Current Opinion :

Turkey-EU relations:

A view of recent developments

by Erhan AKDEMİR

The assumption of the presidency of the European Union by Austria as of January 1, 2006 signalled the beginning of a potentially painful period in relations between Turkey and the European Union (EU). The strength of this signal was obvious from the discourses of Austrian leaders. In practice, however, the agenda of Turkey-EU relations so far this year has been taken up to a great extent by the latest developments in the international arena, particularly in the Middle East. The leading topics have been Iran, on account of its nuclear activities, and Hamas, after its victory in the Palestinian parliamentary elections.

Two other developments of the past two months that require evaluation in the context of Turkey’s EU perspective are Turkey’s new Cyprus Action Plan, announced on January 24, and the World Economic Forum which was organised in Davos in Switzerland on January 25, and its analyses with respect to Turkey.

These developments have brought with them some new challenges with respect to Turkey’ EU membership.

Role of reconciliation

A major benefit of Turkey’s potential membership of the EU is the interaction, dialogue and reconciliation which would arise on account of the rich and deep-rooted civilisations and cultures which Turkey harbours within itself. There is no other country that can contribute to mutual understanding between the EU - particularly Western Europe - and the Middle East, the Caucasus and Central Asia on the same scale as Turkey. No country other than Turkey can offer to the EU the opportunity to benefit from such a deep, rich and rooted accumulation of civilisation and culture.

Against this backdrop, Turkey should be eager to calculate, during the course of the EU membership process, not only what she would like to gain from the process, but also what kind of contribution she can make to the EU in full awareness of her own characteristics. This will help to avoid appearing in the eyes of the EU as a country which merely makes demands. A Turkey which is fully aware of its strengths, riches and experience, and which is capable of transferring these to its collocutors through its policies and its diplomacy, will be regarded with much more respect on the international arena. Being taken seriously, it will be able to achieve this important step towards modernisation.

The question then arises as to whether this wealth of experience which constitutes one of the biggest and most important arguments in the hands of Turkey on the road to full membership of the EU is being used to good effect. Is the role of reconciliation and dialogue between different cultures and civilisations which Turkey by nature possesses being played to the full? In particular, is Turkey being able to maintain its cultural ties with the Middle East and make use of them as an instrument in its relations with the EU? When Turkey’s policies with respect to Iran and Hamas are assessed from this perspective, it appears that a certain lack of transparency still needs to be overcome.

The Iran affair

The deep differences of view between the current government and Brussels over Iran are among the most significant items on the recent agenda of Turkey-EU relations. Prominent EU leaders have started to take a dim view of the AKP government because of Turkey’s rather gentle approach on the issue of Iran.

The EU conveyed to the government through official channels that it wanted to hear clearer statements from Turkey concerning Iran, for the sake of following a foreign policy harmonious with the EU. The issue was also raised during the visit of French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy at the beginning of February. The visiting foreign minister told Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan that France was insistent on Turkey maintaining a stronger attitude over Iran.

On Iran, there also seem to be differences between the attitudes of the civilian and military bureaucracies and the will of the politicians. It is perhaps this more than anything else which has created suspicion both in Turkish public opinion and among EU officials. The government, which has seemed completely pro-EU until today, has at the same time behaved unpredictably with regard to issues such as adultery, violence against women and the continuation of the secular establishment of Turkey. This makes it all the more important for Turkey to make its position, motives and intentions absolutely clear.

The Hamas front

Something similar can be said about Turkey’s policies with respect to Hamas. The EU, which is the biggest financial supporter of the Palestinian Authority, urged Hamas to renounce violence and recognise Israel and announced that otherwise they would not make contact with the Palestinian government once it was taken over by the group. A strong statement was again expected from Turkey but it was not forthcoming.

Meanwhile the policies to be followed by the EU towards a Palestinian Authority under the leadership of Hamas were repeatedly and clearly stated by EU officials, and even EU High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana said that the EU was not currently considering making contact with Hamas.

Hamas political leader Khalid Mish’al visited Ankara on February 16. Although he was urged to renounce violence, the visit itself was questioned inside and outside Turkey.

Cyprus plan

The Cyprus Action Plan announced by Turkey is a ten-article plan that includes points like the opening of the ports of Turkey to Greek Cypriot ships within the framework of the trade of goods within the context of the EU-Turkey customs union, the use of Turkish air space and airports by Greek Cypriot airlines for high flights within the framework of the relevant international rules and regulations, and the opening of Ercan Airport to direct flights under the authority of the Turkish Cypriot government. The Plan does not include any new elements with respect to Turkey’s thesis. But it nevertheless attracted considerably attention from the world media, and was quite widely welcomed within the EU, apart from Greece and Greek Cyprus.

Many EU officials declared positive opinions. Olli Rehn, EU Commissioner for Enlargement, and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw both welcomed the plan. Austrian Hannes Swoboda, Deputy Chairman of Socialist Group in the European Parliament, also looked favourably on Turkey’s proposals and called on the parties to consider them seriously. Jan Marinus Wiersma, a Dutch member of Socialist Group in the European Parliament, said that Turkey had taken a very important initiative. Cem Özdemir, a member of Green Group in the European Parliament, said that Turkey had made a significant diplomatic move on the Cyprus issue. Finally, Graham Watson, Chairman of the Liberal Group in the European Parliament said that he saw the proposal as a positive step and said that Turkish Cypriots should not be left in their current situation.

Among those who took a negative view were Greek Parliamentarian Ioannis Kasoulides, a member of the Christian Democrat Group in the European Parliament, and Greek Cypriot Foreign Minister George Yakovu. The Greek Cypriot foreign minister made clear that the greek Cypriots were not taking the plan seriously.

Gaining time

Turkey seems to have gained time on the issue with the announcement of the action plan. Ankara is obliged to comply with the conditions of Negotiation Framework Document dated October 3, which is has signed. The deadline that was given to Turkey by the EU was previously determined as June 1, 2006. Consequently, Turkey is naturally obliged to take initiatives in this area.

Meanwhile, at the World Economic Forum which started on January 25 in Davos, Switzerland, and continued for four days, it was stated that Turkey would have a very important role within the expanding borders of EU. In the analysis made within the framework of the meeting of World Economic Forum, it was also stated that Turkey could have positive effects on the economic and social life of EU during the process of full membership. Once again it was stressed that Turkey’s EU membership would be beneficial not only for Turkey but also for the EU, and that the membership process and membership itself could enrich the EU in cultural, political, social and religious terms.

Extra dimensions

To consider Turkey-EU relations solely as a bilateral relationship would fail to attribute the necessary importance to this relationship. Turkey’s geographical locations means that every development that is taking place or will take place in the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Middle East, Central Asia, the Black Sea or the Mediterranean very closely affects the relations between the EU and Turkey. America’s policy of gaining power and spreading influence in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Caucasus is giving the EU cause for concern. America’s desire for maximum influence in these areas is a direct determinant of the foreign policy – and, of course, the enlargement policy - that will be followed by the EU in the future.

Another international development of concern to the EU is the recent emergence of signs that Russia will gradually start to use the energy weapon. The EU is obtaining an important part of its energy from this country. Consequently, the issue of diversification of energy supply is taking up much of the attention of EU officials. From this point of view too, it is clear that Turkey is an indispensable country for diversity of supply and the continuity and reliability of the energy to be supplied to the EU.

All in all, the structure of Turkey-EU relations is such that it cannot be abstracted from international developments. If the EU issue can be removed from the sphere of internal politics, and the goal of EU membership can be frankly embraced and held above party politics, Turkey will be able to focus on the essentials and to act with the future in mind.

( DIPLOMAT  -  March 2006  -  Ankara )