Let’s prepare for more years with Gül

Even though the prime minister does not share it with anybody, everybody regards it as certain that he will move into the president’s Çankaya Mansion in 2014.

Well, who would replace him? Do not say there is a lot of time.

Predictions have started now. Journalist Taha Akyol wrote that Gül was being considered based on a source close to the prime minister. This scenario overlaps with what I have been hearing for some time among presidential circles.

The president also has not said anything about it but even if he does not have any intentions, he is slowly being dragged to the Prime Ministry. A while ago, Gül was telling his entourage that he did not want to go back to politics and wanted to head a foundation.

But today, the situation is different. If Recep Tayyip Erdoğan steps up to the mansion, then who would tidy up the party? The big guns of the party won’t be able to run because of a party statute. It is very difficult to hold the Justice and Development Party (AK Parti) together without Erdoğan. There are two names who could both hold the party together and work harmoniously with Erdoğan, and these two names are Gül and Bülent Arınç.

This trio, which seems to be in perfect harmony, will leave their mark on the period 2014 to 2023. Given the strength of the Erdoğan-Gül-Arınç relationship, and belief ties among them, it is plain obvious they will untie this knot among themselves.

There are two years ahead. But the course seems to lead to more years with Gül.

‘State Secret’ Law should not come out as it is The state of the Republic of Turkey has always worked behind a screen of confidentiality. This passion for confidentiality lies beneath the fact we know almost nothing related to our recent past.

It is not known why and of whom the state is so afraid of, yet if one examines the attitudes adopted up until now, the state not only fears external enemies, but its own public. Even though we talk about more democratization, this passion is still there.
Here is the latest example:
There is a resolution in Parliament. This draft will define what both a “secret of the state” is and what a “confidential document” is. Indeed, while doing this, contradiction with European Union criteria must be avoided.
While reading the draft, you come across, as always, extremely ambiguous expressions and definitions. The following are deemed “secret”: “Information that might damage the state’s foreign relations, national defense and national security and that might pose a danger for the constitutional order and in foreign relations.” Those stamped “secret of the state” are buried for 75 years. In Europe, this is generally 50 years.

Separately, “confidential information and documents” are defined as:

“Information and documents that have features which might damage the country’s economic interests, its intelligence, military services, administrative investigations, juridical investigations or be categorized as confidential by authorized officials.”

If you make such a general definition that can be pulled or manipulated any way, there would not be any limit to secret and confidential elements.

The bureaucracy is also uncomfortable with the situation. Indeed, the EU Ministry has objections. In their written opinion, even though worded in a very soft tone, they oppose the draft and emphasize the need for amendments.

The draft will be reviewed in by the EU Harmonization Commission. We hope the inconveniences will be eliminated; otherwise we will enter a phase where we will shelve our new shames.