Tweet
CAN TURKEY REALLY DO WITHOUT THE EUROPEAN CONNECTION?
news.az
Oct 27 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az interviews Emiliano Alessandri, Transatlantic Fellow, the
German Marshall Fund of the United States.
How successful may Turkey be as an Islamic leader in the Middle
East region?
With its dynamic economy, democratizing and fast developing society,
and its Islamic culture, Turkey can be a source of inspiration for
Arab countries in transition in the Middle East. But the "Turkish
model" is still in the making - the approval of a new, fully civilian
Turkish Constitution will be a key test for this model to emerge - and
may be a confusing concept. What do we mean by Turkish model exactly?
Do we mean the "New Turkey" that emerged under the last three AKP
governments? Or do we mean the longer experience of managed democracy
and westernization under the Kemalist elites? And can we truly talk
about a Turkish model when one of Turkey's greatest challenges - the
solution of the Kurdish question - remains so conspicuously unsolved?
>From a geopolitical standpoint, Turkey seems destined to become a
more prominent Middle Eastern actor. But Ankara will face no small
challenge, including competition with Iran and post-Mubarak Egypt
for regional leadership.
How would you comment on the view that EU membership is no longer a
priority for Turkey?
The EU is clearly not Ankara's priority at the moment. To the extent
that this is a response to the EU's own reluctance to move the
accession process forward this is understandable. Ankara has also the
unquestionably urgent need to deal with the various crises in its
southern neighbourhood. But on the view that fading interest in EU
membership is due to the increasingly fashionable view in Ankara that
"the New Turkey doesn't need the EU anymore", there is reason to pause:
can Turkey really do without the European connection? Is the Turkish
economy really so strong that it can do without the common European
market and the assurance of continuing foreign direct investment from
main European countries? Hasn't Turkey historically always benefited
from its balancing act between integration with Europe and projection
in its eastern and southern neighbourhoods? The various projections
should be developed together and in a coherent way. There are a lot
of risks in developing one at the expense of the others.
What are the main problems and fears in European perceptions of Turkey?
Many Europeans have an anti-Muslim prejudice and bias. Xenophobic
and anti-Muslim parties in the EU have often presented Turkey as
the spokesperson of Muslim communities in Europe, or as the Trojan
horse for the Islamization of Europe. In Italy, the decision to ban
the construction of mosques in certain regions was presented by some
as a "victory against Turkey". Many Europeans ignore the fact that
Turkey is a secular country with republican institutions. Turkey is
also seen as a poor society instead of a fast developing one. Many
fear an invasion of Turkish immigrants and don't know that over the
years Turkey has become a country of immigration as well as emigration.
How serious is the current crisis between Turkey and Israel?
It is very serious and there is some truth in the view that nothing
will be the same anymore between the two countries. At the same time,
both countries realize that in the very unstable strategic environment
of the Middle East, there is no need for yet another crisis, let alone
a new conflict. Cooperation may be out of the question for some time,
but a process of rapprochement is in the interest of both. The sooner
the two parties realize this, the better.
How soon can Turkey and Armenia improve their relations and what does
this depend on?
The initiatives pursued in recent years have lost steam and
normalization of relations has not been attained. Aside from the
issue of the protocols to be ratified, the two countries should
start a dialogue based on a common view of their future, rather than
focused exclusively on their difficult past. Although Armenia has some
responsibility for the lack of progress, much will depend on Turkey's
position. As a larger, dynamic country that prides itself on being
an "emerging power", Turkey has to take the initiative again. The
fact that past efforts have not fully succeeded should not be used
as justification for inaction. Turkey will never be a "leader" if
it fails to solve long-standing problems that date back to its very
origins as a nation state after the fall of the Ottoman Empire".
From: A. Papazian
news.az
Oct 27 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az interviews Emiliano Alessandri, Transatlantic Fellow, the
German Marshall Fund of the United States.
How successful may Turkey be as an Islamic leader in the Middle
East region?
With its dynamic economy, democratizing and fast developing society,
and its Islamic culture, Turkey can be a source of inspiration for
Arab countries in transition in the Middle East. But the "Turkish
model" is still in the making - the approval of a new, fully civilian
Turkish Constitution will be a key test for this model to emerge - and
may be a confusing concept. What do we mean by Turkish model exactly?
Do we mean the "New Turkey" that emerged under the last three AKP
governments? Or do we mean the longer experience of managed democracy
and westernization under the Kemalist elites? And can we truly talk
about a Turkish model when one of Turkey's greatest challenges - the
solution of the Kurdish question - remains so conspicuously unsolved?
>From a geopolitical standpoint, Turkey seems destined to become a
more prominent Middle Eastern actor. But Ankara will face no small
challenge, including competition with Iran and post-Mubarak Egypt
for regional leadership.
How would you comment on the view that EU membership is no longer a
priority for Turkey?
The EU is clearly not Ankara's priority at the moment. To the extent
that this is a response to the EU's own reluctance to move the
accession process forward this is understandable. Ankara has also the
unquestionably urgent need to deal with the various crises in its
southern neighbourhood. But on the view that fading interest in EU
membership is due to the increasingly fashionable view in Ankara that
"the New Turkey doesn't need the EU anymore", there is reason to pause:
can Turkey really do without the European connection? Is the Turkish
economy really so strong that it can do without the common European
market and the assurance of continuing foreign direct investment from
main European countries? Hasn't Turkey historically always benefited
from its balancing act between integration with Europe and projection
in its eastern and southern neighbourhoods? The various projections
should be developed together and in a coherent way. There are a lot
of risks in developing one at the expense of the others.
What are the main problems and fears in European perceptions of Turkey?
Many Europeans have an anti-Muslim prejudice and bias. Xenophobic
and anti-Muslim parties in the EU have often presented Turkey as
the spokesperson of Muslim communities in Europe, or as the Trojan
horse for the Islamization of Europe. In Italy, the decision to ban
the construction of mosques in certain regions was presented by some
as a "victory against Turkey". Many Europeans ignore the fact that
Turkey is a secular country with republican institutions. Turkey is
also seen as a poor society instead of a fast developing one. Many
fear an invasion of Turkish immigrants and don't know that over the
years Turkey has become a country of immigration as well as emigration.
How serious is the current crisis between Turkey and Israel?
It is very serious and there is some truth in the view that nothing
will be the same anymore between the two countries. At the same time,
both countries realize that in the very unstable strategic environment
of the Middle East, there is no need for yet another crisis, let alone
a new conflict. Cooperation may be out of the question for some time,
but a process of rapprochement is in the interest of both. The sooner
the two parties realize this, the better.
How soon can Turkey and Armenia improve their relations and what does
this depend on?
The initiatives pursued in recent years have lost steam and
normalization of relations has not been attained. Aside from the
issue of the protocols to be ratified, the two countries should
start a dialogue based on a common view of their future, rather than
focused exclusively on their difficult past. Although Armenia has some
responsibility for the lack of progress, much will depend on Turkey's
position. As a larger, dynamic country that prides itself on being
an "emerging power", Turkey has to take the initiative again. The
fact that past efforts have not fully succeeded should not be used
as justification for inaction. Turkey will never be a "leader" if
it fails to solve long-standing problems that date back to its very
origins as a nation state after the fall of the Ottoman Empire".
From: A. Papazian