Question: Why do you call it a syndrome, rather than a problem or an illness?

Soylemez: Relations of Turkey, not with France, but with President Sarkozy cannot be described as normal or healthy.

Sarkozy suffers from a Turkey sydrome. I do not know whether it can be cured or overcome because it seems that it is ingrained in his mind. Turkey and France relations have never been as problematic are they are now under President Sarkozy. He is to blame for this unfortunate state of affairs. In retrospect, bilateral relations between the two countries have never been as bad as this, under De Gaulle, Mitterand or lately during Chirac's era. He is not just not a friend of Turkey, he seems to have an anti-Turkey mania.

Question: Can it be, or is it, psychological?

Soylemez: Perhaps Sigmund Freud might have described it as irrational behaviour, not to say a psychiatric case. His psycholology, if diagnosed peroperly, amy indicate some Turkey hate coupled with Turkey fear. It may be traced back to childhood memories based on some unfortunate encounters.

Question: Did not TUSIAD, the Turkish Industry and Businessmen's Association, described his latest behaviour within the EU Commission in the harshest terms as a "pathological case"?

Soylemez: Yes, they did. In no uncertain terms, the business community at the highest level said, and from most authoritative sources, that this behaviour is most unacceptable. To delete the two words Turkey's "membership" and "accession" to the EU from the joint communique of the EU Commission at the insistence of Sarkozy of France is not only unacceptable but an expression of no goodwill to Turkey.

Question: But how it is possible that France put pressure on the EU Commission and the this Commission of 27 had to bow to that pressure and accept the French view that those two words membership and accession should be dropped?

Soylemez: The United Kingdom, Italy, Spain and some others were opposed to the French manoevre to take out those key words which were previously included ever since Turkey's membership negotiation started, and they were against their deletion. But France had pressurized Commission members by threatening that if they did not accept to delete these words then France would oppose the opening of 2 new chapters for negotiation. The minority accepted the bluff for the sake of the future of the negotiations.

Question This is an unbelievable story?

Soylemez: Unbelievable it may be, but true it is. Deletion of these two words reveals the working of the French mind: to leave Turkey's membership in question, in doubt, when the negotiations for membership are already open-ended. With such an attitude the EU Commission casts doubt on the most important principle of international law: PACTA SUND SERVANDA, which means "You will abide by your contract, you will respect your signature." That Signature is on the Treaty of 12 September 1963 which was ratified a year later by national parliaments of the then 6 Common Market countries plus the Turkish TBMM which stipulated the final goal is Turkey's membership of the then Common Market, the forerunner of today's European Union.

Question: Does that mean the EU Commission is negating itself, falling into a legal trap of contradiction with its legal and political commitments?

Soylemez: I cannot find any other words to describe this discrepancy, this dichotomy which Turkey does not deserve and which humiliates her.

Question: How did the authorities react?

Soylemez: The official reaction was incredibly diplomatic and mild. Prime Minister Erdogan's reaction was "With this act France does not win, but lose." To the French Ambassador in Ankara the Prime Minister said "We expect real friendship from France, but this attitude will serve neither to the interests of France nor others." The Prime Minister described the French behaviour as "unfitting and inelegant." He also said that "when we talk face to face with President Sarkozy he says something, but when we turn our back he manifests different attitudes." Such a stand is becoming typical of France's behaviour.

Question: What was the reaction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs?

Soylemez: They were cautious and guarded and not outspoken. "Displeased" was their traditional diplomatic language, as if these two key words did not matter at all, but what matters is the continuation of the membership negotiations with or without the Sarkozy Syndrome. President Abdullah Gul was also diplomatic when he said "Such an attitude is not fitting to the vision and importance of France."

Question: Does France have a vision for Turkey? What is the importance of France within the European Union?

Soylemez: By conducting such maneuvres Sarkozy is out to try to get the leadership role within the EU. His role model seems to be "enfant terrible" of Europe. His anti-Turkey card is also for domestic purposes to appease the conservatives and the reactionaries and the unemployed. His anti-Turkey stand is an excuse.

Question: Is he not proposing a Special Relationship formula, rather than EU membership, for Turkey?

Soylemez: Sarkozy and Merkel of Germany share this view which is not on the agenda of the EU as an alternative to membership. Special Relationship is nowhere defined or explained as to what it is, what it entails, and what it excludes. It is an empty concept and an empty phrase which Turkey is not willing even to discuss or define. Perhaps it means "Don't let Turkey in, but don't leave her out either" as was attributed to de Gaulle many decades ago. Its translation into real politics may be to have the cake and eat it. With membership and accession out, no one knows what the crystal ball of history will show, with its plusses and its minusses, in 2012 or 2014.