Globalaffairs

Issue 6/December-January 2008
By Richard Corbett

Turkey’s bid to join the EU has been the subject of much debate. The question over whether or not Turkey should be allowed to join has given rise to numerous concerns, but also much support. Leading the opposition to Turkey’s membership of the EU is France, who have promised their population a referendum on the issue (which would likely lead to a vote against Turkish accession), whilst Turkey’s aspirations to join the EU are being backed by an unlikely and sometimes unhelpful source – the USA. The UK is favourable to Turkish membership but only if Turkey can address the concerns shared by many across Europe.

The concerns over Turkey’s bid to join the EU vary enormously. Cultural, geographical, economic and political issues have all caused concern in certain quarters across Europe. Some of these issues are perfectly valid and need addressing, but other issues seem to stem from outright racism and xenophobia.

Certain concerns should be dismissed out of hand, namely accusations that Turkey is not “European” and that the EU is a “Christian club”. Geographically, Turkey falls between two continents – Europe and Asia Minor. It therefore qualifies as being geographically European. But the argument over whether or not Turkey is European was settled years ago when it became a member of the Council of Europe. Not only is Turkey geographically and politically European, it is also culturally European due to its participation in such diverse activities as UEFA football competitions and the Eurovision Song Contest. Russia is another country whose borders transcend several continents, including Europe, who is also a member of the Council of Europe, takes part in UEFA football competitions and enters into the Eurovision Song Contest. But not many people question Russia’s “Europeaness” because Russia seemingly fits in with a view of Europe that is white and Christian. This view is based solely on racism and xenophobia. Islam has played an important part in Europe’s history and culture for centuries, around 13 million Muslims live in the EU and besides which, the motto of the EU is “unity with diversity”. We are not trying to harmonise cultures but trying ways of working together whilst keeping our various identities. By reaching out to Turkey we underline that the EU is not based on an exclusive European identity, but of an inclusive one.

But leaving those particular issues aside still leaves Turkey needing to address the many valid concerns some members of the EU have with the country before they will consider allowing the Turks to join the EU. There are a number of legitimate concerns that Turkey needs to address first, namely, their human rights record, political reforms, their relations with Cyprus and Greece and the Kurdish issue. That Turkey addresses these issues is vital for their compatibility with the values the EU holds dear. Along with these political criteria, Turkey would also need to satisfy economic criteria. Only when Turkey has met these political and economic criteria can it be considered fully compatible with the European project.

Only recently, a report by the European Commission, on the progress Turkey was making, criticised the Ankara government for the slow speed at which the necessary reforms were being carried out. Restrictions on freedom of speech remain a cause for serious concern and Turkey’s legal system does not fully guarantee the freedoms of expression in line with European standards.

The treatment of minorities in Turkey was also a concern of the Commission, particularly with respect to Turkey’s sizable Kurdish population. The Kurds, and their separate identity, were always considered a threat to national security by the Turkish authorities. The Kurds have largely opposed the government’s forcible assimilation policies since the 1930s. The main policy in which the Turks had hoped to achieve this assimilation was through the suppression of the Kurdish language. Although Turkey’s application to join the EU resulted in the lifting of some of Turkey’s often-draconian restrictions on the expression of a minority identity, the restrictions have only been eased, not abolished as they would have to be for Turkey to meet the EU’s political criteria. For example, although it is now permitted for the Kurdish language to be used in broadcasts, laws were introduced restricting both the amount and the content. Kurdish is still not allowed to be used in the education system, either as a means of teaching pupils or to be studied as a “foreign language.” This is despite the fact that Turkey has some estimated 15 million Kurds living in the country.

The desire of Turkish governments to assimilate their Kurdish population, and the opposition by the Kurds to these policies, has resulted in a continuing and bloody conflict since the 1980s which has claimed the lives of over 30,000 people. Turkey faces a serious threat from terrorism, not only from within its own borders, but from areas populated by Kurds in other countries, most recently in Iraq. Cross border raids from Kurdish terrorists based in Northern Iraq have killed at least 40 Turkish soldiers and civilians in the last month. Turkey’s threat of retaliation against Iraqi territory has alarmed the EU members who are currently involved in the coalition mission in the country. Iraq’s Kurdish area in the north has remained fairly peaceful compared to other parts of Iraq but an outbreak of hostilities in the region could be disastrous. How the Turks deal with the Kurdish issue is certainly going to have a bearing on their aspirations for EU membership. Turkey must respect the rights and identities of minorities, and then it must begin the conciliatory process with their Kurdish citizens without resorting to unnecessary violence.

Another key issue that needs to be addressed if Turkey is to become a member of the EU is the long running feud with Cyprus. Three years after Cyprus gained independence from Britain in 1960, inter-communal violence broke out between the island’s Greek and Turkish populations, eventually leading in 1974 to a Greek-sponsored coup d’etat to seize the government and a Turkish military intervention seven days later in 1974. Since then, the island has been divided into Greek and Turkish zones. While the international community recognises the Greek Cypriot government to be the legitimate authority, only Turkey recognises the Turkish Cypriot government and refuses to recognise the Greek Cypriot government. Turkey also refused Greek Cypriot traffic access to its airports and harbours. As a condition for entering into accession negotiations, one of the conditions was that Turkey must extend its association agreement with the EU to the 10 new member states, including Cyprus. However, despite extending the custom’s union to the new EU members, Turkey declared this did not amount to recognition of the Republic of Cyprus, nor did it open its harbours and airports up to Cypriot traffic. Because of this, at the end of 2006 the Council of Ministers decided to follow the Commission’s recommendation to sanction Turkey and suspended talks on 8 out of 35 areas. The Commission has made it quite clear, that unless Turkey accepts the additional protocols in the customs union and applies them to Cyprus, then going ahead with these areas of the accession negotiations will not be possible.

The relationship between the military and the government in Turkey is very unique amongst European countries and gives rise to further concerns about Turkish membership of the EU. In no other European country does the military enjoy as much influence in political affairs as the Turkish military. The military is staunchly secular and sees itself as the defender of this secular ideology, and will intervene in government affairs when they perceive secularism to be under threat. Although that may appear desirable in the current international climate regarding the threat from extreme forms of Islam, and despite the fact that American neoconservatives support the interventions by the Turkish military in political affairs, it is simply not how we Europeans conduct ourselves in a liberal democracy. The military must be under the sole control of the civilian government, not opposed to it and certainly not in the position to overrule it.

The current Turkish government – the Justice and Development Party (a party with religious roots) – has a majority in Parliament even though they only secured 34% of the popular vote. This was largely due to the Turkish Constitution that requires a party to win at least 10% of the popular vote in order to achieve parliamentary representation. This is an unusually high threshold for a proportional system and, because the secular opposition is divided into several smaller parties (some of which fall just below the threshold), it makes it harder for secularists to win seats. This has led to the secularists being underrepresented in the Turkish Parliament even though secularism enjoys much popular support. If the military, who wrote the Constitution, are concerned that secularism will be under threat without their ‘protection’, then perhaps a rethink over the threshold needed to achieve parliamentary representation could have the dual effect of giving the secularists a more equal representation in government and lessen the temptation for the military to interfere in the political affairs of Turkey, making the country compatible with the European democratic model. That being said, the JDP has proved to be a competent, moderate and sometimes modern government, belaying the fears of those who thought it would be a radical Islamist party.

It is clear then, that the road towards Turkish membership is fraught with numerous challenges that must be overcome for the Turks to realise their European dream. Culturally and geographically, there should be no barriers to Turkish accession. There are a multitude of reasons why Turkey can play an immensely positive role in tackling many of the strategic challenges that Europe faces: insecure energy supplies; seemingly intractable problems in the Middle East; rising extremism trying to drive Muslims and non-Muslims apart; increasing global competition from Asia; the desire for Europe to play a more active role beyond its borders; and both at those borders and within them, the need to tackle drugs, people trafficking, organised crime, international terrorism and illegal migration.

But Turkey does not currently meet the necessary requirements to take its place in the EU. The EU sets out a number of political and economic criteria, not only for prospective new members, but also for any third country that wishes to enter into agreements with the block. This means that the EU has a great opportunity to spread its values around the world, which not only benefits the EU, but also brings benefits to the peoples of countries wishing to enter into agreements with the EU.

Turkish membership of the EU would be a remarkable achievement as it would show that democracy promotion can be achieved successfully through political and diplomatic means. UK Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, recently commented that EU enlargement is “by far our most powerful tool for extending stability and prosperity.” The EU has proved extremely successful in expanding and consolidating democracy in the former authoritarian states of Eastern and Southern Europe. This process is currently also having a positive effect on Turkey, despite the problems that need addressing as noted above. Should Turkey address these problems and meet the criteria set by the EU, then it should become a member, and both Turkey and the EU will enjoy all the many benefits that this will present us. Should Turkey join the EU then it will have made the transition into a fully fledged democracy, something we can all be proud of. But should Turkey meet Europe’s demands, and still not be invited to join, then, as David Miliband points out, “it will signal a deep and dangerous divide between East and West.”

Richard Corbett
British Member of the European Parliament
Deputy Leader of the European Parliamentary Labour Party
Party of European Socialists
http://www.richardcorbett.org.uk/

Global Affairs is not liable for author’s opinion

 Print Europe | Permalink | eva