KAREL DE GUCHT FOLLOWING EU’S DECISION ON TURKEY IN LUXEMBOURG

De Standaard , The Netherlands (Translated from Dutch)
Oct 6 2005

Barroso-led commission’s leadership role insufficient

We would have looked ridiculous had we not started negotiations
with Turkey. Turkey must now make a major effort, as must the EU,
for that matter. And the [Jose Manuel] Barroso-led commission must
show more dynamism. It is not playing its leadership role.

Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht (VLD [Flemish Liberal
Democrats]) is known to be a fervent advocate of Turkey’s EU
adhesion. He thoroughly dislikes the concept of Europe as an
exclusively-Christian club. In his opinion, invoking this argument
as a basis for discussions means putting back the clock. So he is not
upset by critics of the decision reached by the EU foreign ministers
last Monday [3 October] evening, nor by former Belgian EU Commissioner
[Karel] Van Miert’s assertion that the “EU is being torn down from
within”.

[De Gucht] The EU being torn down? Imagine we said “No”. What
reactions would that have elicited? Would it have increased the EU’s
credibility in the eyes of the public? No. Newspapers would have
facetiously remarked that the EU had come another cropper, the third
this year, after the Constitution and the multi-year budget. Would it
have increased the EU’s credibility in the eyes of other major world
players? The EU held out the prospect of membership to Turkey 40 years
ago. In Helsinki, and also last year, we confirmed that Turkey would
be allowed to join the EU and that negotiations would start when all
preliminary conditions were met. The Turkish government has done all
it was supposed to do. So there was no alternative. This issue was
not only closely monitored by the United States but we would also
have lost all credibility in the eyes of China and Russia.

[Reporter] Yet initial promises to Turkey were made in an entirely
different context than the current one. We were still in the middle
of the Cold War and Ankara was an important player. Now this is no
longer the case.

[De Gucht] I agree but Turkey has made much progress. Just look at what
the Ankara government has managed to do in recent years in anticipation
of the membership talks. It was simply our moral duty to give them
this opportunity. And one should not underestimate what they still
need to do before being allowed to join. I have the impression we do
not fully realize what the Kurdish question means to them. The PKK’s
[Kurdish Workers’ Party] hands are stained with blood, with a lot of
blood. The Armenian genocide has been completely wiped from their
collective memory. It is not so simple for the Turkish government
to recognize this genocide just because we are now demanding it does
so. And the Cold War context may have disappeared but this does not
mean that Turkey’s strategic location has changed.

Muslim terrorism has now taken the place of the Cold War. Turkey is
located near the world’s largest energy reserves. I think we really
are underestimating all these factors.

[Reporter] However, Ankara’s obstinate refusal to recognize Cyprus
has not made things any easier for the EU.

[De Gucht] I have no problem at all with the fact that this has not
yet been done. It is impossible for Turkey to recognize Cyprus at this
moment in time because there is no international peace agreement which
has been accepted by both parties. I would prefer recognition to take
place within the context of a new UN plan, some sort of Anan-bis,
because some aspects of the first plan, which did not survive the
referendum, need to be amended.

For instance, I think the Turkish army should immediately leave
northern Cyprus. The Anan plan did not provide for this demand.

Moreover, we should not attribute too much weight to the recognition
issue. There is still time and it will have to take place before
accession anyway. So many former arch-enemies are currently already
sitting at the EU table. One of the EU’s main reasons for existence
is to eradicate rivalries.

[Reporter] Yet the question remains as to whether the EU will be able
to absorb all these enlargements. It may still need some more time to
digest the arrival of the 10 new member states. The institutions have
not even been reformed and it has already embarked on negotiations
with Turkey. Do you understand those who are genuinely concerned
about the EU’s political integration problems?

[De Gucht] Yes, I understand them. It is a pity that the Constitution
has been put on the back burner. But for this we cannot blame Turkey –

[Reporter] – which, for instance, declined to bring some of its
foreign policies in line with those of the EU and which refused to
accept Cyprus’s membership, not only of the EU but also of other
international organizations.

[De Gucht] Countries other than Turkey also find it hard to accept
common foreign policies. Is France so much more flexible than Turkey in
this regard? And the United Kingdom? Moreover, replacing the unanimity
rule by qualified majority voting is becoming less important in the
context of the enlarged EU.

This became clear in Luxembourg. Imagine Austria had stuck to its
position in a six-member union. Paradoxically enough, this would
have been easier than in the current context. It did not stand any
chance in a context of one against 24. This does not mean, however,
that I think no more reforms are needed to reinvigorate the EU.

[Reporter] Which reforms?

[De Gucht] I think we need to return to the philosophy of [EU founding
father] Jean Monnet – take specific steps. I think, for instance, we
need to focus on the single currency and further social and economic
integration in the euro zone. This, in turn, will make the EU more
attractive. We need to step up economic coordination.

Much work still needs to be done in the field of taxation. The issue
of taxes on savings has shown the importance of this matter. In Europe,
we also need to agree on a single tax base for companies.

Or we could strive for a shift from direct taxes to indirect taxes,
such as value-added taxes. This would reduce charges on labour and
breathe new life into the economy but it is something that needs
to be done collectively. Countries which are still hesitating about
proceeding with the further development of Europe will then have to
make a choice.

[Reporter] Who will have the courage to take such an initiative? The
EU currently finds itself in a deep impasse.

[De Gucht] The referendums in France and the Netherlands have
indeed dealt an uppercut to the EU as a whole. That is why Europe
at present needs a determined leadership. The current leadership is
not determined enough. The commission should play its role but the
Barroso-led commission is not doing this to a sufficient extent.

According to the treaty, however, one of its duties is to provide