,000 ethnic Kurdish villagers who are armed and paid by the government to fight the PKK. The village guard system continues to raise the most serious human rights concerns expressed on many occasions by human rights organisations, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Council of Europe.

In February 1997 Mr. Unal Erkan, a member of the Turkish Parliament and former governor of that area of south east Turkey which is under emergency rule, stated that the village guards often operated outside the law and that many villagers were forced through pressure to enter the system. In theory becoming a village guard is voluntary but, in practice, refusal to do so is followed by reprisals by the security forces, ranging from detention of villagers to forced evacuation of entire villages. On the other hand, joining the village guard system entails the risk of retaliation against an entire village by the PKK. The overwhelming majority of the Kurdish population in the region faces such a dramatic alternative which allows nobody to remain neutral or uninvolved.

The evacuation of villages refusing to join the village guard system is carried out by the army with extreme brutality and no civilian supervision. It is frequently accompanied by the destruction of property and by violations of human rights, including sexual assault and humiliation, beatings and in some cases extra-judicial executions.

Until recently the Turkish authorities have denied the possibility of these operations claiming the PKK was to blame for the destruction of villages and that individuals had left voluntarily or under pressure from the PKK. However, the complicity of the Turkish authorities was confirmed in two recent rulings of the European Court of Human Rights – one given in September 1996 and another in November 1997. Both findings found the Turkish authorities guilty of the most serious human rights abuses. They were found guilty of burning villages and houses and of forcing villagers to flee their homes.

Undoubtedly, the PKK has some responsibility for the burning of villages, in particular those run by village guards or where villages have refused to support the PKK. Attacks are often targeted against those whom the PKK accuse of co-operating with the state, such as civil servants, teachers and the families of village guard members. According to the Amnesty International report of 1998, armed members of the PKK were responsible for more than 40 deliberate or arbitrary killings in 1997, and the victims included civilians as well as captured soldiers and members of the village guard.

However, the responsibility of both parties, the PKK and the armed Turkish forces, should be viewed in appropriate proportions. It is the majority view of observers who have worked on the issue and have gone to the area to report that it is the Turkish authorities who bear most of the blame for the uncontrolled escalation of the violence in the region, first, because of the provocative nature of the suppression of the rights of the Kurdish majority lies in the very origin of the conflict and, second, because they have at their disposal the whole machinery of the state which they use abusively against the Kurdish population in the region.

Turkey has a multi-party system and there are many members across the political divide in the parliament who are very concerned about what is taking place in Kurdistan. In 1997, a special parliamentary committee on migration was set up by members of the Turkish parliament to investigate what was taking place in the Kurdish region. We must remember the military is in total control and there is little civilian participation in the area. In July 1997, the chairman of the committee held a press conference in Diyarbakir, the central city in that region and which is very much the centre of Turkish culture in that part of the world, and announced that the forced evacuation of villages and hamlets by the Turkish armed forces in the region had resulted in large numbers of displaced people. This would have been the first official admission by an agency of the Turkish Government or state. These parliamentarians announced that there had been forced evacuation of villages and hamlets by the Turkish armed forces in the region and that it had resulted in large numbers of displaced people and official refugees. The committee confirmed that 364,742 inhabitants of over 3,000 villages and hamlets had been forced out since 1990 in the framework of the fight against terrorism.

Those figures were publicly confirmed later by Mr. Bulent Ecevit, who is now the Prime Minister of Turkey, although he was the vice premier when he made this statement. He announced that the villages had been emptied for security reasons. The US State Department cited that about 560,000 was a credible estimate of the number of people who have been deprived of their homes as a result of these forced evacuations. According to Human Rights Watch, the majority of villages and hamlets in the region were forcibly emptied between 1993 and 1995. Largescale evacuations then ceased, but smaller evacuations by armed Turkish forces continued in 1996, 1997 and 1998. The most probable reason for the lower rate of evacuations is that there are very few front-line villages left outside the village guard system and the process of depopulation is virtually complete.

The tragic record of the region would not be complete without recording the number of people killed in the conflict which illustrates the dreadful security situation which prevails. According to Turkish military sources, 19,000 people have been killed since the PKK began its campaign in 1984. This figure is broken down into 3,000 members of the security forces, 11,000 terrorists, as they define them, and 5,000 civilians.

In a speech in 1995, the then President of Turkey, Mr. Demirel, spoke of 20,600 people dead and more than 13,500 injured. Kurdish sources in the region speak of about 35,000 dead, including at least 5,000 civilians. The dramatic situation in south-eastern Turkey has resulted in the forced displacement of the Kurdish population inside and outside Turkey. Exact figures for internal and external displacement are impossible to obtain as no exhaustive statistics are held anywhere. The extent of these movements are so massive that some human rights organisations do not hesitate to speak of a deliberate policy of dispersement of the Kurdish population by Turkish authorities.

There are many other issues I would like to raise. However, in conclusion I will mention a number of steps which have been called for by the Council of Europe and which the Irish Government should also seek from the Turkish Government. We should urge Turkey to stop using armed forces against the civilian Kurdish population; to halt the economic degradation of its south-eastern provinces; to sign and ratify the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages; to adopt policies and take adequate measures to enable Turkish citizens of Kurdish origin to exercise their cultural and political rights; to restore the rule of law in south-east Turkey; to lift emergency rule in the south-eastern provinces; to ensure the effective protection of villages; to exercise civilian control over military activity in the region, including the keeping of records and the observance of human rights; to prosecute members of the armed forces charged with human rights violations and to abolish the village guard system.

Mr. Lanigan

I am disappointed this debate has focused directly on Turkey and the problems of human rights violations by the Turks. Mr. Ocalan has been in exile from Turkey since 1984 and has contributed to the most gross human rights violations inside and outside Turkey. In an article in The Sunday Times, Carey Scott quotes Jonathan Randal, author of Kurdistan: After Such Knowledge, What Forgiveness, as stating that “the rambling, paranoid Ocalan, with his black moustache, organised personality cult and “single-minded, blinkered devotion to violence”, reminded him of Stalin.” Mr. Randal also states that Ocalan is extremely good at killing Turks and that he has a one-track mind.

Ocalan is the godfather of the Kurdish people and he has lived outside Turkey. He is like the godfathers of the former IRA who lived in Dublin and sent kids to be killed in Northern Ireland. He is the original godfather who, since the 1980s, has been responsible for killing his own people who would not join the PKK. Many Kurds in the area who decided to take the political road were forcibly stopped. They were killed indiscriminately by the PKK under Abdullah Ocalan.

The dispersal of the Kurds in the region is not the fault of Turkey, rather the international committees which sat in Sèvres in 1920 and in Lausanne in 1923 following the break up of the Ottoman Empire. The British, French and Germans are as responsible as others for what has happened in the region.

Other speakers did not mention what is happening to Kurds in Iraq, Iran and Syria. At present, a most cynical exercise is taking place in northern Iraq. Under the guise of the no-fly zone, the United States has, in effect, set up a semi-autonomous state of Kurdistan in that area. This suits America because it thinks that if it can foment trouble and terror in the area, the people might rise up and take out Saddam Hussein. However, they cannot do so and even if they try, they still do not have a puppet to take over from the despot, Saddam Hussein. The attempt to create an autonomous state in northern Iraq is associated with the rise of militant PKK in the area.

No mention has been made in recent months of the position of the Kurds in Iran. Certain sections of the international community are attempting to get rid of Saddam Hussein and they are keeping the Kurds in that area happy. However, there is no mention of what is happening to the Kurds in Iran. This suits the inter national scene. In addition, there is no mention of what is happening to the Kurds in Syria.

The role of a number of governments in the Ocalan affair in recent weeks must be queried. The roles of the CIA, the Greek Government and the Israeli/Turkish military alliance also must be questioned. I do not support the defence agreement between Turkey and Israel because it is potentially very damaging to the region.

What should be done with the 25 million Kurds living in the area they call Kurdistan which is located in four surrounding countries? If it was made an autonomous area, it would have to be supported by the international community and the four nations in which the Kurds are living at present. Should they be totally assimilated into the culture and political systems of the surrounding areas? How can an international settlement be brought about which would give the Kurdish people civil, human, economic and political rights?

The problem with the area in which the Kurds are living is that it is made up of probably the poorest regions of the four countries involved, although the two main rivers of Turkey start in the mountainous area. An international council or sub-committee under the aegis of the UN must be convened to consider how best to deal with the position of the Kurds. If their situation is not addressed at an international level, the violence which has beset areas in Turkey and northern Iraq will continue.

The political assimilation of the Kurds into Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria will be difficult to achieve because there is not a cementing of views among the Kurds on what should be done. As long as people like Mr. Ocalan are around, it will be extremely difficult for anyone to bring consensus among the Kurds.

I agree with the statements here and by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the EU and the other bodies discussing this matter, that there should be no suggestion of capital punishment. I was glad to hear there has not been a capital punishment execution in Turkey since 1984. I sincerely hope this will continue.

Nobody could suggest Mr. Ocalan is not guilty of the most heinous crimes but we must wait until the courts decide on his guilt. He is totally to blame for much of what has happened in the area. It is ironic that he now wants the European Court of Human Rights to intervene on his behalf. He referred to various articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, including the right to liberty, security and life, prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment and the right to a fair trial. This man would not even give his former wife a fair trial. He had her imprisoned for disloyalty and he talks about throwing himself at the mercy of the European Court of Human Rights. It is a nonsense.

There should be an open trial of this man in Turkey with international observers present. The trial should be seen to be as open as possible and there should be no suggestion of capital punish ment. Turkey, Europe or the world does not need another martyr for terrorists at this stage.

Let us have an open discussion on how to deal with the Kurdish problem which was created by the so-called lines drawn in the sand in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Given these lines were drawn arbitrarily in the sand at various places in Europe – mainly in Sevres and Lausanne in terms of the Kurds – Europeans have a huge part to play in righting the wrongs they created when slicing up the territories where Kurds live.

I do not know how the matter can be resolved but it cannot be resolved by total condemnation of the Turkish Government without considering the background to the problem and what the PKK, with Ocalan as their leader, has done to the Turkish and its own people. If we are to have a proper debate on the Kurdish situation we must also consider the Iraqis, Syrians and Iranians.

Mr. O'Toole

This is not my first time raising in this House issues relating to the way the Turkish Government runs its operation. I have always felt Europe would be better for the involvement of Turkey in the European Union. However, every time it gets close to it, the Turkish Government seems to do one more thing to put it out of line. For many years there was a difficulty about its prisons. I have raised its attitude towards trade unions in the House time and again.

I have had a number of discussions over the past three years with colleagues in EGITIM, the teachers union in Turkey. It deals with the Kurds in an educational rather than in a political way. As far as teachers are concerned children have the right to be educated in the language of the home or their mother tongue. That is a right for which this country has fought over many centuries. In Turkey the teachers' union executive was imprisoned for demanding the right of children to be educated in their home language. This right is not acceptable in Turkey. Over the past number of years, we also heard of a female Turkish parliamentarian who was jailed for many years for daring to articulate the views of the Kurds and for wearing the Kurds' national colours and emblems following election to parliament. This kind of thing is utterly unacceptable.

As Senator Lanigan stated, it is not easy to sort out the Kurdish problem. It is very complicated. These people stretch over four different national territories, including Turkey, Iran and Iraq. Millions of these people are effectively homeless. According to the latest figures I received there are approximately 3 million Kurds effectively homeless, mainly in Turkey, hundreds of them have disappeared or been murdered and over 3,000 villages have been burnt down. These people are suffering in Turkey today.

Perhaps I cannot direct my attention that much on the Kurds but I can direct it on the issues as they relate to Turkey. I ask the Turkish Government to grow up, to mature and try to deal with these issues like a modern western democracy which understands people's rights. The way it deals with these things does not help its cause. I firmly believe there is a European conspiracy to keep Turkey out of the European Union because it is a mainly non-Christian country. I regret that fact but it is my view that that is the case. It is unfortunate the Turkish Government seems to play into the hands of those people every time a serious issue arises. Some of us feel Europe could learn and gain a lot from Turkish involvement in the Union. However, at this stage nobody could feel comfortable inviting it in. Things have to be put right and this is not helped by Turkish Government prosecutors seeking the death sentence in the court case this week. That is not on and it cannot be acceptable to those of us who have the interests of the European Union at heart.

One issue I have come across is the way the teachers' union in Turkey has been dealt with. Nine members of EGITIM's executive have been found guilty of anti-state propaganda – to support the right of the Kurdish minority, Arabs, Syrians and others to be taught in their mother tongue. An article was published in a teachers' union magazine in Turkey advocating and supporting that right. Teachers throughout the world, as part of a group of 26 million organised under Education International, look closely at the right and access to education of minority groups in different parts of the world and we are honestly appalled at what is happening on the edges of Europe in Turkey. I have argued this with the Turkish authorities but I have not made any progress. I feel they do everything to turn back the tide on themselves instead of moving into a modern western European set of values in terms of democracy.

How can we live with the kind of attitude the Turkish Government shows towards people in prison there? How can we live with the fact that people in Europe are not allowed to be educated in their mother tongue? I was the first parliamentarian in either House to raise with the Department of Foreign Affairs the difficulties being experienced in Kosovo. Children were not allowed to learn and be educated in their home language, in this case, children from an Albanian background. This is unacceptable in a multi-cultural and pluralist society.

The world will be watching how the trial proceeds in Turkey. This is another opportunity for the Turkish Government to show that it has matured and developed, to show that it can take its place with other European nations and give those of us who support Turkish involvement in the Community some argument in its favour. This has been impossible up to now and the situation does not seem to be improving.

The restraints, restrictions and imprisonment of members of parliament in Turkey who were elected by the Kurds to represent their views is impossible for us to comprehend. Our Constitution protects Members of Parliament. It is a sacred law that Members cannot be arrested trav elling to or from their parliamentary duties. Over the centuries, dating from penal times, we have suffered as a nation because we were not allowed to be educated in our own language, practice our religion or express and articulate our culture. Turkey now has an opportunity to deal with the Kurdish problem, in as much as it is their problem, in an effective, mature and democratic manner. I ask the Turkish authorities not to be afraid of pluralism or difference and to create a more open society.

I ask the Turkish Government to withdraw the prosecutor's demand for a death sentence and to agree to the UN rights of the child, which includes the right to be educated in one's own tongue. This might indicate a movement forward.

Sitting suspended at 1.45 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.