Login

MIDEAST MIRROR 02.07.15, SECTION C (TURKEY & IRAN)

 

1-From today’s Turkish press

 

ELECTION OF PARLIAMENTARY SPEAKER: Cengiz Candar suggests that the choice of a new parliamentary speaker may augur early elections in centre-left Radikal: "Given that MHP [Nationalist Movement party] presented the post of head of parliament to the AKP [Justice and Development Party] 'on a golden platter' and that a CHP [Republican People's Party] spokesman called the MHP a 'chair provider', one cannot fail to detect the MHP's major role in AKP member Ismet Yilmaz's election as head of parliament. Nonetheless, comments to the effect that the likelihood of an AKP-MHP coalition has increased may be hasty and careless. With yesterday’s developments, paradoxically, we may say that the probability of an early election in November has become much stronger."

Mehmet Tezkan castigates the MHP for its position on the Kurds in centrist Milliyet: "What does the MHP want? It seems that that MHP’s stance that the HDP [pro-Kurdish leftist alliance] is null and void will stop the MHP from becoming an all-Turkey party. This is because ignoring the HDP means ignoring the great majority of Kurds. It means forgetting about the entire southeast. It means rejecting the Turkish reality".

Aydin Engin anticipates a nationalist anti-Kurdish coalition in secular, Kemalist Cumhuriyet: "I guess the MHP and the AKP have conducted a religious marriage ceremony behind closed doors. It is now time for an official ceremony. And for that, a head of parliament had to be chosen, the president needs to give [AKP] PM Ahmet Davutoglu the mandate to form a government and he will then knock on the door of MHP leader Devlet Bahceli. This is coming soon. I think an AKP-MHP coalition will happen soon. This is harmonious since both parties are purely nationalist. The most significant force driving them towards a coalition is clear: enmity towards Kurds."

Abdulkadir Selvi sees the opposition in retreat in moderate, pro-Islamic, pro-government Yeni Safak: "The roof of the opposition has collapsed. It has not only suffered the pain of losing the parliament speaker’s election. It has become evident that a head of parliament cannot be chosen and a government cannot be formed without the AKP. The vote for the head of parliament has not only strengthened the probability of a coalition with the MHP, but that of an early election as well."

 

MILITARY INTERVENTION IN SYRIA: Unal Cevikoz claims that the Turkish people oppose any military intervention in Syria in Radikal: "An intervention in Syria concerns all the Turkish people. And the people are a whole, with all their ethnic, religious and sectarian elements, and they do not feel any grudge or enmity towards any element of the people of Syria. That is why, if Turkey ends up in war against Syria, this war will not be a war of the people of Turkey."

Ali Sirmen argues that Turkey will confront a host of enemies in Cumhuriyet: "Iran, Russia, the U.S. and the coalition forces are all against Ankara's attempt to establish a buffer zone in the north of Syria. All parties, which are struggling in the Syria quagmire, and which Ankara is trying to dive into head-on, will clash with the Turkish Armed Forces if there is such an intervention."

 

 

2-From today’s Iranian press

 

NUCLEAR TALKS: Conservative Hemayat writes of a new final phase: "After a seven-day extension, the talks are taking a new form and colour. New diplomatic moves are underway. The conclusion of the negotiations is vitally important for all. The other side uses all its media capacities and psychological methods to achieve its goals. The Western approach to negotiations is nothing new for our people and officials. The Iranian nation is expecting results based on the Islamic revolution and the interests of the current and next generations." 

Conservative Khorasan looks beyond: "Our nuclear team and media should behave in a way that prevents the other side - which is equipped with a vast media empire and has experience and expertise in processing and embellishing lies – from blaming Iran for deadlock or failure. If our negotiators pursue the nation's demands through the spirit and traits attributed to them by the Supreme Leader, regardless of the outcome; the leader and the people will view them as heroes in a diplomatic battle against a deceitful, greedy and untrustworthy opponent. The redlines of a good deal, as stipulated by the Supreme Leader, protect and promote the Iranian nation's dignity and development. This is not limited to the nuclear case. Although the talks concern the nuclear issue, this is the first time, since the revolution, that the talks are held at this level. The basis and principles established in these talks can become the basis, pattern and practice for any future engagement". 

Reformist Arman implies that responsibility for failure is shared: "If talks fail, none of the parties will blame themselves; each will try to pass the buck to the other side. But, it is natural that ultimately both sides should accept responsibility for the consequences of their failure. With psychological warfare, both sides will accuse each other and use this to gain support in public opinion."

Moderate Iran interprets Amano’s visit to Tehran: "The presence of IAEA Director General, Yukiya Amano, in Vienna and his meeting with foreign ministers, as well as his visit today to Tehran, cannot denote that he is participating in the talks. However, the timing of his visit to Tehran and the meetings that he will have with the president and the secretary of the National Security Council suggest positive developments in the negotiations. The purpose of Amano's visit is to create greater coordination to help the talks reach an agreement. Both sides have concerns over the nature of the agency's access to Iran's nuclear programme based on what is in the additional protocol."

Centrist Jomhuri-ye Eslami reminds: "This is a decisive moment. The Iranian delegation has stressed that achieving a good deal is more important than adhering to a stipulated deadline. Vienna can become the place where a nuclear deal is announced and years of nuclear tension with the West could end. Nevertheless, until the final moment, no one should forget Western selfishness and breaches of promises." 

Hard-line Keyhan is clear: "The text of the draft is so complex and multi-layered, that its violation of Iran's declared red lines is not clear. If we accept the draft of a ‘bad deal’, it means that we have surrendered. If we reject it, there will be a campaign to suggest to the world and possibly a part of the Iranian people - that Iran is responsible for the breakdown of talks. Our negotiation team has gone to Vienna with sufficient authority and has the power to say either 'yes' or 'no'. When they see that the red lines have not been adhered to in the proposed deal, their duty -meaning their definite and immutable obligation - is a clear declaration of opposition to the text and a definitive 'no'." 

Conservative Resalat calls Obama’s bluff: "Threats by President Obama to leave the talks are intended to influence the negotiations. Obama's recent position is a tactic to improve U.S. bargaining. Obama himself has repeatedly acknowledged that he has no alternative to the negotiations." 

 

ECONOMY: Hard-line Javan analyses: "Strengthening the economy is not limited to only sanctions; there are long-term requirements and the need for the right policies too. Our unseemly economic structure is related to the architecture of planning and the state of the country before the Islamic revolution. Relying on oil revenues, which has been the natural result of years of a single-product economy as well as mismanagement are not related to foreign sanctions. Of course, sanctions have caused harm and have had a negative impact; but their cancellation alone cannot resolve the economic problems of the country; the solution is somewhere else. It can be resolutely stated that the Resistance Economy is our choice whether a nuclear deal is reached or not." 

 

HAMAS: Conservative Siyasat-e Ruz reminds Hamas of the fate of Fatah: "Terrorism and security have marginalized the issue of Palestine and removed it from the agenda of the Muslim world, which created a good situation for the Zionist regime. It allowed the continuous occupation of Palestinian territories and the siege of Gaza. News comes that Hamas is ready to agree to a 10-year cease-fire to break the siege of Gaza. The main focus of the cease-fire, however, is to disarm the Palestinian groups in Gaza. The plan is a deception with false promises. Hamas, by considering the plan, will face the fate of Fatah and will not achieve any other results. The Palestinian nation does not accept currents that compromise. They see resistance as their sole option."   

 

 

Copyright: Mideast Mirror.

This email is intended for the recipient only.

Access to this message by any other person is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely upon this email.

The materials available through Mideast Mirror are the property of Alef Publishing Ltd or its licensors, are protected by copyright, trademark and other intellectual property laws.

Mideast Mirror - Alef Publishing Ltd.

Tel: ++ 44 020 7052 96 00

Fax: ++ 44 020 7052 96 09

 

Editorial and Enquiries:

Tel: ++ 44 773 4426 113

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.