Volkan Vural
Counselor to Chairman
Doğan Şirketler Grubu Holding A.Ş.

I joined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1964. Four years later, I was assigned to the Turkish Embassy in Korea. That was my first foreign assignment. In 1971, I was posted in the Turkish Consulate in Munich as Consul and later as Deputy Consul General. After Germany, I worked at the Ministry’s headquarters in Ankara briefly. Then I took a leave of absence from the Ministry and started to work for Political Division of NATO as an international staff member. This department has been established at NATO HQ in Brussels in the footsteps of the political upheavals in the world. I provided consultancy to our allies. I spent the years between 1976 and 82 there.

Back at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Ankara, I became the Director General for Bilateral Economic Affairs. Later, I served as the Ambassador to Tehran until 1987 and then in Moscow until 93.

When I returned to the country, I started working as both the Deputy Undersecretary and Spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. When Tansu Çiller became the Prime Minister, she wanted me to be Chief Advisor on foreign issues and security policies. Thus, I assumed those responsibilities between the years of 1993 and 1995, as well.

After that, I was made the Ambassador to Germany and worked in that capacity until 1998 and at the Permanent Representation of Turkey to the United Nations until 2000. Later, the late Mr. Bülent Ecevit and İsmail Cem called me and told that Turkey was accepted as a candidate for EU membership and a new organization must be established. So, I formed the Secretariat General for EU Affairs and served as Secretary General for two years.

Lastly, I was appointed as Ambassador to Madrid until the end of 2006 and that was my final assignment.
 

How is your impression of the private sector so far? Do you think companies should form EU/international relations department? 

I was not really detached from the private sector before. Both during my years in Ankara and, especially, in Tehran and Moscow, I had close relations with Turkish private sector with regard to Turkey’s export and construction business. But this is my first time as an employee in the private sector. The structure is not hierarchical and strict as government structures. It is a different experience for me.

Unfortunately, Turkish companies do not pay enough attention to EU relations. This may be due to the slow progress of the negotiations, but I think this will be temporary. As Turkey continues in this direction and especially membership comes close, companies will have to have a better understanding on EU issues and even to monitor the developments round the clock. This will be no longer a job that can be handled through outsourcing. Large companies will need to have departments on EU affairs and train their staff, send them to institutes working on EU issues or to internship programs in Brussels. I believe big organizations will have an EU perspective in a couple of years and start forming EU departments.

You happened to be in Tehran during the Iraq-Iran war. How do you see those times as the Ambassador of Turkey, neighboring both of these countries? Can you tell us some interesting memories?

I have lots of memories from then. For example, my undersecretary counted 87 quite big rocket pieces on my garden and the embassy’s that fell during explosions. When under fire, we had to go to shelters to sleep at nights. But I couldn’t go. Until I caught my cat at home, the bombardment would stop anyway.
The Turkish Ambassador to Iraq was Sönmez Köksal then. We used to send messages to each other saying ‘don’t send me bombs, send flowers instead’… I have lots of memories about Iran.

You also witnessed the collapse of Soviet Union and formation of Russian Federation when you were in Moscow. How was it like to see a country in transition from communism to capitalism?

It was a very chaotic transition period. The system had collapsed. None of the states had fought for their independence, they were rather told ‘you are independent from now on’. Many people were left in hunger and poverty, because the government did not have any goods, services or employment to offer to them… When I left Moscow in 1993, the chaos was still going on. It was a period when old and new habits coexisted, mafia and gangs were strong. Later, the sources of the state were taken over and when the new owners started to run them, the system began working again, but it brought about the huge class differences in Russia. 

After the Helsinki Summit, you were heading the Secretariat General for EU Affairs and you formed a ‘National Program’ together with the State Planning Organization. How do you evaluate the progress so far with regard to the Program?

Secretariat General for EU Affairs was founded in August 2000. At the beginning, we were three-four people and then a couple of associates joined us. Firstly, we developed the National Program, which had various sections, the most important one being on politics. Such an initiative was very critical particularly in terms of the political criteria. Our biggest challenge was making the political and constitutional changes in order to meet the Copenhagen criteria. We worked on hotly-debated issues like the elimination of death sentence, education in Kurdish; and prepared the draft bills for constitutional changes. One of the milestones in Turkish history was the passing of this package in the Parliament on August 3, 2002. The package included the reforms which allow Turkey start the negotiations later. There had been noticeable progress afterwards, however a stagnation period started in December 2004.  

You stated that negotiations for EU membership take around 6-10 years. Do you think Turkey follows this time-line since Helsinki Summit?

Actually, what I was talking about is an average based on other candidate countries experiences. Turkey’s situation is unique. I was optimistic and said that we would be a member by 2011. But Turkey lagged behind for two reasons. Not only the stagnation in Turkey but also the prejudices in Europe against Turkey will delay this process a bit.

Why Turkey will join EU? And why will EU accept Turkey?

EU membership is in line with Turkey’s historical development and meets its political, economical and social expectations. For these reasons, EU membership has become a permanent policy. EU, on the other hand, cannot integrate Europe without Turkey. Turkey’s membership is important, because EU will be stronger and more efficient with Turkey; and as a global actor, it will contribute more to the international system. Our mutual interests support Turkey’s membership.

You also worked as an Advisor to Prime Minister. Which one do you think is more political, internal politics or foreign affairs?

The two are strongly intertwined, you can not separate them. But, I can say, foreign affairs is more professional, while internal politics is more colorful and up-to-date.

Turkey’s geo-political position is of critical importance, its neighbors’ problematic internal affairs and international relations give Turkey a hard time. As a Turkish diplomat, how did this affect you? Do you feel stronger than your counterparts living in a more peaceful international environment?

Generally, Turkey had to defend itself unlike most of Western countries. Therefore, our job was very different than a Western diplomat’s. Moreover, we had to form a positive public opinion about Turkey wherever we were. Because, especially in Europe, the people don’t know Turkey well; they are biased about some of our problems. And we are not provided with sufficient budget and human resources to create a positive image, either.Therefore, a Turkish diplomat must be much more flexible, savvy and active than his counterparts.

Do you think foreign affairs is an appealing profession among youth? Do women prefer foreign service?

The number of women applying to Ministry of Foreign Affairs has lately increased significantly. This is partly due to increasing number of women graduating from universities. But for women, foreign service is both an appealing and a formidable profession. It is formidable for two reasons. First, they have to move to a different country, maybe a very poor one, and must be ready for the conditions there. Secondly, it is hard to keep marriage and family relations. Even if a woman diplomat is married to another diplomat, it is not always possible for them to be assigned to the same country. If she is married to someone in a different profession, it may be hard for the husband to move with her, because for many professions, it is not easy to find a job abroad. Despite all these, the number of women applying to the Ministry increases and that makes me happy.