Restrictions that do not mesh with Turkey's new ambitions. It is not only unrealistic and the wrong time for Turkey to join the EU from the EU's point of view (see my column in issue 10124 of the newsletter), but I believe that it is not right from Turkey's point of view either. The reasons for recommending not to join the EU are even stronger for Turkey, in fact. The accession negotiations have been dragging on for years and have not made any significant progress, giving rise to misunderstandings and pointless arguments when a strengthened partnership would have already provided significant and speedy results. The current customs union already involves economic ties that go beyond a free trade zone. Historic and cultural ties are very powerful and continue to make headway. In addition, the EU provides considerable financial aid. All this would continue and be extended.
Joining the EU, however, would place restrictions on Turkey that do not mesh with its traditions or new ambitions. During his visit to Brussels last week, Turkey's foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu gave an idea of the role Turkey aims to play on the world stage - acting as the mediator between Iran (with which Turkey has close ties) and the world's big nuclear powers; contributing to the unification of Cyprus through a solution that is acceptable to both communities; and taking a proactive role in the Balkans (see issue 10124). This burgeoning international role includes closer ties with the United States under Obama, revitalising dialogue with Russia and partnership with Brazil in several areas, in addition to Turkey's direct responsibilities in its own backyard, like Iraq (stronger bilateral relations), Syria (helping with its dialogue with Israel), Armenia (a number of disagreements need to be ironed out), and the vast geographical area that was once the Caucasian and African part of the Ottoman Empire. Some observers describe Turkey's new attitude as 'neo-Ottoman' (a term Ahmet Davutoglu rejects), saying that it amounts to peacefully recuperating areas where it had an empire for centuries. People in Istanbul sometimes talk of the “Ottoman Peace” and religious tolerance that used to reign back then all around the Mediterranean (although Greece and the Balkans might not agree with that memory of the period).
Irrespective of the nuances in the interpretation of history, Turkey is now acting as a proactive regional power in a vast area and is often requested as a mediator, whether it be in Macedonia or the Philippines. It is hard to see it scaling back its options and action and agreeing to prior discussion with the EU. As far as the EU is concerned, it is currently preparing its new diplomatic corps and would find it difficult to reconcile some of Turkey's action and views within it. If one believes in the EU making slow and steady progress towards a common foreign policy, then the involvement of the new Turkey would be a handicap, and the EU rules would act as a brake on Turkey's new dynamism.
Assessing the constraints. Over and above foreign policy issues, Turkey should also make a careful assessment of the constraints it would be subject to if it were to become an EU member state. During the European Parliament's examination of pre-accession aid to Turkey, severe criticisms were voiced that echoed criticisms made by the European Court of Auditors. Ms Holhmeier commented that if any other country had been subject to so much criticism, EU aid would have been suspended while waiting to see how the money would actually be used. Mr Pieper said people shouldn't turn a blind eye because it's Turkey, but instead should take account of other developments and changes, not just accession. People argue that Turkey is geographically very important for the EU's supplies of oil and natural gas. That is a fact, but a country does not have to be a member state to play such a role. Look at Norway, Algeria, Russia and other countries. I have not even mentioned Turkey's shortcomings over minority rights, freedom of the press, religious freedom and so on because the situation is in flux, but the constraints are legion.
I believe that taken together, the above aspects mean that insisting on Turkey joining the EU would be a mistake for both sides because it would end as a fiasco (it would necessarily require a referendum and it is not certain that the results would be positive in all member states). The EU would become imbalanced in terms of its budget and institutions, because Turkey would have more weight in the Council of Ministers than any other member state, and more MEPs at the European Parliament than any other country. From Turkey's viewpoint, Turkey would lose its freedom of action and role as reconciliatory force between the East and West, while strengthened partnership with the EU would provide unlimited prospects.
(F.R./transl.fl)