Monday Morning, Lebanon
Dec 27 2004

Turkey’s EU bid: The long road ahead

Turkey has finally been given a date — October 3, 2005 — on which
it can begin negotiations that may in the fullness of time lead to
membership of the European Union. There has been dissent from this
decision from various quarters, notably in France and Austria, not to
mention Armenia, who complain of an attempt to `manufacture’ an
`artificial’ link to bind a Middle Eastern country to what Goethe
called `the Old Continent’.

The process of negotiations that is scheduled to start in October
2005 would take at least a decade before Ankara could be admitted.
Many details remain to be settled, including the issues of Cyprus,
human rights and legal reform. And the Turkish government, now led by
a government dominated by a moderate Islamic party, has to show how
deep the roots are of the secular tradition established by Kemal
Ataturk in the 1920s and `30s.
At the European Union summit, the Turkish prime minister, Recep
Tayyip Erdogan, said the possibility of EU membership was for Turkey
a promise of greater prosperity and influence in the Islamic world.
Addressing his people after coming back from Brussels, he said,
`There will no longer be interruptions, interim periods [of military
rule] and interventions, because there will be no need for them’. He
added that `Turkey is no longer a country that will progress for five
years, stall for 20 years, fight for three years. Stability has
come’.
These words were very expressive and show how very decisive Turks
consider EU membership to be for their future.
The other option for Ankara is to seek another regional gathering in
the Middle East, which is poorer and less stable from a strategic
angle. Joining the EU is a guarantee for the coming generations but
achieving it will be an immense task and challenge for the present
generation, which will have to mould the country into conformity with
EU standard, including thousands of pages of directives on almost
every imaginable subject.

A European country?
This is the principal question that many Europeans are asking. If we
look at the map, the European part of Turkey is very small,
comprising only about five percent of the country’s land mass.
Ninety-five percent of Turkey is `Asia Minor’. And joining the EU
will bring millions of Muslims into the European entity, where
Christianity has been the main source of morals and laws, despite the
secular character of many institutions. This point was brought to the
surface during discussions of the draft EU constitution. A big debate
took place whether the document’s preamble should mention the
Christian roots and values on which Europe’s civilization is based.
It is not a technical issue only as it seems to be when examining it
from above. Deep inside it is a cultural debate between separate
civilization, different traditions and practices. The Europeans are
afraid of the slow change taking place in their identity and culture.
This point has been clear when dealing with the immigration issue
bringing immigrants from North Africa to Southern Europe. Radical
anti-foreign parties are winning more and more seats in European
national parliaments simply because of a fear that Europe’s face is
being altered. This debate is another aspect of the `clash of
civilizations’ which, right-wing American commentators would have us
believe, is now going on between the Islamic world and the `coalition
of the willing’ led by the United States.
In this regard Ankara has to prove how European it is, and how stable
and capable it is of defending its secular tradition to alay all
these fears. A decade or fifteen years devoted to discussing these
questions may be enough to provide answers.

The role of the generals
Turkish generals have long held considerable sway over the country’s
elected politicians, staging three outright coups since 1960 and
forcing a fourth government, led by an Islamist party, to resign in
1997. But recent reforms aimed at meeting EU political criteria to
start negotiations have reined in the power of the military, which
sees itself as the guarantor of Turkey’s secular state.
Financial markets are finely tuned to any sign of friction between
the army and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), a
moderate party viewed with suspicion by much of the secularist
establishment for its roots in a banned Islamist movement.
The generals themselves are in a paradoxical position: welcoming the
EU as a bolster to secularism in Turkey but seeing their own power
eroded in the process.
Another item of discussion is that of human rights. Brussels expects
a major improvement in Turkey’s record in this respect, including
full rights for non-Muslim minorities — including the use of the
Kurdish language –, women, and the eradication of torture. The EU,
the national parliaments and a legion of non-governmental bodies will
demand concrete proof of improvements on these points.

The Cypriot nettle
Ankara has a clear vision regarding the problematic issues mentioned
above, but its main complex is the Cypriot nettle. The sensitive
issue of recognizing the internationally-accepted Cyprus government,
a full EU member since May 2004, could prove a stumbling block for
Turkey. even before it starts negotiations. Even before talks can
even start next October, Turkey will have to take the difficult step
of acknowledging the Greek Cypriot government in Nicosia, something
it has said it can only do when a settlement for the divided island
is reached.
Ankara pledged last week that it would sign a protocol extending its
EU association agreement to the bloc’s 10 new members, including
Cyprus, before its EU accession negotiations are due to start on
October 3, 2005. But it insisted this was not tantamount to direct or
indirect recognition of the Greek Cypriot government in Nicosia. This
point promises many complications because Nicosia would not accept
any deviation in the general line aimed at securing recognition of
its independence. To provide a new impetus, UN Secretary-General Kofi
Annan offered his mediation to renew the bilateral talks that failed
months ago intended to reunify the island. The European Union urged
all sides in the Cyprus dispute to take up this offer. But Ankara
still needs time to decide what course to take.
Assuming this hurdle is passed, the negotiations will oblige Turkey
to make reforms more costly and far-reaching than those required by
other `clubs’ such as NATO or the United Nations. Turkish industry,
at present a strong backer of EU entry, will have to make expensive
upgrades of its machinery to comply with EU standards on health,
safety and the environment. One of the big challenges will be in
revamping an economy still recovering from the crisis of three years
ago, and whose reputation for corruption and red tape still scares
off many much-needed foreign investors.
Turkey adherence to the EU would change a great deal in the Middle
Eastern equation. And if Israel were to succeed in presenting its
candidacy for EU membership, it could be a slap in the face for the
Arab countries, split between various groups and interests. It would
be a `wake-up call’ to the Arabs regarding the need for them to form
strong alliances to keep their strength in the world of
globalization.