CYPRUS AS A FIG LEAF THAT COVERS EU’S OWN NUDITY
Ayca Turan
Journal of Turkish Daily
Sept 16 2005
Last year, I participated in an international youth convention
in a small town in France. Having “Europe and its Boundaries” as
its main theme, this ten-day lasting organization had also invited
guests from non-EU countries such as Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey,
thereby we, 3 Turkish student, had the opportunity to participate in
this organization. The aim of this convention was to create a free
discussion environment where all participants coming from different
countries, different cultures and therefore different political focuses
could express their opinions and listen to the antitheses on the
confirmed EU-related topics. Additional to the discussion sessions, the
games and other social activities helped the organization’s objective
to facilitate intercultural dialogue and reduce cultural prejudices.
Although I departed from France with tears and unforgettable memories,
being a Turkish participant made it be a very though experience for
me. Just by looking at the main theme of the convention, it could have
been guessed that the discussions would be focus on Turkey and his
possible integration to European Union. Even in other discussions,
the subject was inevitably come to Turkey and all participants took
up-right position and their attention rose.
Therefore we needed to be ready for further discussions about
Turkey anytime. After a few days, I got used to find myself in
harsh discussions in which I defended my opinions and Turkey’s
political perspective. Actually the problem was neither Turkey nor
Europe. The real problem was the old-fashioned and invalid Turkey
image in Europe. Therefore EU participants’ questions ended up one
single question: “We read your history, we are following papers and
consequently we know Turks and Turkey this way. But we also want
to listen to you, is this really you?”. The invalid image was so
confirmed that I was confronted with a participant asking me the
funny question “Don’t you Turks ride elephants and wear slippers in
your country?”. This kind of people knowing nothing true about Turkey
and Turkish people can be found everywhere and these people are so
attached to their opinions that it is almost impossible to change
their opinions. Yet, it was also an honor for us to hear “You are
really European” from the same person at the end of the convention,
we felt sorry for this ignoramus. It was said with good intentions,
yet this did not help his bigoted and xenophobic point of view.
Consequently, several feelings and opinions were flying in my head
while traveling to North France by train. I suppose that we, human
beings, could not develop our empathy skills very well. We have a very
small world view and a huge ego; therefore we could not understand
other cultures because of our prejudices.
Actually, the reason that I am sharing this memory with you is an
e-mail coming from The Convention Head whom I was glad to meet and
appreciate very much after all. He wrote “Here, everybody is talking
about Turkey and the coming October, 3rd” reflecting his care about
our country. He was curious about our opinions about the increasing
anti-Turkey arguments in Europe, especially in France. I took this
opportunity to express my opinions, my feelings and my expectations
before the coming historical day.
I could not witness the major part of the historical dialogue between
Turkey and European Union. Yet, as far as I could observe, it will not
be possible for Turkey to be well in EU integration for the following
years. I suppose that we have many years to live and many things to
do before the integration. It is inevitable to have a new case at the
time that we say “Ok. We are done!” However, the interesting thing
is the fact that I do not get depressed and disappointed at these
negative events just as I do not get excited and energized at the
happy news coming from EU.
Few days left before October 3rd, new topics arose. Our new topic
is EU-Turkey-Cyprus triangle. Actually, the problem is not Cyprus,
if our new topic were not Cyprus, it would be something else. What
really matters is the fact that EU needed to give something before
October, 3rd to be presented as the reason for the possible negative
outcome. It is nothing but the fig leaf that covers EU’s own nudity.
Essentially, there are two important questions needed to be answered
by EU before their temporizing policy of defining EU-Turkey relations
on a Cyprus platform: First of all “What kind of Europe that we are
willing to have?” Europe could not develop a serious decree on this
question. Second question to be answered is “Does Turkey belong to
Europe, or not? What are the boundaries of Europe?” The answer of
one question will facilitate finding the answer to the other question.
Although Luxembourg Summit in 1997 and EU’s giving candidate status to
Turkey in Helsinki Summit are named as a reply to the first question,
the increasing anti-Turkey campaigns enforced by some political
sectors in the EU-founder countries indicate the fact that past
decisions and past promises were not accepted by the politicians.
When we look at the European countries, anti-Turkey campaigns executed
by populist leaders, Merkel and Sarkozy, in Germany and France
draw attention. Merkel is as usual. We all know her vision about
EU-Turkey relations from the beginning. She is one of the politicians
that keeps on defending the exceptional partnership opinion about
“neither with nor without” Turkey. She just increased her frequency
of expressing this opinion before the September, 18 elections. We
appreciate her since she is a kind of leader that tells what she
really thinks about this case. On the other hand, the campaigns
in France executed by Chirac and vision lacking leaders such as
Villepin and Sarkozy are really disturbing. Rather, France’s recent
attitude is totally duplicity. Especially Chirac’s “We can not start
October, 3rd process until all EU countries are recognized by Turkey”
declaration is a very brave step for France. Yet when we look closer,
Cyprus is not the primal matter for France. It is just Turkey used by
the leaders in order to serve for their domestic policies that will
empower their political status just before the presidential elections.
I also want to add my opinions about “Does Turkey belong to Europe?”
discussions. Although Europe puts Cyprus at the center of its
relations with Turkey, EU should present a precise answer to this
question at first. Everything would be simpler for both Turkey
and Europe. Recently, “Turkey and Turks do not belong to Europe”
expressions are widening all around Europe. The reference point
of these expressions is settled down on historical, religious – we
cannot forget the claim: “Is EU a Christian Club?” – and cultural
platforms. There are also old fashioned claims such as Turkey
geographically does not belong to Europe. According to my point of
view, EU’s boundaries should artificially be taken. Claims like “Turkey
is an Asian country when we look at her geographical position.” are
not noteworthy anymore, they are nothing but excuses.
What’s more, EU is not a religious union that we can name as a
Christian Club. If we accept this argument, we shall also explain
the situation of Muslims’ living mostly at the Balkans. EU’s applying
quote to non-Christian countries conflicts with her values defended
since EU’s foundation. It is known that human dignity and freedom of
worship lie on the basis of Islam; therefore there is not any conflict
between EU’s basic values and Turkey’s religious identity.
At this point, EU should rethink about its secularism principle and
reconsider the fact that Turkey is a secular country. On the other
hand, global values such as the excellence of law and state of law,
respect to human dignity, democracy, freedoms and justice are put under
strict legal protection in Turkey; therefore democracy is empowered
in Turkey. These improvements indicate that Turkey is becoming closer
to Europe, actually to what Europe symbolizes. The problem of defining
Europe’s boundaries is just an identity problem of Europe, not Turkey.
It is totally inaccurate to compare Turkey’s integration process
with Bulgaria, Croatia or Romania. Turkey, with her 80-million
population, economic and strategic position, domestic dynamics and
cultural values, has a unique status. Furthermore, it has Cyprus at
one hand and political problems with Kurdish population and Armenian
issue at the second one. Cyprus affairs can cause unexpected outcomes
for Turkey, but it should not be forgotten that Turkey has executed
major political and legal reforms in the recent years. Especially
legal arrangements according to human dignity area facilitated the
excellence of law and state of law and supported the empowerment
of democracy in Turkey. These steps strengthen Turkey’s political
power on the global issues in her region. From this point of view,
Turkey’s integration to EU is not a donation or a favor; it is a
win-win kind of a partnership. Putting what Turkey will gain from
this membership away, Europe will have a more powerful position on
the global political arena.
What is to be done next is to constructively follow the negotiation
process that is said to begin at October, 3rd. Both parties keep
many advantages coming from this partnership in mind. One important
thing that is also needed to be considered in this article is the
fact that October, 3rd is not an end, it is just a beginning. For
Turkey and for Europe as well. We will have more though days in
front of us and there will be more opposing peoples, groups and
politicians who will try to avoid us from realizing our political
objectives. Altering these opponents into minorities and diminishing
anti-Islamic and Eurocentric insights will only be provided by sincere
and intensive endeavors. That’s why, benefiting from this process
is quite important. My last word to the hopeless, we have not been
confronted with claims like “Turkey is anthropologically unsuitable
for Turkey”, keep your hope.
AYCA TURAN is a researcher at ISRO, Center for European Union, Ankara
TURKEY September, 15 2005