Split Turkey up? Let's dream a minute. Relations with Turkey are so important for Europe, and the history and geography between the two are so intertwined (starting with Byzantium, which then became Constantinople and is now Istanbul) that a modus vivendi is definitely needed. In times gone by, this intertwined connection resulted in conflicts at sea and on land, and in reciprocal invasions - with the Turks reaching right up to the gates of Vienna. Today, it's fortunately the path of peace which dictates. Turkey has moved its capital from Istanbul to Ankara - which is situated right in the middle of Asia. This is significant. The political, geographical and religious developments of this large country have led to a split between the Asian part and the area of Istanbul, and the authorities are working on a new constitution that will abandon the secular nature of the country (secularism brought in by Atatürk) in order to give Turkey a soul which is expressly religious The large majority of the population supports this approach - the elections have proved it for years and will confirm it next year. What Turkey wants must be respected.
Yet the area of Istanbul is specific - opinion polls conducted there, reports and television show a radical difference in aspirations and mentality in relation to the Asian part. Some behaviour and choices made by the central authorities are only imposed by strength. The difference is not limited to the urban projects that are contested, but involves attitudes, aspirations and way of life.
Two autonomous parts. The solution could be found in the autonomy of each of the two parts of the country. The Asian part - which is very extensive with its Mediterranean shores - should accept the autonomy of the region of Istanbul, which would have the right - if it wanted it - of becoming a member of the European Union. Its history would justify this. When Istanbul was called Constantinople, it was the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire - before the Ottomans conquered it in 1453 with Sultan Mehmed II.
What I have just written will doubtless be considered absurd by my readers because the Turkey of Ankara will never accept a development of this kind. My answer is in the words at the beginning of this column - let's dream a minute. Dreams, by definition, are not reality. Yet it can happen that one day they become so.
The real situation. Let's come back to reality. The EU ministers responsible for the negotiations with Turkey have agreed in principle to open the chapter on regional policy and the Turkish minister for foreign affairs, Ahmet Davutoglu, is delighted about this (see EUROPE 10874). We can understand him too - Ankara would have much to gain from participating in this European policy. Yet we can also understand that some member states (especially Germany, the Netherlands and Austria) have not hidden the fact that they would have preferred the chapter on the respect of fundamental rights and freedom to be negotiated first - implying that the government of Ankara would sign up to clear and firm commitments in this domain. These three member states managed to obtain, however, that the negotiation on regional policy will be preceded by the European Commission's progress report (due out in October), which will assess the state of the negotiations, and that the regional policy negotiation will be subject to the approval of the foreign affairs ministers. In other words, Germany, the Netherlands and Austria managed to obtain several months' respite and a decision that is to be confirmed.
Within the European Parliament the misgivings are evident. The rapporteur, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, confirmed that the priority of the negotiations should come back to fundamental rights and freedom, which would then be the chapter to open, while Rachida Dati stated: “Turkey is not European and has no vocation to be a member of the EU”. Other voices were more conciliatory: “If Turkey does not renounce its secularism, the doors are still open”. Yet we know that the new constitution will eliminate the secularism from the denomination of the country, affirming its Muslim nature.
Crucial cooperation. Most European authorities and member states are, of course, aware that Turkey will never be a member of the EU. Any accession is decided by unanimity, and France, for example, has been opposed to Turkey's accession right from the very beginning. In the two-speed Europe that is becoming established, Turkey - an Asian country - would dominate the part of the EU outside the eurozone because of its size, its voting rights and its number of MEPs. This comment should suffice to rule Turkey's accession out. It's just tactical reasons and others that are keeping the fiction of accession negotiations alive. The demands of the world of politics must be understood and respected. But I'm a journalist and I stress the need for an alternative solution, founded on cooperation - which is crucial - between the EU and Turkey.
(FR/transl.fl)