Provoking Turkey
Most Turkey specialists in the European Union and Europe specialist in Turkey agree: negotiations between the two are stuck.
Yes, the technical talks on adapting Turkish laws to EU standards continue. Yes, Turkish and European politicians keep making positive statements about the advantages of Turkish accession to the EU. But the drive needed to get things done is gone.
The Turkish government echoes the frustrations of many Turks when it complains about the mixed signals coming from EU leaders. There is a growing feeling that even if and when the country complies with all EU demands Turkey will never get in. On top of that, the government is faced with an opposition that is hostile to all the reforms needed to keep up the momentum.
European politicians are frustrated with the slowdown of reforms since the start of negotiations three years ago. They expect Turkish leaders to tackle the issues which top the EU’s list of demands: freedom of speech, the position of ethnic and religious minorities, the Kurdish problem and the role of the army.
Both sides lack political leaders that are courageous enough to continue to make the case for Turkish entry in to the EU.
There is a growing tendency on both sides to look inward . Politicians give in to populist sentiments. Recent examples in the Netherlands are the draft manifestos for next year’s European elections presented by the right-wing liberal party VVD and the Labour party PvdA. The liberals offers Turkey a kind of secondrate membership by explicitly excluding free movement of Turkish workers after accession. Labour mentions additional conditions that have to be put to Turkey.
Both parties supported Turkish accession until now but clearly do not want to be seen as pro Turkish awaiting the strong anti Turkey campaign Dutch populist maverick Geert Wilders is expected to present next year.
This kind of unfair treatment plays into the hands of the anti Europeans within Turkey. It raises the pressure on the Turkish government to give in to their calls to stop talks with the EU and look elsewhere for partners who do not humiliate Turkey. That would be the tragic outcome of a process in which strong rational arguments seem to be loosing out to lack of courage and fear politics.
–
Joost Lagendijk (1957) has been a member of the European Parliament for the green party GroenLinks since 1998. His main topics are foreign policy and EU enlargement. He is the chairman of the Turkey Delegation of the European Parliament and rapporteur on Kosovo.
–
What are your ideas about the relationship between and future of Turkey and the EU?
Monday 20 October 2008, 17:07
It is a process, and it will take time. Only by continuing the process turkey can prove that it is able to handle the difficult problems it face.
Turkey can not expect that the EU will say, ok we accept all your problems, become a member now. That is not realistic.
Yes it seems that there is a lake of political leaders that are courageous enough to make the case for Turkish entry in to the EU, and that is a bad sign and it is a strange thing that those leaders are strong supporters of the EU
It seems to me that the liberals and Labour party do things from opportunistic view, that because of the populist politic from some in the Netherland.
We have to wait until will have there full brains back and come with a new vision of the EU, not inspired by short term solutions
Monday 20 October 2008, 19:55
The issues on the EU’s list of demands: freedom of speech, the treatment of ethnic and religious minorities, the Kurdish problem, the Cyprus problem and the intervention of the army in the political sphere are not trivial, each one is a core issue which would be enough to prevent Turkey’s entry.
I also think conflating Ankara’s failure to move forward with whatever drivel comes out of our European right wing is not helpful. There will always be people in the EU opposed for illegitimate reasons, just as there always be people in favor for illegitimate reasons (flooding the EU with cheap labor).
What matter sis if Ankara with its policy and law is in conformity.
If I wish to be hired, join an organization, run for office, or whatever, and am in outright active violation of the CORE norms, policies or rules of that organization, and have a record of being that way, it is up to me to resolutely and unequivocally change if I expect to join.
We are talking about a heavily armed state, with a record of ongoing repression of its own citizens both with overt and covert use of state apparatus, military threats and actions against neighbor states, murders of journalists, and a dozen other problems.
It is irrational to be opposed to Turkey on racial, ethnic or religious grounds. It is equally irrational to give such a huge state with so many problems , which are its to solve, a free pass.
I am very surprised to read terms like “unfair” and “humiliate.” We are talking about a state which is reserving the right to be unfair and whose humiliation comes from its own acts and policies.
Who humiliated Ankara with Pamuk? The Dutch? The Germans? The Greeks? the Spanish? NO.
Friday 24 October 2008, 12:58
It’s a disgrace that Turkey isn’t allowed in the EU by some members while poor backward country’s like Bulgaria and Romania are already a part of the EU. The use of double standards affects the political reliability of the EU.
Tuesday 28 October 2008, 20:10
A’s logic is of course vacuous (”… backward country’s like Bulgaria and Romania are already a part of the EU”): all backward countires should be allowed to join. That is Syria, Jemen etc.
J Nivard calls for courage and Ian for rationality; I just don’t think thats the issue at all. EU is an astonishingly fragile construction, evn artificial to a large extent. What holds such federations – or clubs etc – together is the spirit of “us”: i.e. identity. Who we are depends on who we see as “them”. If “us” is anybody, that the fragile construction will fail.
Monday 3 November 2008, 13:19
# HN
The point is that Turkey is a part of Europe. That’s a fact. So, I am pretty sure that Turkey will join the EU inspite of the injustice by some conservative countries like Austria, France and the Netherlands who spread panic.
Friday 14 November 2008, 16:59
The fact that Turkey has a bit of territory in Europe and a lot in Asia is somewhat irrelevant to its EU membership. Several member states have overseas territories outside Europe, even in America, which are part of the EU now. I would even argue that we should offer membership to Israel and Lebanon, stimulating them to adopt our European standards (e.g. separation of state and church). We should lure them into the egalitarian peace that the EU brings, with the promise of financial gains and military protection.
Turkey has done its best to conform to EU standards and I think we should speed up full membership as fast as possible, even if the Kurds are not treated as they should be yet, and even if corruption is still a significant problem in the Turkish economy. I am convinced that we can solve many of the problems once Turkey is within the EU.
KURDS
To Kurdish fighters I have often pointed out that the EU will end their problems and that they had better behave, so the membership of Turkey is not delayed by Kurdish issues. I have pointed out to them that the EU will invest in infrastructure, build schools and otherwise upgrade regions that have been neglected by national governments (such as Eastern Turkey). To Kurds who claim that this is not enough, and who want their own parliament, I point out that Schotland got its own parliament after (and partly because) Great-Britain joined the EU. In the EU we don’t allow one people to suppress an other.
The Kurdish problem is a Turkish issue, not a European one. Europe will solve it. We know how. Peace between sworn enemies gave birth to the EU, and still works as our magic wand. How very different from the tactics of the USA!
CORRUPTION
Corruption is not solely a Turkish problem. Berlusconi is in favour of corruption and in Holland we have Verdonk rallying for a similar decline of standards. High time for a Europe-wide, hands on approach to corruption. Indeed many of the new member states have deeply corrupt political establishments. “Establishments,” may not be quite the right word, since many of their political intuitions lack experience with democracy. This facilitates corruption. When we have enough experience in dealing with corruption in our present member states, we can tackle the institutions of Turkey, after it has become a full-blown member.
Somehow we have to define our European definition of corruption, so a big conference should be held including, if possible, the entire governments of all the member states. We have just witnessed the American elections and by our European standards, the American political system is one big legalized form of corruption. I am quite confident many Europeans agree with me. But we shall have to lay down our European definition of corruption before we commission any anti-corruption bureaus to teach new member states (and slacking old ones) about financial integrity.
Monday 26 January 2009, 12:09
The EU has gone out of its way to help Erdogan and the moderates steer Turkey towards the EU. But instead of recognizing and appreciating this, Turkey has acted like the EU is a supermarket and you can pick what you like and ignore what you do not like and complains about “unfair treatment!”. It is already making imperial demands, as if it is the EU that wants to join Turkey.
The occupation of Cyprus is a huge issue and Turkey does not have the guts to deal with it. By any logic the EU should not even be talking to Turkey, while the later is occupying EU soil. Starting negotiations and asking for an indirect recognition of Cyprus is a HUGE concession by the EU. Any self-respecting country or union(like the US which is what the EU aspires to be with Lisbon etc) would have send an army to liberate Cyprus. After all, what’s the point of supporting a European Army to go and fight in far away places, when it is not allowed to defend EU soil first?
All Turkey could do on Cyprus was the tailor-made Anan plan that allowed them occupation troops and intervention rights the next time they could come up with a pretext.
Army interference in politics is another issue
Because EU governments wantto speak to the man in charge and it should be clear if that is the PM or the head of the army.
Corruption, with the PMs son-in law the only bidder in government projects speaks for itself.
In short, if Turkey is serious about the EU, it must act like a prospective member. The EU cannot bend over to the turkish demands
Saturday 19 December 2009, 15:51
This is truly a fascinating topic; it involves so many strategic issues and one can easily become distracted from what is important and what is irrelevant.
I tend to disagree with Mr. Lagendijk’s views on Turkey. I don’t think his perspective of the issue is consistent with that of the people he represents. Now, he is right in my humble opinion. The EU needs to help at all expenses this Muslim country’s passage from nominal to real democracy. Turkey could really well become a model to other Muslim nations that may wish to follow suit. Thus, all efforts must be directed to ease Turkey’s path to this transition and that should include both financial and political support. Turkey on the other hand needs to show progress in all those issues that have been for years on the table.
It is a chimera to think that in this current economic context the EU could absorb a massive country like Turkey and not implode while attempting to do so. The decision pertaining Turkey’s European future belongs to our children and grandchildren. Let’s prepare each other for that decision to come perhaps 20 years for now.
joseutrecht@hotmail.com