Y. SOYLEMEZ AKP’S LOSS OF APPETITE FOR THE EU

Turkish Daily News
September 18, 2006 Monday

It is now the "secret de Polishinelle" that even the tightlipped EU
bureaucrats cannot hide the public secret that Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) government
has lost much of its politically gastronomic choice, which was the
appetite of a "gourmet" only three years ago. There is no denying that
the AKP had previously put the EU question as a first priority goal
in their foreign policy agenda, a pivotal item of declared essence
that is now on a slow fire, to say nothing of the back burner.

The reasons why and how the AKP government has regressed since last
October with no visible implementation or action are quite a few.

Primarily, the European Court of Human Rights headscarf decision
no doubt cast a severe blow to the AKP’s main goal in attaining EU
membership. This was more than a disappointment that backfired. The
EU refused to be used as an instrument against secularist principles.

Secondly, the EU kept on forcing the Cyprus issue as a means of
permanent political pressure over the AKP government, knowing full
well that it was too much too bear for the Erdogan government as no
concessions were possible on their part, or for any Turkish party or
government, for that matter. Thirdly, the important psychological
factor that "the EU does not want Turkey, so we don’t want the EU"
feeling in the body politic became widespread. As expected, support for
the EU has decreased from 78 percent to 54 percent in the time since
Turkey’s candidature was approved and a semblance of negotiations in
the form of the Screening Process started and completed.

In spite of some positive and encouraging statements about the way
the screening process is going on the technical level, the loss of
appetite for the process has been obvious. Those involved in the
process while comparing notes about the acquis were in no way ready
to bind themselves on any issue regarding the future membership. Ali
Babacan, the chief negotiator for Turkey’s EU accession talks was
conspicuous by his absence from Brussels, by not being present at
the scene of activity and decision to canvas and to socialize. This
was naturally interpreted as a tactical display of a lack of interest
and a message that a non-committal attitude had prevailed.

This declining interest, which started at the end of last year,
seems to be of critical importance for Turkey-EU relations. The
process of negotiations may well go off the rails, causing a much
feared "train crash" which is a catastrophic eventuality, mainly due
to the impasse over the Cyprus problem. Ever since Turkey signed the
Additional Protocol last year the EU has been blunt on insisting that
by signing the Additional Protocol Turkey promised to open sea and air
ports to Greek Cyprus and that promise must be kept. That protocol,
though signed on behalf of Turkey, has not yet been submitted to the
Turkish Parliament for ratification, a legal necessity before it can
be adopted. The EU professes to understand Turkey’s predicament and
the fairness of quid pro quo that before this can be done, first and
foremost the isolation of the KKTC must be ended, but the EU is at
the same time unwilling to apply any pressure that this isolation be
ended. Thus there is a dialogue of the deaf but not the dumb. This
all means that the EU and Turkey are about to arrive at a dangerous
juncture in a relationship into which both are locked.

The EU’s Candidate Countries Director-General Pierre Mirel, in a
recent interview with Kriter magazine, analyzed the situation thus,
and I agree with him: "It cannot be denied that there is an impression
that Turkey has lost its excitement, or urge, for the EU.

Turkey does not seem to understand the importance of the Oct. 3,
2005 decision taken under very difficult conditions, in a political
environment that was against the enlargement of the EU. It is very
disappointing to see disinterest rather than an appreciating stand."

He added that "Turkey seems to be behaving not as a future partner
but as an opposing party." Indeed an example of this attitude can be
seen in the prime minister’s negative remarks vis-a-vis suspension of
negotiations over the past few months. What now seems a possibility is
that the Free Circulation of Goods, Customs Union and Transportation
chapter may not be opened but instead frozen because of the Cyprus
"Sword of Damocles" during September. This may even be followed at
the beginning of 2007 by suspension of negotiations between Turkey
and the EU.

Dutch rapporteur Camiel Eurlings’ Turkey report will be discussed
in the European Parliament around Sept. 25-28. It is an ice cold
shower for Turkey quite apart from the Cyprus issue. There are 343
motions in the report on matters like women’s rights, the Armenian,
Pontus and Syriac "genocides," recognition of the rights of Turkish
Alawis and Yezidi minority rights, headscarves should be permitted in
universities (in spite of the Strasbourg ruling), the reopening of the
Greek Orthodox seminary on Heybeliada, as promised a few years ago,
withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus, in addition to the opening
of Turkish Cypriot ports to Greek Cypriots. The report itself is
somewhat self-contradictory, in that the Armenian issue was added at
the last moment, as Eurlings confessed, although it is not something
new in that the European Parliament had already adopted an Armenian
genocide claim in 1987) saying that recognition of genocide should not
be made part of the criteria or preconditions for Turkey’s membership,
but those words of his are not reflected or contained in the report,
which is all the more surprising in view of the fact that Eurlings
is from Holland, 55 percent of whose population supports Turkey’s
candidature while Turkey’s support for its own membership according
to an opinion poll in July 2006 has fallen to 54 percent.

Although Eurlings says that he "wants Turkey’s membership to the EU
with all his heart and mind as an important alternative for Turkey"
his report does not reflect any positive thinking. Even so, his
report must be taken seriously because it reflects the general lack
of interest in Turkey’s membership not only by Turkey but by the
major political groups in the EU Parliament. Sadly, such a negative
report that has been described in the Western media variously as a
warning or even a slap, will not be conducive to more cooperation
but rather help further estrangement and lack of trust for the future
between Turkey and the European Union. This report is a wake up call
heralding a serious crisis that can either lead to a calamity or in
the famous words of Laurens Van der Post instead be an opportunity
for both sides to use the sword of Alexander to cut the Gordion Knot.