Tweet
TURKISH-EU RELATIONS: A WAR OF NERVES?
Cem Oguz
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Aug 8 2005
Last December, the European Council announced that Turkey had
fulfilled the Copenhagen political criteria and the EU would open
accession negotiations with Turkey on Oct. 3 this year. However, in
the same statement that gave Turkey the green light, it was clearly
underlined that the negotiations were to be an "open-ended process,
the outcome of which can't be guaranteed beforehand." Paradoxically,
it had to be ensured that Turkey would be fully "anchored in European
structures through the strongest possible bond," even if it fails
"to assume in full all the obligations of membership."
Given that these two prerequisites were accepted at the time by
the Turkish government, there's indeed substantial irony in hearing
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's, as well as Foreign Minister
Abdullah Gul's, recent statements such as the "EU shouldn't toy
with Turkey" or "Turkey would walk away from the EU for good,"
if there were attempts to water down its membership. Apparently,
similar to that prevailing sentiment among EU circles, there's also
confusion in the higher echelons of the Justice and Development (AK)
Party government. I'm willing to assume that such statements are
either tactical maneuvers or, as characterized by political analysts
close to the government, must be part of sincere warnings rather
than empty threats. Yet it seems that, so far, they're destined to
remain vain efforts. What I find more important is Erdogan's remark of
"Turkey has nothing more to give."
Readers will probably remember that a short while ago I wrote that none
of the so-called concessions on the issues relevant to EU accession
had created a notable outcry in Turkey. But I warned, as many other
people possessed of common sense did, that the honeymoon seemed to
be over and popular disappointment in Turkey was rapidly growing. At
present anger has reached such a level that almost the entire country
is engulfed by anti-EU feelings, although some domestic, as well as
foreign, circles are choosing to ignore it. Last week, I visited some
remote villages in the Taurus mountains and astonishingly witnessed
that even among the villagers living there the current stage of
relations with the EU unleashes powerful emotions. The question then
should be: What's changed so quickly?
The answer is very simple: First of all, Turks, by and large, have
lost their hope, and secondly the repercussions of radical changes on
sensitive issues have eventually started to affect their daily lives.
The recent rise in attacks by the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party
(PKK), for instance, is linked by a considerable number of ordinary
Turks to the biased attitude, as well as support, of EU circles.
Suffice to say that the EU right now is associated with the notion
of instability. Apparently, it's the US administration that has
realized how acute the danger is. Washington, facing rising criticism
from the Turkish establishment about PKK hideouts in northern Iraq,
recently announced that it will help the Turkish government to combat
the PKK on European soil. Isn't it a paradox to mention Europe,
while the Turkish fingers were pointing at Iraq? Washington can
indeed be accused of willing to deflect attention from itself. But
it's not that simple. The US authorities are fully aware that
the surge of nationalism in Turkey, as well as reactions towards
the broadly-defined West, the EU in particular, must be balanced,
before it turns out to be detrimental to the interests of each party
concerned. It shouldn't be allowed to reach a level that would result
in an ultimate breakaway. In that regard, they seem to be supported by
some prudent EU members. Measures recently applied by Germany against
the PKK, for instance, are a precise example of that phenomenon.
Some EU members, in turn, once again appear to be in denial about
the depth of rising discontent as well as reaction in Turkey.
Irreversible concessions on Cyprus, the Armenian allegations, and
minority issues are the three main subjects that have been the cause
of agonizing debates between Brussels and Ankara. They're adding to
popular indignation in Turkey. Obviously, however, they'll be used
increasingly by ardent Turkey-skeptics in Europe to block its full
membership. French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, for instance,
sarcastically claims that he's in favor of Turkey's membership process,
as long as Ankara "has a calm and peaceful relationship with the whole
of Europe" and "as quickly as possible commits itself to the road of
recognizing [Greek] Cyprus." Are we talking about the same southern
Cyprus that's solely responsible for the current deadlock subsequent
to Kofi Annan's efforts for a peaceful resolution on the island?
In the meantime, Turkish people have run out of patience and are
becoming more disgusted with each passing day. They're tired of
endless conditions and aren't willing to make more concessions
without concrete results. Inevitably, this leads to political
extremism in Turkey and the radicalization of Turkish politics.
Nationalist sentiments are running high. In such a milieu, Erdogan,
who's based his party's as well as the government's entire vision
on the ideal of Turkey's full membership, can't simply say "enough"
and turn his back on EU prospects. People would then question why
sacrifices were made or concessions were given. At this point,
it's Erdogan himself who's believed to be playing to the gallery.
Consequently, it seems that there might be a war of nerves between
the Erdogan government and Turkey-skeptics in Europe, each trying to
leave responsibility for failure in the hands of the other side. This
stubborn war will probably continue until one side finally just gives
up. Whether this becomes a long-term disagreement and doors will be
closed to each other forever, is right now in the hands of visionary,
honest, and sincere circles in the EU itself.
Cem Oguz
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Aug 8 2005
Last December, the European Council announced that Turkey had
fulfilled the Copenhagen political criteria and the EU would open
accession negotiations with Turkey on Oct. 3 this year. However, in
the same statement that gave Turkey the green light, it was clearly
underlined that the negotiations were to be an "open-ended process,
the outcome of which can't be guaranteed beforehand." Paradoxically,
it had to be ensured that Turkey would be fully "anchored in European
structures through the strongest possible bond," even if it fails
"to assume in full all the obligations of membership."
Given that these two prerequisites were accepted at the time by
the Turkish government, there's indeed substantial irony in hearing
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's, as well as Foreign Minister
Abdullah Gul's, recent statements such as the "EU shouldn't toy
with Turkey" or "Turkey would walk away from the EU for good,"
if there were attempts to water down its membership. Apparently,
similar to that prevailing sentiment among EU circles, there's also
confusion in the higher echelons of the Justice and Development (AK)
Party government. I'm willing to assume that such statements are
either tactical maneuvers or, as characterized by political analysts
close to the government, must be part of sincere warnings rather
than empty threats. Yet it seems that, so far, they're destined to
remain vain efforts. What I find more important is Erdogan's remark of
"Turkey has nothing more to give."
Readers will probably remember that a short while ago I wrote that none
of the so-called concessions on the issues relevant to EU accession
had created a notable outcry in Turkey. But I warned, as many other
people possessed of common sense did, that the honeymoon seemed to
be over and popular disappointment in Turkey was rapidly growing. At
present anger has reached such a level that almost the entire country
is engulfed by anti-EU feelings, although some domestic, as well as
foreign, circles are choosing to ignore it. Last week, I visited some
remote villages in the Taurus mountains and astonishingly witnessed
that even among the villagers living there the current stage of
relations with the EU unleashes powerful emotions. The question then
should be: What's changed so quickly?
The answer is very simple: First of all, Turks, by and large, have
lost their hope, and secondly the repercussions of radical changes on
sensitive issues have eventually started to affect their daily lives.
The recent rise in attacks by the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party
(PKK), for instance, is linked by a considerable number of ordinary
Turks to the biased attitude, as well as support, of EU circles.
Suffice to say that the EU right now is associated with the notion
of instability. Apparently, it's the US administration that has
realized how acute the danger is. Washington, facing rising criticism
from the Turkish establishment about PKK hideouts in northern Iraq,
recently announced that it will help the Turkish government to combat
the PKK on European soil. Isn't it a paradox to mention Europe,
while the Turkish fingers were pointing at Iraq? Washington can
indeed be accused of willing to deflect attention from itself. But
it's not that simple. The US authorities are fully aware that
the surge of nationalism in Turkey, as well as reactions towards
the broadly-defined West, the EU in particular, must be balanced,
before it turns out to be detrimental to the interests of each party
concerned. It shouldn't be allowed to reach a level that would result
in an ultimate breakaway. In that regard, they seem to be supported by
some prudent EU members. Measures recently applied by Germany against
the PKK, for instance, are a precise example of that phenomenon.
Some EU members, in turn, once again appear to be in denial about
the depth of rising discontent as well as reaction in Turkey.
Irreversible concessions on Cyprus, the Armenian allegations, and
minority issues are the three main subjects that have been the cause
of agonizing debates between Brussels and Ankara. They're adding to
popular indignation in Turkey. Obviously, however, they'll be used
increasingly by ardent Turkey-skeptics in Europe to block its full
membership. French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, for instance,
sarcastically claims that he's in favor of Turkey's membership process,
as long as Ankara "has a calm and peaceful relationship with the whole
of Europe" and "as quickly as possible commits itself to the road of
recognizing [Greek] Cyprus." Are we talking about the same southern
Cyprus that's solely responsible for the current deadlock subsequent
to Kofi Annan's efforts for a peaceful resolution on the island?
In the meantime, Turkish people have run out of patience and are
becoming more disgusted with each passing day. They're tired of
endless conditions and aren't willing to make more concessions
without concrete results. Inevitably, this leads to political
extremism in Turkey and the radicalization of Turkish politics.
Nationalist sentiments are running high. In such a milieu, Erdogan,
who's based his party's as well as the government's entire vision
on the ideal of Turkey's full membership, can't simply say "enough"
and turn his back on EU prospects. People would then question why
sacrifices were made or concessions were given. At this point,
it's Erdogan himself who's believed to be playing to the gallery.
Consequently, it seems that there might be a war of nerves between
the Erdogan government and Turkey-skeptics in Europe, each trying to
leave responsibility for failure in the hands of the other side. This
stubborn war will probably continue until one side finally just gives
up. Whether this becomes a long-term disagreement and doors will be
closed to each other forever, is right now in the hands of visionary,
honest, and sincere circles in the EU itself.