The long path to accession

Turkish accession has been controversial from the start. In 1987, Turkey submitted its application for formal membership into the European Community. Two years later, the EC confirmed eventual membership, but deferred the start of the accession process due to the state’s economic and political situation, poor relations with Greece, and conflict with Cyprus. A decade later, in 1999, the EU recognized Turkey as an official candidate. Accession negotiations were launched in 2005.

By this point, Turkey had of course already become a bit frustrated with the EU. In the time that had passed since its 1987 application was accepted, fifteen other states had been granted membership in the Union. Most notably, in 2004 and 2007, the EU welcomed twelve states, mostly from Central and Eastern Europe, some with economic and political standards below what is typically demanded by the EU. Notably, Cyprus was also accepted into the Union.

The trouble with Turkey

There are of course, a multitude of reasons for the slow process Turkey is experiencing. Most notably, as was mentioned above, the political and economic situation was not up to the standards the EU expects. In fact, it is still not. Although Turkey claims to be a secular state, there are doubts surrounding the extent to which this is true. Also, in gross violation of democracy, the military plays an active military role. Economically, Turkey must prove that it has a free market economy, and the EU must feel confident that the standard of living and job market is not so drastically different from the EU’s as to create a mass influx of migrants, when the borders eventually open.

Turkey’s questionable human rights record is also a huge obstacle. The conflict in Cyprus is one issue, particularly since Cyprus is an EU member – the EU cannot have two member states who are on such unpleasant terms with each other. Turkey’s refusal to recognize the Armenian genocide is another sore point. On that note, however, vast improvements have been made in the past month. On 10 October 2009, the two states signed an accord restoring diplomatic relations with each other and opening the borders.

The establishment of diplomatic relations with Armenia is of great significance. Symbolically, it means that Turkey is moving forward, but practically it shows that Turkey is being rational about taking the steps necessary to be accepted in the eyes of the Western world, and perhaps most importantly, in the eyes of the European Union. However, there is still a very long way to go. As is the case with all states joining the EU, Turkey must fulfil the requirements in the thirty-five chapters of the acquis communitaire. So far, thirteen chapters have been opened, only one of which has been completed. Progress stalled when many chapters were frozen by the EU because of the continued dispute over Cyprus.

Abuse from the EU

As the Independent Commission experts concluded in September, Turkey is certainly not the only one to blame for the slow process and tensions in its accession process. While it must show a greater commitment to democratic reforms and other prerequisites of EU membership, the EU member states and their leaders must demonstrate that too they are serious about the accession process. They need to stop proposing alternatives to membership, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel has done. It’s hardly fair to tell a state it is a candidate, and then a few years into the transition process keep suggesting other options.

Partners in opposing Turkish accession

Sarkozy and Merkel are joint in their disapproval of Turkish accession.

www.flickr.com/ Chesi - Fotos C

As recently as 2007, French President Sarkozy (who was campaigning for the post at the time) said that Turkey has no place in the European Union. Such offensive comments serve no purpose but to isolate Turkish citizens. He has reaffirmed this conviction saying that he doesn’t believe Turkey belongs in Europe because it is in Asia Minor, and that integration is thus unacceptable. Undoubtedly, geography was a question considered by EU officials before Turkey’s accession bid was accepted. The decision that Turkey geographically qualifies for membership has already been made, so such comments are unhelpful and counterproductive.

Eastern horizons ahead?

It seems then, that the big question for the next decade is whether the EU will move East and re-commit itself to Turkey accession, or if Turkey will turn away from the EU and direct its attention further eastwards. Since the time of Ataturk, Turkey’s main foreign policy goal has been acceptance among European states. But after years of teasing and unwelcoming comments by prominent state leaders, the prospective of EU membership seems much less appealing.

Fears that Turkey is focusing on its Eastern ties were fuelled by its increasingly poor relations with Israel (with whom relations were previously seen as part of its bridge-building role), and increased dialogue with Iran. Earlier this year, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan publicly accosted his Israeli counterpart over the war in Gaza. He was among the first foreign leaders to congratulate Iranian President Ahmadinejad on his controversial election win in June, and has recently criticized the West for having double standards: pressuring Iran over its nuclear programme, while possessing their own nukes. Of course, he was right on this point – there is a double standard. But a nuclear Iran is not ideal for anyone, and it was shocking to see him contradict his Western partners so publicly.

What must the EU do?

As is clear, neither side is innocent in the deterioration of relations. But it is time for the EU, who undoubtedly considers itself the superior player, to smarten up. It is simply unacceptable to allow leaders of key member-states such as Sarkozy to continue to publicly broadcast their distaste for prospective Turkish membership. Likewise, Angela Merkel must learn to hold her tongue when she is tempted to propose alternatives to membership. Turkey’s candidacy was formally accepted a decade ago, by Sarkozy and Merkel’s predecessors. The accession process will be eventually completed by their successors. In the meantime, application of the acquis communitaire is primarily the responsibility of the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Enlargement.

Sarkozy and Merkel would be well advised to keep their irrelevant comments to themselves, as they serve no purpose but to damage the morale of Turkish citizens working towards eventual accession. Likewise, DG Enlargement and even the Commission President himself need to take a stronger role in communicating to such leaders that their comments are neither helpful nor welcome. If Turkish accession is to proceed with renewed strength, both sides must make a genuine effort, starting with the EU.

Logo: Flickr, Oberazzi