Tweet
Zaman, Turkey
Dec 14 2004
WHY TURKEY?
Reasons for a Privileged Partnership between Turkey and the EU
by Hans-Gert Poettering
Chairman of the EP Christian Democrat Group
Few political questions have been debated both on European and
national level as intensively and as passionately as the question of
the accession of Turkey to the European Union. In fact it confronts
the European Union with the question of its own identity and the
discussion in the European Union therefore is as much about whether
the European Union is ready for this challenge as whether Turkey is
ready to join the Union. In the EPP-ED-Group, as well as in the other
Groups of the European Parliament, there are different points of view
as to whether the European Union can face this challenge or not and
whether Turkey should join the European Union or not. During the
coming weeks, we will discuss our position intensively in the context
of a European Parliament report by Camiel Eurlings (EPP-ED), which
will be voted in time before the European Summit on 17 December.
The accession of Turkey to the European Union would be an enormous
challenge for Turkey as much as for the European Union itself. In
fact, when defining the "Copenhagen criteria" in 1993, the European
Council also underlined the importance of the Union's capacity to
absorb new members. This question therefore has also to be taken
seriously into account when deciding on future membership of Turkey.
There is no doubt that Turkey has made today progress with political
and economic reforms, although problems still persist in particular
with regard to the implementation of the political reforms, including
human rights. Civil and human rights NGOs in Turkey continue to
express their concern on this question. However, my main concern
today is the impact Turkey's accession would have on the European
Union and its cohesion. If Turkey joins the EU in 2015, it will have
the same size in terms of population as Germany. By 2025 Turkey will
be the biggest country in the Union. But since it is at the same time
a comparatively poor country, full integration in all areas of EU
policies would lead to huge budget transfers at least if there is no
fundamental reform of the agricultural and structural policies of the
European Union. With Turkey's accession and its borders being
extended to Syria, Iran and Iraq in the Middle East, Armenia and
Georgia in the Caucasus, the European Union will have to make the
step from a mainly regional player to a potentially global player
given the political sensitivity and importance of these areas.
Considering the incoherent European position during the Iraq crisis,
the European Union will still need a very long time before being able
to assume such a global responsibility. The foreign policy mechanisms
under the new constitution will need to be tested and proven before
the EU can envisage such ambitious objectives.
The European Union will now have to put the current enlargement into
practice and test the functioning of the new Constitution, which will
hopefully be ratified without delay in the 25 Member states. We have
to be very careful before thinking about a further enlargement that
could "over-stretch" the European Union's capacities in many ways and
could eventually put at risk the EU's achievements over the past 50
years.
At the same time, one has also to admit without any prejudice that
Turkey and the countries of the European Union have undergone a
different historical development with regard to political culture and
philosophical thinking. I am not speaking in this context of
religion, but about a more general cultural approach. This is
enriching for both sides in the framework of close cooperation, but
it could be difficult in the framework of integration and there is
reason to fear that this could cause problems for the internal
cohesion of the people of the European Union. That is why in some
member states public opinion is very critical with regard to Turkish
accession. This is a psychological problem, but European politicians
are also bound to respect the opinion of the citizens they represent.
For these reasons I believe that Turkey and the European Union will
have a more fruitful and satisfying relationship if they develop a
privileged partnership, where they work together as closely as
possible, but still remain autonomous in their decision-making.
Turkey is a strong regional power and as such an important partner
and ally for the European Union and the Atlantic Alliance. As a
privileged partner of the European Union, Turkey will maintain much
more independence of decision and in fact more influence in the
region than if it is bound to European decision-making on the basis
of a common denominator of more than 25 member states. On the other
hand, I believe that the European Union will loose its capacity to
act and part of its cohesion with a big regional power that
necessarily will confront the Union with many challenges and requests
which the European Union might not be able to solve within its own
structures, but which it could solve together with Turkey as a strong
partner.
Due to its size and geo-strategic position, its historical links and
its willingness to be part of the European family, Turkey will be one
of the most important partners and neighbors of the Union. With
mutual respect and understanding, both partners should intensify
their relations taking into account the complex political situation
on both sides.
If the European Council should decide in December by unanimity to
open negotiations, these should, in my view, not exclude possible
alternative options to accession, such as a "privileged partnership"
with Turkey. If such a partnership can be achieved in a reasonable
time this seems to be more interesting for both sides than very long
negotiations and insecurity about mainly the European Union's
capacities to assume this enlargement.
* This article expresses the personal views of the author.
Dec 14 2004
WHY TURKEY?
Reasons for a Privileged Partnership between Turkey and the EU
by Hans-Gert Poettering
Chairman of the EP Christian Democrat Group
Few political questions have been debated both on European and
national level as intensively and as passionately as the question of
the accession of Turkey to the European Union. In fact it confronts
the European Union with the question of its own identity and the
discussion in the European Union therefore is as much about whether
the European Union is ready for this challenge as whether Turkey is
ready to join the Union. In the EPP-ED-Group, as well as in the other
Groups of the European Parliament, there are different points of view
as to whether the European Union can face this challenge or not and
whether Turkey should join the European Union or not. During the
coming weeks, we will discuss our position intensively in the context
of a European Parliament report by Camiel Eurlings (EPP-ED), which
will be voted in time before the European Summit on 17 December.
The accession of Turkey to the European Union would be an enormous
challenge for Turkey as much as for the European Union itself. In
fact, when defining the "Copenhagen criteria" in 1993, the European
Council also underlined the importance of the Union's capacity to
absorb new members. This question therefore has also to be taken
seriously into account when deciding on future membership of Turkey.
There is no doubt that Turkey has made today progress with political
and economic reforms, although problems still persist in particular
with regard to the implementation of the political reforms, including
human rights. Civil and human rights NGOs in Turkey continue to
express their concern on this question. However, my main concern
today is the impact Turkey's accession would have on the European
Union and its cohesion. If Turkey joins the EU in 2015, it will have
the same size in terms of population as Germany. By 2025 Turkey will
be the biggest country in the Union. But since it is at the same time
a comparatively poor country, full integration in all areas of EU
policies would lead to huge budget transfers at least if there is no
fundamental reform of the agricultural and structural policies of the
European Union. With Turkey's accession and its borders being
extended to Syria, Iran and Iraq in the Middle East, Armenia and
Georgia in the Caucasus, the European Union will have to make the
step from a mainly regional player to a potentially global player
given the political sensitivity and importance of these areas.
Considering the incoherent European position during the Iraq crisis,
the European Union will still need a very long time before being able
to assume such a global responsibility. The foreign policy mechanisms
under the new constitution will need to be tested and proven before
the EU can envisage such ambitious objectives.
The European Union will now have to put the current enlargement into
practice and test the functioning of the new Constitution, which will
hopefully be ratified without delay in the 25 Member states. We have
to be very careful before thinking about a further enlargement that
could "over-stretch" the European Union's capacities in many ways and
could eventually put at risk the EU's achievements over the past 50
years.
At the same time, one has also to admit without any prejudice that
Turkey and the countries of the European Union have undergone a
different historical development with regard to political culture and
philosophical thinking. I am not speaking in this context of
religion, but about a more general cultural approach. This is
enriching for both sides in the framework of close cooperation, but
it could be difficult in the framework of integration and there is
reason to fear that this could cause problems for the internal
cohesion of the people of the European Union. That is why in some
member states public opinion is very critical with regard to Turkish
accession. This is a psychological problem, but European politicians
are also bound to respect the opinion of the citizens they represent.
For these reasons I believe that Turkey and the European Union will
have a more fruitful and satisfying relationship if they develop a
privileged partnership, where they work together as closely as
possible, but still remain autonomous in their decision-making.
Turkey is a strong regional power and as such an important partner
and ally for the European Union and the Atlantic Alliance. As a
privileged partner of the European Union, Turkey will maintain much
more independence of decision and in fact more influence in the
region than if it is bound to European decision-making on the basis
of a common denominator of more than 25 member states. On the other
hand, I believe that the European Union will loose its capacity to
act and part of its cohesion with a big regional power that
necessarily will confront the Union with many challenges and requests
which the European Union might not be able to solve within its own
structures, but which it could solve together with Turkey as a strong
partner.
Due to its size and geo-strategic position, its historical links and
its willingness to be part of the European family, Turkey will be one
of the most important partners and neighbors of the Union. With
mutual respect and understanding, both partners should intensify
their relations taking into account the complex political situation
on both sides.
If the European Council should decide in December by unanimity to
open negotiations, these should, in my view, not exclude possible
alternative options to accession, such as a "privileged partnership"
with Turkey. If such a partnership can be achieved in a reasonable
time this seems to be more interesting for both sides than very long
negotiations and insecurity about mainly the European Union's
capacities to assume this enlargement.
* This article expresses the personal views of the author.