Media Monitors, USA
Jan 14 2005

Humiliating EU deal offers little to Turkey
by M A Shaikh

“…while the French and the Austrians, as well as others, are
virtually certain to block Turkish membership, they are not at all
hostile to the prospect of, say, Romania or Bulgaria joining,
although, as Ankara points out, these countries are even poorer than
Turkey. Their accession talks are in full swing, and they are not
subject to humiliating or obstructive objections or conditions.”

The deal recently negotiated by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish
prime minister, in Brussels on his country’s longstanding quest for
membership of the European Union is, by general agreement, unfair and
humiliating, and by no means indicates – let alone guaranteeing –
that Turkey will eventually be allowed to become a member of the EU.
All it secures for Turkey is accession talks beginning on October 3,
which could last for a decade or more- with even more humiliating
conditions attached – and still fail to lead to admission into the
EU. Yet Erdogan, whose government is often described in the West as
`Islamic-leaning’, is determined to sell this compromising and
controversial arrangement to his own sceptical people -even to the
extent of arguing publicly that they should do much more than they
have already done to prove that their country is fit to be admitted
to the EU. But despite the fact that a large number of Turks are keen
to see their country join the Union and will support his conciliatory
– some would say submissive – style, the prime minister will find it
difficult to take the majority on board.

So much has been written and broadcast on the deal struck in Brussels
on December 17 that its provisions are familiar to all Turks and most
Muslims elsewhere, and need not be repeated here in detail.
Basically, an agreement was reached to commence accession talks on
October 3, with the understanding that talks will only start once
Turkey has signed an association agreement with all EU members,
including Greek Cyprus. A much stronger demand, calling for the
diplomatic recognition of the island, was rejected by Erdogan, who
threatened to walk out of the summit. This demand was based on the
contention that Ankara could not be invited to accession talks when
it did not recognise members of the organisation it wants to join.
Greek Cyprus was admitted to the EU on May 1 last year, despite the
fact that a UN project for reuniting the Greek and Turkish parts of
the divided island was on the table at the time.

The Turkish Cypriots had accepted the UN plan; the Greek Cypriots had
rejected it. By admitting the Greek part, the EU sabotaged the UN
project; while dropping its attempt to force Ankara to recognise
Greek Cyprus directly, it seems to have succeeded in forcing it to do
so indirectly. A direct recognition would have turned the Turkish
army’s presence in Northern Cyprus into that of an occupier. It was
not, therefore, surprising that Erdogan – and the chief of the
Turkish armed forces – objected strongly to it.

But the mere acceptance of the condition that accession talks will
not begin until Ankara signs a trade-agreement with the Greek
Cypriots means that the basis of an eventual recognition has been
laid. Moreover, the fact that the EU can make the start of accession
talks conditional on such a demand, and get away with it, means that
it can make further demands – such as Ankara’s agreement that the
killing of Armenians by the Ottomans amounted to `genocide’. On
December 19, for instance, Tassos Papadopoulos, the ruler of Greek
Cyprus, repeated his warning that Turkey’s EU accession is not
guaranteed, and that Cyprus would not support it unless Ankara
recognised his government. The prospect of Turkey joining the EU was
also treated with caution by much of the European media, and
opponents – led by Nicolas Sarkozy, head of the governing UMP party
in France – continue to express reservations.

Sarkozy told French television: `Europe already has difficulty
functioning with 25 members. The more members Europe has, the less we
will be integrated, the less we will share common values and the more
fragile we will be.’ Sarkozy is said to be more hostile to admitting
Turkey than Jacques Chirac, the French president, who is on record as
having said that he is in favour of Turkey’s membership.

Interestingly, it was Chirac who began to lay down the most effective
basis for rejection of membership when he announced that he would put
French acceptance to a referendum. He must know full well that most
French voters will reject it without any hesitation, given the
opportunity. Austria, another EU member – whose population is as
hostile to Turkish membership as the French – has announced that any
decision to admit Turkey will be submitted to a referendum. According
to EU rules, every member-state has the right to veto the acceptance
of new members by referendum.

But while the French and the Austrians, as well as others, are
virtually certain to block Turkish membership, they are not at all
hostile to the prospect of, say, Romania or Bulgaria joining,
although, as Ankara points out, these countries are even poorer than
Turkey. Their accession talks are in full swing, and they are not
subject to humiliating or obstructive objections or conditions.

So it is not at all surprising that a cross-section of Turkish
society, including highly secular people and groups, have objected
strongly to the deal agreed by Erdogan, demanding, when he returned
to Ankara from Brussels, that he abandon it. The opposition parties
and Islamic groups were the most vocal in their criticism. Denis
Baykal, leader of the main opposition group, the Republican People’s
party, said that `this is not the EU we want’, perhaps hinting, like
other objectors, that he is willing to join a union that respects
Turkish culture, religion and dignity. Certainly there are many Turks
from ethnic and religious minorities, such as the Kurds and the Roman
Catholic Christians, who believe that joining a friendly EU as an
equal member can advance their interests.

Most Turks who want to join the EU, however, `want to be a part of
Europe, but with our honour and values intact,’ as a factory-worker
was quoted on December 18 in a London paper as saying. The mayor of a
Turkish town, described by the same paper as `an undiluted EU
enthusiast’, says that he is `hurt’ by the attitudes of Europeans
towards his country.

Erdogan should heed his people’s views and feelings, and stop
demeaning them and destroying their bargaining position. By siding
with them, he is likely to gain more than from ignoring them for the
sake of a process that is extremely unlikely to culminate in the end
he desires.