KANALTURK - ECONOMY AGENDA / NOVEMBER 3, 2004

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Hi from the Economy Agenda. Dear viewers, the entire world has focused on the presidential elections currently being held in the United States of America. According to the unofficial results, George Bush is in the leading position. Of course, those elections in the USA closely concern Turkey, too. We will now talk with our esteemed guest and discuss if the elections will have an impact on the Turkish economy; and we will discuss the Turkish-American economic relations in the new term.

The United States of America and Turkey have been strategic partners for more than 50 years but something was always missing in that partnership. The close cooperation in the political and military relations did not find its way through sound economic and trade relations. The USA is making foreign investments worth 2.5 trillion dollars per year. The share falling on Turkey out of these investments is merely 1 to 2 out of 1000. Why did we always neglect the economic interests in our relations with the USA so far? What will be the level of economic relations between Turkey and USA in the new term? Now we are here, along with our guest, Mr. Adnan Nas, the Chairman of the Turkish-American Businessmen Association, to discuss these issues everyone is wondering about. Welcome Mr. Adnan.

Adnan Nas:   Thank you.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu:  Sir, these elections are really a pivotal point in the history of the USA; but of course the entire world has concentrated on those elections, too. They also concern Turkey in close terms. We said that Bush is leading; then what do you think about the circumstances?

Adnan Nas:   Yes, I was listening to the news just a little while ago when I was in the car, headed here. He seems to be leading. I think there is some uncertainty in Ohio but it is largely plain and simple. My thoughts on the subject: This is what the markets have expected all along. You know, markets are generally in favor of stability and against uncertainty. John Kerry is largely a man supported by the anti-Bush people. I have already seen a comment in the US press. This election was held not between Bush and Kerry but between the pro-Bush supporters and anti-Bush parties. Kerry seemed to be a more marginal factor because no one got the impression that Kerry has some definite policies. He only has a softer style, and more inclined to be more friendly with the Europeans. Except for rather abstract messages, he could not give any clear message. Kerry may be better in theoretical terms but no one is aware of it.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: You mean  he has been unable to express himself?

Adnan Nas:  Probably. Or perhaps he could not make clear his foreign policies to a large extent. I mean these would be definite and defined only one year after Kerry took office. Thus this long-term uncertainty was not favored by the markets, in my opinion. The business communities in the USA were rather inclined to display an attitude favoring Bush to maintain his office because not only there is the factor of uncertainty but also there were some negatives: for instance Kerry said that he would raise tax rates. One of the few clear things was that he would surely raise tax rates. Tax raising is not a good thing, not only for big, multi-national companies but also for small- and medium-scaled ones. In this sense, in my opinion, in the last analysis, the swing voters did not support Kerry contrary to what was expected because when we saw long queues on TV last night we thought that they were democrats; the first impression was  that; but we noticed the truth in the morning: This was not the case. My comments: The view of the world's public differs from the view of the USA people. You know there is a witty saying around: Actually the world people should vote for the USA president; after all he has an impact on everyone of us. But of course the voters are only the American people.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu:   Sir, as far as I understand there is some different, intrinsic thing here: I mean the worlds people view Bush according to his Iraqi policy while the USA look at their own economy and economic developments. It may be safe to say that probably the economic issues are more important than the Iraqi issue.

Adnan Nas: This seems not to be so much like that in this election. In fact, let us say: economy means the daily life of people. The daily life of people is very important because in America there is a middle class which we do not know very well. This middle class is not so different from our middle class, or middle lower class. I mean they do not vote by taking into consideration the global issues in a broad perspective; they vote according to the likely impacts on their daily lives. One of the extremely important factors that had a huge impact on the middle class was September 11th events. The September 11th syndrome is still alive and hot. Another factor that Bush makes of it other than the economy is the fact that this syndrome is still alive. I think Bush seems pretty resolute in this respect: He is fully against terrorism, etc There may be some troubling points in his policies but the opposition theses have yet to give the impression that their policies will be better than those of Bush.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu:  Alright, sir, you just said that the reelection of Bush is favored by the markets; but when you look at the issue from the point of view of Turkey, is it also in our interests?

Adnan Nas:  Of course, if you look at the short term, the reelection of Bush is more favorable because the same thing is applicable to Turkey. We already know what Bush does and does not. As a consequence, the USA has maintained its relations with Turkey to a large extent during do Bush's office term. We should add this: The USA's foreign policy has never been the fruit of merely presidents. As a super power, the USA has a policy set through much more intricate and lengthy procedures keeping in mind the balance of the state. But it is hard to say that the relations were destroyed during Bush's era. There is only the March 1 official note; apart from that the things got pretty well repaired. However, this repair is a repair in the sense that the USA and Turkey are allies. But as frequently referred to, is it a strategic partnership in all aspects as everyone dearly loves to call it? One should be careful here, I think.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Yes, it is necessary to underline this point. It may not be actually so.

Adnan Nas: It already wasn't so; it gotten worse after March 1. Because after March 1, no definition of the common interest areas was made between the USA and Turkey. It is possible to say in theory that the established order, government and other state bodies in Turkey favour Bush to keep up his office. You know some articles were published in newspapers: There is a issue incompatibility between Bush and our government. These may be true but one point is missing: The common strategic area should be defined between the USA and Turkey. Huge efforts are required in this respect.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: This was disrupted when the Iraqi war erupted, wasn't it?

Adnan Nas: These assumptions should have been already there. The US government thought that the permission would be easily and quickly given. I guess a question mark arose between two countries then.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Perhaps Turkey had its own red lines that should not be crossed and the USA did not pay attention to them during the Iraqi war.

Adnan Nas: Yes, this means that we were not aware of what the other was thinking. Whereas, any two strategical partners should know very well what the other is thinking. Now that was revealed. Let's look at the other side of the story now. As you stated in the preamble, Turkey has been a partner of the USA for 50 years but this is rather a strong military alliance relation. It started with the Korean war and NATO. The most healthy and long-term relation of Turkey with the West is NATO in my opinion. I think, there have always been some aspects of our relations that needed to be worked on. We don't have a very consistent and well-maintained relation other than NATO. For this reason, the relation is an alliance within the context of NATO. What you say is extremely true. With an annual foreign trade volume of 7 billion dollars, and USA investments that don't even add up to 3 billion dollars in total, it is a proven fact that the USA has no such strategic economic relation with Turkey.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: We export goods worth 4 billion dollars; but our imports also amount to that figure.

Adnan Nas: It is not even 4 billion; it is something like 3.5 billion dollars. It shows fluctuations but it is mainly around that figure. Now there is something else here: The problem is not only the fact that we don't know each other in economic terms; also our people don't know each other. We assume that the American folks know us; we assume that we know the USA but the ones knowing each other only governments. The societies do not have an idea about each other. I am not sure that there is a very clear image of Turkey on the minds of the US citizens. This is also applicable for its companies; the US companies don't know us very well. Let's keep multi-nationals out of this. They are omnipresent and thus they don't need anyone to enter into a new market. What in fact, in terms of medium-size companies that form the majority, no one could argue that there is  a huge interaction or mutual relations between the economies. There are various reasons for this phenomenon. One of them is of course geographical location; and another one is the lack of cultural closeness. That is to say, no matter how much we bicker with Europe, Europe and Turkey know each other for hundreds of years. When you look at the past in terms of trade, the initiative had always lied with the other parties; not with Turkey. You know Turks are not so much tradesmen; they are traditionally of military origin. For this reason, they have always depended on the activities of the other parties. Since the Europeans have known Turkey for centuries, our trade relations have gotten much more developed and better with them. There is not a familiarity between the USA and Turks or Turkish companies in this sense. For this reason, a great deal depends on us. We have to intensify that relation to the extremes on both sides.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: How can this be done?

Adnan Nas:  In both Turkey and USA, one should introduce these economic units with each other on both sides; in addition, one should boost the multi-faceted relations between the nations of two the countries. The acceleration of the relations between the peoples should be boosted from the sports activities to the cultural aspects. We have a very limited relationship with the USA. This overall trade and cooperation is effected from such invisible factors. There should be such factors behind those relations. Consider that an US citizen is willing to invest; why on earth will he choose Turkey among 100 countries? There should be some motivating factor behind this choice; if that citizen is having his holidays in that country; if he has some friends or knows about some institutions better...of course that country should be transparent and has a decent record in terms of law. Then this country may be picked up as a choice. I mean there are many factors; in fact it is a very complex matter. This cannot be developed only through military relations or when the governments shake hands. In fact the firms having mutual business with each other shall have a trust in the "win-win" situation for both of them. I mean two sides should win. If Turkey always asks something, always tells the same story that "you are my elder brother; you are strong; give me some money" then this cannot be described as a strategic partnership but rather a relation between two brothers.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu:   And it somehow turns out to be a relationship of dependents. This is also very acceptable in terms of Turkey's interests isn't?

Adnan Nas: Sure.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Alright, you just said that there should be a win-win strategy; both parties should win. From the point of view Turkish companies, what kind of market is the USA?

Adnan Nas: I don't think that Turkish firms bothered to ponder about this matter up to now. You always say that there is only that issue of quota between us and the USA. Textile industrialists have always wanted to export to the USA whatever they want without any quota as much as possible. Apart from this general desire, I don't think that the USA market is well-known and well-analyzed as a market. You know this issue of quota shall be eliminated in 2005; Mr. Süleyman Oratçıoğlu is trying to put off it until 2007. We tried to deepen these relations with the High Quality Industrial Zones. As you should know, the High Quality Industrial Zones are important for both the diversification of the exports and improving regional cooperation. That's why Turkey should be a part of it. You know there is a triangle covering Israel, Egypt and Jordan. It was really a great effort to establish Turkey as a member there. But after March 1, this was slightly forgotten. For this reason, it should be put in front of Congress once more. As the Turkish-American Businessmen Association, we are also the Turkish representative of the American Chamber of Trade. Thus, we believe that we have much in our hands to do in this respect. We are preparing a very important file in this respect which goes a little bit deeper than the superficial approaches. Will Turkey create such a synergy in terms of high value added products and high-tech issues under the feasibility of this job? Turkey should not feel content anymore only by selling its existing products. It should slightly change its economy and strategic relations; in both general terms and specific terms exclusive to the USA. We can not continue to make trade by our old ways. We have to think strategically in this respect. This should also be implemented after the project phase.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: You say that this should be implemented in practical life a little bit. OK, then if we go back to the elections again Mr. Nas, you say that it was a good thing for Turkey that Bush was re-elected because we know the policies of Bush and we know him.

Adnan Nas: Yes. For both Turkey and business circles. I mean rather for markets and business communities. In any event, even if Kerry was selected, this would mean an uncertainty in the long term. What would the Kerry government do? Because he would choose his staff members etc. You know there is a period of uncertainty; when an American president is elected, he takes up office until the end of January. This is one thing when a new president is elected. Until then the former president's policies will go on. However, while on the one hand the former president's policies are still in force, on the other hand, everyone will have expectations of what the new president will do. This would remain as a big question mark in both the markets and in countries like ours with close-knit relations with the USA. All of us are spared of these questions now. Everything has its good and bad sides. The bad side is rather for those ones who dislike Bush: Bush's policies will be maintained and remained in force. However, the good side is that Bush has no further chance of being elected according to the constitution; I mean according to the American system. For this reason, there may be more mature, more settled policies that are designed to leave a heritage of name in our world. There is a historical fact that in general, the American presidents better perform in their second office terms. For this reason, one can expect positive expectations.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Sir, of course, you know America well; you frequently visit there.

Adnan Nas: I mean we are trying to understand at least; because frequent visits abroad are not enough on their own to know that country. One should think about it.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu:    You are in tightly-knit relations; I mean as an association. When you look at the non-governmental organisations set up by the Turkish population there, can you say that there are sufficient lobbying activities in fact?

Adnan Nas: No, I cannot say; because first the Turkish population there is not well-organised. Second, the organised ones are in the form of youth organisations rather than such circles that have a specific level of maturity and they mostly comprise rather young, recently graduated friends. I mean, our lobbies lack the influence other lobbies have and exert. The Greeks, Armenian people and the Jews have lobbies that have one-to-one relations with the Congress lobbies which are very effective among the business communities. It is hard to say that we enjoy such level of lobbying there.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Is there anything being done at this point?

Adnan Nas: That's not so easy; it depends on several factors, including the presence of successful businessmen in the USA. Of course it is not possible to raise successful businessmen overnight. First, the organisations like us have to do something. We have to hold more organised activities in the USA. We should take representatives of both Turkish businesses and other non-governmental Turkish organisations. More interaction; more interrelation between the USA society and the Turkish society should be conducted between the USA and Turkish societies. Let me clearly say that we have too many shortcomings there. The American society is also mostly an introverted company. They do not know many countries outside the USA. There are few among them who know Europe well. Someone with a little bit money visits Paris for holiday once in his lifetime. Because the USA society is such of, we have to be more active to promote ourselves. They do not know Turkey well. The ones who know Turkey mostly remember that we were by their side in the Korean war. During Ozal time, they vaguely remembered him: "Was the short, mustached president yours?" they sometimes ask. But don't let this make you have illusions that steer people in the USA know Turkey; it is not a well-known country. According to me, this has an impact on the stunted trade relations.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Yes sir, now there is a hot topic, too. Iraq at the cross-section of Turkish-American relations. As for Iraq, there is terrible chaos there. It became almost impossible for Turkish businessmen to make investments there. Our drivers were kidnapped, killed, massacred. From this point of view, how is the investment environment in Iraq?

Adnan Nas: It is not nice of course. It is necessary to deal with the subject not only from the investment environment in Iraq. The fact that the balances are settled in Iraq is also very important for oil prices. The current condition of Iraq makes it impossible for the global oil prices to go down in the short-term. This is really a very important danger.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Oil prices have reached record highs for a long time; they are still at high levels.

Adnan Nas: Yes. For this reason, to achieve stability in Iraq becomes significant for everyone. It is also necessary for the USA, too. On the other hand, we should not forget this: An expectation that the USA will immediately leave Iraq is not a very realistic one because this would be to the interests of no one. Now that's what I would call chaos. If the USA manages to turn Iraq into a stabled, democratic and free country, then this will be for the benefit of both itself and the world because an ever-ongoing chaotic state of affairs in Iraq is not favorable for anyone.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: The USA companies made attempts to find subcontractors in Turkey; you gave your support, helping them find those subcontractors. Where does Turkey stand concerning the subcontractor business?

Adnan Nas: You know Turkish companies have already some natural advantages. One of the most important ones is their ability to assume risks. Now under those risky conditions, they still go to Iraq. In spite of some tragic affairs that some employees have suffered, Turkish companies do not give up in Iraq.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: This is related to the poor economic conditions of the employees to an extent. Those employees are people who cannot find a jobs in Turkey.

Adnan Nas: Yes, it is related to the poor economic conditions in Turkey. As long as the Turkish companies have cost advantages, they will be always advantageous in terms of subcontracting. There has never been a policy on the part of the USA to strictly work with Turkish subcontractors in this respect. But considering the commercial advantages, they should favor Turks. We are geographically close to the region and we have sound transportation and contractor sectors. From these points of view, we are advantageous. But I suppose the political state of affairs in Iraq do not bring advantages to us as much as in Afghanistan. In particular, the state of affairs in Northern Iraq, the ethnical tension there, Turkey's concerns about that sensitive matter...lead the USA to act more hesitantly. But I hope that these will be overcome. Both Turkey and the USA should have an expansion policy at this moment. Turkey,  I believe, will produce a policy which will save it from being stuck in the Northern Iraq issue, thanks to its huge experience over the years and the fact that it is a great state. I think this will open the way for Turkish businessmen. But you know there is a fact around: In the short term, Turkey's way is not open in Iraq as much as it was in Afghanistan because of the Northern Iraq issue. Afghanistan calls Turks more; the Turkish businessmen bid in the tenders held there. But there is clearly an invisible barrier in Iraq.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: You say that this trouble is because of the Northern Iraq issue. You explained that there is a chaos in the investment environment there; you say there are not so many favorable conditions there. I would like to talk about the security issue. In this respect, the truck drivers are exposed to attacks. Some projects were proposed: the USA convoys would accompany them; they would complete their journey under the protection of the US soldiers. Stops would be put at every 50m. Secure points would be built. Now we see that Turkish drivers are the ones who seriously suffer there in general terms. Turkish workers undergo hard days. Attacks are rather concentrated on Turkish people. Could there be other reasons underlying these attacks? What do you think?

Adnan Nas: Like what? I am not that keen on conspiracy theories.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: It is discussed in the public from time to time. So as to make Turks more active in Iraqi policy; you just said conspiracy; you just said passwords; of course one need to elaborate these issues. I mean those attacks committed because of pulling Turks more into the chaos. There are rumours around.

Adnan Nas: Let me tell you this: In fact foreign policy, and in general, security policy are not the issues that we are specialized in. We are an association rather representing the business world. But we, too, carefully read those comments, in particular, with reference to their impact and effect on the business life. But if you want to know the truth, let me tell you that it is hard for me to comment on this while there are more competent security experts in Turkey. There is a huge balance of powers in the USA; I mean the decisions are not made in a single room on an arbitrary basis in the USA. Some think this way and some think the other way. Now, at the moment, their Ministry of Defense may be thinking something while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs may think the other way. This is the case in Turkey as well as in other countries. It is much more like that in the USA. For this reason, I think there should not be generalizations about the way things are happening in the USA. For instance, the Israel- Palestinian issue is an issue that has a strong impact on almost everyone in the context of the Middle East. The Iraq issue is somehow related thereto. Neither Bush nor Kerry would be able to settle the Israel-Palestinian issue in the short term. But I am speaking not as an expert but as a thinking man. Many of the regimes there are fed by the tension ongoing there, including the regimes in the adjacent countries. It seems to me only the entire Middle East map changes, then that subject may be finally settled. In this sense, you remember, once there were talks about the Great Middle East Project; the name will be probably a different one; but it is certain that there should be a reorganization in the Middle East. This reorganization should be to the benefit of the Middle East people; to the majority.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: You mean a stable Middle East will a great benefit to Turkey.

Adnan Nas: Certainly.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Sir, if we return back to Turkey; Turkey is undergoing severe troubles in terms of foreign investments. For a long time, people talked about the bureaucratic barriers; new laws were adopted in this sense; there were attempts to make the environment in Turkey attractive to foreign investment. You are hand-in-hand with the foreign investment. Are there still problems in that respect in Turkey?

Adnan Nas: Yes, there are. Of course there are improvements; favorable steps. But you know this is not a subject matter to be overcome in the short term. For instance, one of the most important issues is the "legal assurance". Turkey has some problems in terms of its legal system that was erected on a tradition that goes back centuries. To overcome all these problems all at once is a little bit difficult because it rather concerns the mentality, the infrastructure of the institutions etc. However, as for the things that can be achieved in the short run, I have to admit that huge steps were taken during the last two or three years following the 2001 crisis. Certain laws which will seriously better the investment environment were adopted thanks to the results of the programs pursued with the support of both IMF and the World Bank; the meetings and programs held with governmental and non-governmental organisations in Turkey. It may take some time for those laws to be effective in practice but, for instance, a well-established banking system is important. It is true that the number of banks declined sharply but at least there is a more sound and transparent system now. USA companies have that or this problem regarding other issues, such as Cargill, Motorola etc. Of course there are improvements concerning their problems and improvements. I mean the problems of Cargill are on the verge of complete settlement while the problems of Motorola are on a good track. The problems with these kind of USA companies have been solved a little bit; but there are still severe problems in relation to patent and intellectual property rights.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: This is being discussed a lot, particularly during the discussions we are having with the EU.

Adnan Nas: I mean since the old times we had our standards and laws specific to us; maybe this is due to the fact that we are the grandchildren of an Empire. Now we should clearly comply with an international standards a little bit further. I mean we are living in an age that no one will say "we are like each other". We are not the only ones that cannot say "we are like each other". When you look at in this respect, Germany is compromising its line; France is also compromising. For this reason, we have to adopt certain laws that would elevate us to their level. It will surely take time for those laws to be effective in practice. But the issue of intellectual property rights is particularly important; the foreign companies, particularly, the American ones have serious problems, in particular, in the pharmaceutical sector.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Now I think the local manufacturing is looked after a little bit. Now we are in a hard position. We should find the middle of the road.

Adnan Nas: Yes, but it is an industry in which considerable expenses of research and development are made. That's the reason why they are seeking for a recognition of those expenses.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Yes sir. My last question is: Mr. Adnan, when you look at the relations with the EU, what do you think, as the Chairman of the Turkish-American Businessmen Association, how will those relations find their ways through the Turkish economy after 2005?

Adnan Nas: Now let me tell you briefly this thing before moving to the EU: In my opinion, the election of the new American president will have a severe impact on the transatlantic relations between the EU and the America in terms of economic results; the fact that the dollar's trend to spiral down will continue; that the growth will continue based on consumption. During the Clinton presidency, the growth was based on savings. However, this turned out to be a growth based on consumption during the Bush era. Yes, there is a growth based on consumption; but the unemployment remains at the same level; USA's problem is this. We all have problems just like the USA. This is due to outsourcing. The USA achieves a growth; makes fast manufacturing; balances the demand; but it achieves this fast production by means of rather the cheap labor in some countries via outsourcing, such as India and China. For this reason, this was one of the topics Mr. Kerry concentrated on very much; but I suppose because the economy was not the most hot topic, this did not attract interest too much. There is no growth problem in the USA but the employment will surely be a nuisance for it. In terms of the European Union now; the USA is striving hard to maintain further and deeper relations with the European Union. I think the fact that Bush has kept his office will result in an increase in these efforts because I think if Kerry was selected, there would be rather a silent term. It is common talk: Does America not favor an approach between Turkey and the European Union? The USA laid down its strict opinion in this subject matter: It favors such an approach since Helsinki. But this does not mean that the USA think the same way as Europe. You see there are many debates even among the member states of the European Union. I mean if we are admitted to the European Union, we will give up all of our opinions. As an equal member, we can express and defend our arguments there; we will try to convince the others. The USA may not be thinking the same thing with them; but one should remember this: the USA and Europe are two wings of the great Western Alliance. Irrespective of temporary disputes between them, in the final analysis they form the two wings of a huge alliance.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: You mean that the tension between France and Germany, on the one hand, and the USA on the other hand is a temporary thing.

Adnan Nas: Of course. In the final analysis, they are to come together with a larger perspective like the Western alliance.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Now sir we have to make things a little bit clearer in this respect. When you look at it from the point of Turkey, you think there must be a tension between the USA and Europe. Because the USA pushes Turkey towards the EU, it is interpreted that this may be an attitude the EU adopted against Turkey.

Adnan Nas: That attitude will be truer when Turkey is a definite part of the EU; because now there are 25 member states in the EU. There is no acting in any unison or unanimity among those 25 countries on every and each issue. Some may claim that there is a new kind of danger there: The Anglo-Saxon way of thinking within the European Union will be more dominant. Up until now, the Franco-Germen axis was dominant in the European Union. If you pay attention, England was always willing to stand aside in the European Union. The Anglo-Saxon way of thinking wishes to make the European Union a broader institution and a more flexible one. Of course there will be shifts between these two opinions from time to time. For instance, Germany has recently shifter to the Anglo-Saxon view to some extent. France is acting more bigotedly. For this reason, there may be shifts in the European Union not only in terms of Turkey but also in terms of their internal policies. In my opinion, you cannot fully describe the type of the identity the Union will reflect after three to five years. This is an ever-evolving and developing process; Turkey will also be a part of that process. Turkey's participation makes this process more painful because Turkey is a big country not an ordinary one like Lithuania. It is very natural that Turkey's access causes so much fuss and reverberations and comments.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Sir, let's go back to our initial question.

Adnan Nas: But will the investments start up as soon as we have access to the European Union on December 17th? No, of course not because this is a process. It only reinforces and boosts the process that started up two years ago. At least they know that Turkey's path is a definite one. This will make that impression stronger: "Yes, it has some problems; but as a result Turkey wishes to be like us; for this reason it is a right place to invest". But in main terms, it will be optimistic think to expect a boost in the investments. It will be a much more appropriate thing if the investments gradually increase. I mean we have to expect a gradual increase and we should not give up our efforts, structural reforms, the self-promotion of civil society and private sector. Our private sector should shed its mentality that the state will pave the way for it; that the state will take it there. The state should not support the civil sector from now on; it should be the other way around should be. In my opinion, from now on Turkish private sector should be boosted to that level, fast and quick. This is one of the significant parts in our vision. What are the problems in relation to the Turkish businessmen; why are not they appropriate for international cooperation? These should be overcome; the cooperation, in my opinion, will wash out  out in this way. I mean, some things cannot be done by force; "Come here the USA Company; be a partner to my Turkish company". This is not the case. The trade does not develop like this.

Tuncay Mollavesioğlu: Mr. Adnan Nas, the Chairman of the Turkish-American Businessmen Association, thank you very much for troubling yourself by visiting our program and sharing out your valuable opinions with us.

Adnan Nas: I would like to thank you, too.