EUobserver.com, Belgium
Sept 30 2005
[Comment] Why we should delay opening accession negotiations with
Turkey
30.09.2005 – 11:02 CET | By Peter Sain ley Berry EUOBSERVER / COMMENT
– The British Presidency, we are told, has been working very hard to
ensure that the negotiations to allow Turkey to accede to the
European Union will begin, as scheduled, on 3rd October – that is
next week. They may indeed begin. Or on the other hand they may not.
If they begin they may be broken off, perhaps indefinitely. If they
are postponed now they may never start. The situation is not a happy
state of affairs for anybody. This may be the 21st century but
diplomacy remains an artisanal craft.
The immediate reason why the talks may not commence is that Austria
is reportedly still not happy with the UK Presidency’s negotiating
framework. The only intended outcome this envisages is full EU
membership for Turkey. Austria would prefer to see reference to a
‘privileged partnership,’ as an alternative. Turkey has countered by
indicating that it would not enter negotiations on this basis.
Regardless of this there are at least seven other good reasons why
the talks should not commence next Monday, despite that being the
desire of the British Presidency, the European Commission, the
European Parliament, at least 23 of the EU’s 25 member states and, of
course, Turkey itself. These reasons, moreover, have nothing to do
with the merits, or otherwise, of Turkey’s case for Union membership
sometime around 2015. Nor do they have anything to do with Turkey
being predominantly poor, predominantly Muslim or predominantly in
Asia.
EU cannot negotiate honestly
The first is that the Turkish negotiations are already in a big hole
before they have even started. And the first thing you should do when
you are in a hole is to stop digging, or as the early pilots were
instructed should they find themselves in a tailspin: ‘centre all
controls and pray like hell.’ Pursuing the negotiations now is likely
to harm both parties: both Turkey’s prospect of eventual membership
and Europe’s own necessary constitutional reform process.
The second reason to postpone the talks is that the EU is simply not
in a position itself to negotiate honestly with Turkey at this time.
It is currently deeply divided on Turkish membership. There is major
– if not majority – opposition in all the EU’s institutions and in
national parliaments. A substantial part of the European Parliament
is opposed, as are an even wider section of the European electorate.
This absence of full-hearted consent will hamper the negotiations.
The persistence of such a split will damage coherence within the EU,
making constitutional and economic reforms far more difficult to
achieve.
This split in European opinion can be attributed to several factors –
several of which can be addressed. If they are – and Turkey does
certain things and Europe does others – public opinion may well
become more favourable.
Not recognising Cyprus is ridiculous
It is ridiculous, for instance, that Turkey does not currently
recognise one of the states of the Union it is seeking to join. As
its delegates sit down to negotiate Turkey will still be banning
certain EU ships and aircraft (namely those from Cyprus) from its
ports and airports.
It is also ridiculous that Turkey should be still prosecuting
writers, like the respected novelist Orhan Pamuk, for expressing
non-violent opinions and that it should keep active on the statute
book laws that make it a crime to ‘denigrate Turkish identity.’ This
is the third reason why talks should not start now. Turkey should
address such fundamental un-Europeanism before embarking on accession
negotiations: not during those negotiations.
But Europe also needs to do certain things if it is to bring its own
citizens ‘on-side.’
It needs to have, for instance, an overall enlargement policy – not
just for Turkey, but for the Ukraine, for the Balkans, for the
Caucasus states, for Belarus and Moldova. How large should the Union
become? How should it be managed at that size? How financed? In other
words, where are we going? Many, especially in France and the
Netherlands, would like to know.
EU needs overall enlargement policy
Until we ourselves have formed an opinion on these matters how can we
negotiate with Turkey? That is the fourth reason for delay. We need
to be able to fit Turkey into a wider enlargement framework before we
open talks.
Part of this framework would be the institutions we might need to
manage an expanded Europe. The late lamented European constitutional
treaty proposed institutional change to accommodate 25 member states,
not 35. In any case it was rejected and we are left with the existing
‘stretched’ version of a system designed for 15. We can’t honestly
embark on discussions about further European enlargement before we
put our own constitutional house in order – for what is adding new
member states but changing the fundamental nature of the Union? This
is the fifth reason why the accession talks should not begin now.
Then we have the problem of Northern Cyprus. Of course, with
hindsight, we should not have allowed Cyprus to join the Union before
reunification of the island. The Turkish Cypriots loyally voted for
the UN backed reunification settlement. The Greek Cypriots, knowing
they had nothing to lose, did not. The result is an unresolved mess
and a state of bitterness and non-recognition between Turkey and the
Cypriot government. This festering sore needs to be healed before the
Turkish accession talks commence. This is the sixth reason to delay.
A seventh reason is the events – I don’t want to be prejudicial – of
1915. So many Turkish diplomats have been killed and still are killed
by those who hold them, even today, responsible for tragedies that
occurred ninety years before, that this is also unfinished business
that risks clouding a new political future. What happened to Turkey’s
Armenian population – and to indigenous Turks in Turkish Armenia –
should, three generations later, surely be a matter for independent
historians. That also requires action by Turkey, but not only by
Turkey.
Turkey’s hinterland
These then are the reasons for delay. But postponing the talks by a
few years need not delay eventual Turkish accession. Both sides have
problems to sort out. Once these are resolved, the accession
negotiations will proceed more speedily and still could conclude by
2015.
In the meanwhile, Turkey and the EU should talk about the economic,
military and political future of the eastern Mediterranean and its
large hinterland. Turkey is not an island: it is rather the centre of
a region, one of the reasons that a hundred years ago it had a large
empire. The future of the region as a whole should not be divorced
from Turkey’s bid for EU membership. And that provides yet another
reason, if one were needed, for not rushing into talks which, on
present omens, look destined to end in tears. The enemy of diplomacy
is rush. ‘N’ayez pas trop de zèle,’ as Talleyrand used to say.
The author is editor of EuropaWorld