COLD ON TURKEY
By MARTTI AHTISAARI
New York Times
Sept 10 2009
STOCKHOLM — Turkey’s aspiration to join the European Union motivated
it to make a series of remarkable transformations between 2000
and 2005.
Ankara amended a third of the country’s authoritarian Constitution. Its
legislators enacted human rights laws in line with international
standards. It abolished the death penalty. It provided greater legal
protections for women. It introduced new safeguards against torture
and reformed the penal system. It scrapped draconian restrictions on
freedom of expression, association and the media.
The Turkish armed forces have stepped further back from the dominant
role they had played in the country’s political life since the time of
its founding father, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Turkish-Kurdish tensions
have eased. Turks have begun to debate the Armenian question openly.
Turkey has also made significant positive input as a regional power,
contributing troops for international peacekeeping missions and
supporting talks to settle the Cyprus conflict in 2004. Let us also
not forget the significant cooling of animosities between Greece
and Turkey.
Yet despite so promising a start, the process of Turkey’s accession to
the E.U. has lost significant momentum since 2005. Negative statements
and actions by E.U. leaders have played a key role in discouraging
Turkey. These have undermined Ankara’s will to reform and have fueled
resentment. Popular support in Turkey for E.U. membership continues to
wane. Frustrated leaders in Turkey lament that the E.U. would reject
Turkey’s accession even if Ankara implements all the prerequisite
reforms and meets all other preconditions.
Europe’s wavering on Turkey’s E.U. accession is jeopardizing the
E.U.’s credibility and threatening to tarnish its good image. How
can European leaders be trusted if they continue to go back on their
word, stalling, and perhaps scuttling, a process that began a decade
ago with so much promise, has produced so many positive effects,
and holds such potential for the future?
During my three decades in mediating conflicts around the globe,
I have learned that only rarely, perhaps once in a generation, do
the political planets align for dramatic solutions. (In the past few
years just such an alignment appeared over Northern Ireland.)
A promising alignment is now appearing over a land of key importance
for both the E.U. and Turkey: Cyprus. Ongoing talks between the
leaders of the island’s Greek and Turkish communities offer the best
and probably the last chance to avoid an indefinite partition of the
island. A settlement on Cyprus — something that both Turkey and the
E.U. can contribute to achieving — would breathe new life into the
accession negotiations between Turkey and the E.U. and hasten the
day when both sides can gain full advantage from each other.
Strengthening the relationship between Turkey and the E.U. through
accession negotiations offers a clear opportunity to serve the E.U.’s
interests in energy security and to bolster stability both in the
Middle East and the South Caucasus.
If Turkey were to meet the remaining requirements for membership, the
country would enjoy a more open society. It would be more comfortable
in its own diversity. It would demonstrate that Islam and democracy
are fully compatible. Such a Turkey would be a beacon to East and West
alike. Its integration would help galvanize the E.U. to embrace its own
diversity and enhance its position in the world as a trusted partner.
On a cold Helsinki day in December 1999, E.U. leaders declared Turkey
to be "a candidate state destined to join the Union on the basis of
the same criteria as applied to the other candidate states." Today,
almost 10 years later, Turkey’s destiny seems far less certain.
What is at stake is not just Turkey’s future, but also the credibility
of the European Union as an honest broker.
Martti Ahtisaari, a former president of Finland and Nobel Peace Prize
laureate in 2008, is chairman of the Independent Commission on Turkey.