Tweet
The Washington Note
September 11, 2009 Friday 1:50 PM EST
Why Should Europe Accept Turkey Into Its Union?
I just finished reading the Independent Committee on Turkey's report
on Turkey's EU accession negotiations. The Committee consists of
European elder statesman who support Turkey's membership and are
alarmed by the "vicious circle" of events that is jeopardizing
Turkey's EU prospects.
The term "vicious circle" is meant to capture how European opposition
to Turkey's membership has led to a slowdown in Turkey's reform
program, which in turn has led to further opposition within Europe.
Overall, the report makes a compelling, balanced case for why it is in
Europe's interests to do everything it can to move the negotiations
along and eventually accept Turkey's full membership.
The Committee demonstrates the hollowness of French and German calls
for a "privileged partnership," noting the fact that Turkey is already
as integrated with Europe as any other non-member, and thus already
enjoys a privileged partnership.
The report also correctly identifies the Cyprus, Kurdish, and Armenian
conflicts - along with the ongoing struggle to reform Turkey's
democratic institutions - as the primary obstacles to Turkey's
membership.
Missing from the report, however, is a compelling, imaginative vision
of what Europe is likely to look like in 15-20 years, and how
incorporating Turkey's young population, dynamic economy, access to
energy resources, and large, professional army will strengthen
Europe's position. The authors make each of these points separately,
but I would have liked to have read a concluding chapter that paints
the picture a bit more clearly.
Another quibble is that the report does not mention the Turkish army,
save for in the context of Turkey's domestic political
struggle. Turkey possesses the second largest army in NATO, a fact
that should not be overlooked when making the strategic case for
Turkey's EU membership.
I understand that the European Union likes to think it makes its
decisions based on democratic principles rather than strategic
calculation - but Paris and Berlin think strategically, and it is
Sarkozy and Merkel who are Turkey's most significant opponents.
The essential point that the authors certainly understand - but that
must be made explicitly - is the fact that Europe is stuck with Turkey
no matter what. Whether or not the accession process moves forward,
Turkey will be a large, influential country on Europe's
borders. Europe's best chance to shape Turkey's trajectory is to keep
the negotiation process alive.
-- Ben Katcher
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
September 11, 2009 Friday 1:50 PM EST
Why Should Europe Accept Turkey Into Its Union?
I just finished reading the Independent Committee on Turkey's report
on Turkey's EU accession negotiations. The Committee consists of
European elder statesman who support Turkey's membership and are
alarmed by the "vicious circle" of events that is jeopardizing
Turkey's EU prospects.
The term "vicious circle" is meant to capture how European opposition
to Turkey's membership has led to a slowdown in Turkey's reform
program, which in turn has led to further opposition within Europe.
Overall, the report makes a compelling, balanced case for why it is in
Europe's interests to do everything it can to move the negotiations
along and eventually accept Turkey's full membership.
The Committee demonstrates the hollowness of French and German calls
for a "privileged partnership," noting the fact that Turkey is already
as integrated with Europe as any other non-member, and thus already
enjoys a privileged partnership.
The report also correctly identifies the Cyprus, Kurdish, and Armenian
conflicts - along with the ongoing struggle to reform Turkey's
democratic institutions - as the primary obstacles to Turkey's
membership.
Missing from the report, however, is a compelling, imaginative vision
of what Europe is likely to look like in 15-20 years, and how
incorporating Turkey's young population, dynamic economy, access to
energy resources, and large, professional army will strengthen
Europe's position. The authors make each of these points separately,
but I would have liked to have read a concluding chapter that paints
the picture a bit more clearly.
Another quibble is that the report does not mention the Turkish army,
save for in the context of Turkey's domestic political
struggle. Turkey possesses the second largest army in NATO, a fact
that should not be overlooked when making the strategic case for
Turkey's EU membership.
I understand that the European Union likes to think it makes its
decisions based on democratic principles rather than strategic
calculation - but Paris and Berlin think strategically, and it is
Sarkozy and Merkel who are Turkey's most significant opponents.
The essential point that the authors certainly understand - but that
must be made explicitly - is the fact that Europe is stuck with Turkey
no matter what. Whether or not the accession process moves forward,
Turkey will be a large, influential country on Europe's
borders. Europe's best chance to shape Turkey's trajectory is to keep
the negotiation process alive.
-- Ben Katcher
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress