 Who is responsible for
this pitiful state of negotiations? For sure, there is more than one actor
and the Cyprus
presidency cannot be ranked first. That presidency will come to an end in
two-and-a-half-months and even then the situation will not improve for the
simple reason that negotiations were already at an impasse before Cyprus took
over the EU presidency. First of all, it must be noted that the negotiations
started on flawed ground. The negotiations for full membership began
following the council meeting of December 2004 during which Turkey was declared “a candidate member”;
however, at the same time Turkey
was told that membership was not guaranteed even if the two sides managed to
come to an agreement on all of the chapters.
One can ask, of
course, why Turkey
accepted to negotiate under this condition. In other words, why would Turkey
accept adopting the EU's rules and laws, particularly in areas, like
competition, public procurement, environment, etc. where conflicts of
interest are unavoidable as long as Turkey is not a full member of the EU?
The answer to the question has never been given officially, but I can suggest
two possible answers: First, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party)
government that won the November 2002 elections with only 34 percent of the
vote needed to absolutely consolidate its power, and the start of EU
negotiations was considered an important tool in both preventing a very
probable military intervention and for pushing economic growth. My second
answer is that the AK Party, considering sincerely the EU membership as a
strategic target for Turkey,
thought that EU members opposed to Turkey's
membership would change their minds, admitting that with time Turkey would become indispensable for Europe.
It is likely that
within these two possible answers lies the truth, but what does matter is
that negotiations started and they contributed largely to the consolidation
of the democratic regime as well as to its economic success, at least in the
first phase. Then the opposition to Turkey's membership from the
European side became more and more apparent and hurtful. Former French
President Nicolas Sarkozy said on many occasions that Turkey will
never enter the EU since “it is not a European country.” And in order to
prove its determination, he blocked five chapters considered critical to full
membership.
As for German
Chancellor Angela Merkel, she was perhaps less hurtful than Sarkozy, but not
less opposed to Turkey's
membership. France and Germany, not willing to risk irreversible
damage to EU-Turkey relations, offered Turkey the status of a so-called
“privileged partnership.” Turkey
rejected it categorically since it was very difficult to see where the
“privileges” lay. Last but not least, the Greek government of Cyprus, thinking that negotiations could be a
good opportunity to pressure Turkey
to recognize a single, Greek-dominated union government in Cyprus,
decided to block, on its own, some additional chapters.
While these negative
attitudes were cooling the appetite of Turks for EU membership, the AK Party
government was becoming more and more self confident as the economy was
booming; exports were successfully being diversified towards the East and the
risk of military coups was over. Has the AK Party started to think that EU
membership is no more a strategically important target for Turkey? I am
not sure, but it should be noted that signs indicating the government is
leaning in this direction are increasing. Nevertheless, I have to remind you
that the EU continues to be the main market for Turkish exports despite the
recent decline due to the European recession. Turkey will crucially need the EU
when the recession is over in order to continue its export-led growth. Also, Turkey
continues to crucially need European investments, which constitute
three-quarters of overall foreign direct investments (FDI). Moreover, I
believe that EU membership continues to be a unique political anchor for
Turkish democracy in its quest for stability and consolidation of power.
Recently, Stefan Füle,
the EU commissioner for enlargement, declared that Turkey
and the EU “have many common interests and Turkey
is a key country for the EU,” adding, “It is in our mutual interest that
accession negotiations regain their momentum, notably also to allow the EU to
remain the benchmark for Turkey's
reforms.” I agree. But this momentum risks, sooner or later, being totally
lost if a clear perspective of membership is not given. Turkey has no
interest in fully adopting the EU legislation and policies as long as full membership
is not guaranteed. It should also be noted that such a perspective would
largely facilitate a negotiated solution in Cyprus, which I believe is the
main political obstacle to the membership.
|
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder