US should be ready to fill the void on Turkey
By Marc Grossman
FT
September 15 2005 20:20
Most Americans believe that a strong Europe, politically united and
militarily capable of helping to meet the century’s new security
threats, is in America’s interest.
Americans are also convinced that one of the European Union’s most
remarkable accomplishments has been its long-term strategy to spread
democracy and prosperity to Europe’s east and south through
expansion. This is especially true of Turkey: its desire to join the
Union has been a profound incentive for positive change.
But how should we judge from across the Atlantic the signals that
French and Dutch voters, French and German politicians and some EU
leaders have recently sent to Turkey? From the US perspective, it
looks like Europe’s  – strategy to encourage Turkey to strengthen
its democracy by remaining committed to eventual Turkish membership
may be losing political support. If this is true ` and Americans
should hope that it is not and that Tony Blair, UK prime minister,
will keep the EU focused on Turkey in light of the deal negotiated
with France to start  – Turkey’s accession talks on October 3 `
the US should think now about what it might do if Europeans miss their
historic opportunity.
The last three US administrations have promoted the advantages of
Turkish EU membership and that should remain America’s goal. Why has
the US put such effort into this? There are several reasons.
First, because Turkey has already taken significant steps ` such as
 – loosening the government’s grip on the political system,
improving relations with Greece and freeing its economy ` in pursuit
of EU membership. Second, because Turkey in an EU embrace is a beacon
for others aspiring to democracy and economic success. And third,
because the EU’s own future success depends on shedding the image of a
`Christian club’.
Americans applauded the EU’s  – decision last year to open
membership negotiations with Turkey on October 3. But since then,
disappointments have dominated. Europeans should appreciate the
enormous changes they have sparked in Turkey by keeping alive not a
`privileged partnership’, but the prospect of EU membership. Turks, in
turn, should be confident of their successes in political and economic
transformation and not be grudging about further reforms.
Failure to keep Turkey moving west would discredit those Turkish
leaders who took risks for change; change that Europeans and Americans
supported. Implementing these reforms will get harder, and an
embittered and perhaps more radical Turkey would be a defeat for
Europe and America. In a world where there is debate about whether it
is possible to be democratic, secular and Muslim, we must pay
attention to a country that is trying to answer `Yes!’.
If the EU falters, what should a US administration do to recover the
strategic initiative? First, America should do the work necessary to
get the leaders and members of the anti-Turkish extremist group, the
PKK/Kadek, out of northern Iraq and on their way to face justice,
either in Iraq or in Turkey. The US should take this action now,
whatever happens between the EU and Turkey. Without some American or
Iraqi action soon, it will be hard to dissuade Turkey from unilateral
intervention in northern Iraq, especially after the July terror
attacks on Turkish cities.
Second, the US administration should be ready with a US-Turkey free
trade agreement. The US cannot  – substitute dollar-for-euro the
foreign capital that would flow to Turkey as a full EU member, but
such a trade agreement would encourage more US trade and investment
while promoting market freedom and economic success in Turkey.
Third, the US administration needs to develop a new agenda for the
US-Turkish military relationship to bury the argument about Iraq. Some
in the Pentagon cannot forgive Turkey for denying access to northern
Iraq before the war. But it is time to move the focus to protecting
America’s larger interests.
At the same time, Turkey needs the new Iraq to succeed and must do all
it can to help. And Turks need to recognise that their strategic
relationship with America, which includes supporting a strong Nato
alliance, must be a two-way street, including more flexibility for US
forces in Turkey.
Turks have other work to do, either to ensure that the EU negotiations
remain on track or, in the event that talks do not start or that they
fail, that America is a closer partner to Turkey. For example, Turkey
should meet its responsibilities to solve the Cyprus problem,
highlight religious freedom and tolerance by re-opening the Greek
Orthodox Halki Seminary in Istanbul, allow the free flow of people and
goods across the land border with Armenia, declare zero tolerance for
anti-Semitism and implement enacted reforms. And, as Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, Turkish prime minister, did in Washington in June, Turks
should speak out to support the US-Turkish relationship.
Both the former and current presidents Bush as well as Bill  –
Clinton have been right: the EU should continue to expand and Turkey
should some day be a member of that larger body. This remains by far
the best  – outcome for Turkey, for Europe and for the US.
Americans can hope that European leaders will make the public case
that a Turkey inside the EU is better for Europe than a Turkey
outside. It is surely too early to write the end of this story. But if
the EU misses this chance to change the balance of success in its own
neighbourhood, America should be ready to fill the void.
The writer, vice-chairman of the Cohen Group, retired in 2005 from the
US State department, where he served as under-secretary of state for
political affairs. He was US ambassador to Turkey 1994-97