Cyprus-Forum.com

[EPSILON]

Charlemagne

Turkey's circular worries
Sep 3rd 2009
From The Economist print edition

It is increasingly hard to pretend that Turkey's negotiations with the European Union are on track


TURKEY’S friends inside the European Union believe that history is on their side. Ask these national politicians, diplomats and EU officials if they think Turkey will one day achieve full membership, and they answer that it must. In a decade or two, they say, objections to Turkish entry will look trifling, next to the country’s strategic benefits as an energy hub, regional diplomatic power and bridge to the Muslim world, not to mention as a dynamic economy filled with young people.

Yet when it comes to the glacial pace of Turkey’s formal membership negotiations, those same friends are starting to sound the alarm. When talks began in October 2005, the popular notion was of a virtuous circle. Turkish reformers would use the EU process to push through changes that would transform the country. This would reassure Europeans, bring EU membership closer, strengthen the reformers and so on. In one of those polished phrases much beloved of diplomats, it was murmured that, for Turkey, the “journey is as important as the destination”.

Yet it turns out that, for the journey to go on, those embarked on it must also believe in the destination. Turks read newspapers. They know that European leaders like France’s Nicolas Sarkozy think it is time to stop “lying” to Turkey about full membership. Turkey is in “Asia Minor”, Mr Sarkozy says; he will not be the one to “tell French schoolchildren that the borders of Europe extend to Syria and Iraq.” The danger of such rhetoric is clear: doubt the EU’s sincerity and the circle turns from virtuous to vicious.

Complying with EU environmental law could cost €140 billion ($200 billion), says Cengiz Aktar, a professor at Bahcesehir University. No country would spend that without a clear path to membership. Some demands are pushy. One EU benchmark involves opening Turkey’s public-procurement market to European firms. That market is worth around €60 billion a year, says Mr Aktar. It is not going to open “while Sarkozy is going around saying Turkey will never be a member.” Thus reforms slow—and Turkey’s opponents inside Europe duly proclaim they were right all along and the country is unfit to join.

An independent commission of pro-Turkey bigwigs, led by a former Finnish president, Martti Ahtisaari, will publish a progress report on September 7th. They do not mince their words. Actions by “some European leaders”, they say, have “all but derailed the process.” At the same time, there has been a “regrettable” slowing of reforms inside Turkey. Add in polls that show growing Euro-disillusionment inside Turkey, and a “vicious circle” is upon us, Mr Ahtisaari and his colleagues conclude.

Out of the 35 “chapters” in the accession talks, only one has been completed. Eight are formally blocked because Turkey has not kept an agreement to open its ports and airports to traffic from Cyprus, an EU member since 2004 (Turkey does not recognise the Greek-Cypriot republic and insists that Turkish north Cyprus is being unfairly blockaded). The reunification of divided Cyprus would unblock this impasse. Promising peace talks began in 2008 under a new Cypriot president, Demetris Christofias. Yet it is now “hard to trace” a sense of urgency on the Greek-Cypriot side, says an official. This could cost the president of Turkish northern Cyprus, Mehmet Ali Talat, his job: he faces an election next year, and hardline opponents are circling. The European Commission must also report to EU governments in December on Turkish compliance with its port-opening promise. The report may set the scene for a big new row.

Mr Ahtisaari’s commission calls for carping European politicians to shut up, more or less, and stick to EU promises to judge Turkey’s membership application purely in terms of compliance with EU rules and values. The problem is that it is hard to see such politicians shutting up. In places like Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and France, Turkey-bashing is a vote-winner.

Finnish common sense
Ask him in person, and Mr Ahtisaari, who won a Nobel peace prize for mediating in such tough spots as Kosovo, suggests that a bit of time may sort this out. Mr Sarkozy will not be around forever, and Turkey’s membership talks will take years, he says. “Having once been a president, I tend to say: presidents come and go.” The key is for Europe to keep its word, and allow the talks to continue. Other senior figures are more nuanced. The good news, maintains one, is that the Turkish elite still appears to believe in the membership talks. The main Turkish opposition party seems to be more EU-friendly than before. Recent government concessions such as the opening of a Kurdish-language television channel should gain credit with the EU, as will recent signs of a Turkish-Armenian rapprochement.

But the bad news is that Mr Sarkozy means what he says. Sources talk of “serious moves” by France to open a discussion with Turkey next year about alternatives to membership, to “put the cards on the table for the Turks”. France would want German backing before making such a move. The forthcoming election in Germany is likely to produce, as now, a coalition government that is divided on the Turkey question. That may help Turkey, as it ties Germany to the status quo of letting the talks go on.

Mr Aktar suggests that individual EU countries which back Turkey should name an unofficial target date for entry: perhaps 2023, the centenary of the Turkish republic. The whole EU would never agree to a deadline, he recognises, but even the idea of an end-point would helpfully boost morale.

It is an intriguing suggestion. On the EU side, the passage of time can be expected to make the case for Turkish entry stronger. Yet in Turkey the slow pace of talks is reducing the chances of success. If Europeans and Turks can meet somewhere in the middle, they might just make history.

[EPSILON]

Charlemagne

Turkey's circular worries
Sep 3rd 2009
From The Economist print edition

It is increasingly hard to pretend that Turkey's negotiations with the European Union are on track


TURKEY’S friends inside the European Union believe that history is on their side. Ask these national politicians, diplomats and EU officials if they think Turkey will one day achieve full membership, and they answer that it must. In a decade or two, they say, objections to Turkish entry will look trifling, next to the country’s strategic benefits as an energy hub, regional diplomatic power and bridge to the Muslim world, not to mention as a dynamic economy filled with young people.

Yet when it comes to the glacial pace of Turkey’s formal membership negotiations, those same friends are starting to sound the alarm. When talks began in October 2005, the popular notion was of a virtuous circle. Turkish reformers would use the EU process to push through changes that would transform the country. This would reassure Europeans, bring EU membership closer, strengthen the reformers and so on. In one of those polished phrases much beloved of diplomats, it was murmured that, for Turkey, the “journey is as important as the destination”.

Yet it turns out that, for the journey to go on, those embarked on it must also believe in the destination. Turks read newspapers. They know that European leaders like France’s Nicolas Sarkozy think it is time to stop “lying” to Turkey about full membership. Turkey is in “Asia Minor”, Mr Sarkozy says; he will not be the one to “tell French schoolchildren that the borders of Europe extend to Syria and Iraq.” The danger of such rhetoric is clear: doubt the EU’s sincerity and the circle turns from virtuous to vicious.

Complying with EU environmental law could cost €140 billion ($200 billion), says Cengiz Aktar, a professor at Bahcesehir University. No country would spend that without a clear path to membership. Some demands are pushy. One EU benchmark involves opening Turkey’s public-procurement market to European firms. That market is worth around €60 billion a year, says Mr Aktar. It is not going to open “while Sarkozy is going around saying Turkey will never be a member.” Thus reforms slow—and Turkey’s opponents inside Europe duly proclaim they were right all along and the country is unfit to join.

An independent commission of pro-Turkey bigwigs, led by a former Finnish president, Martti Ahtisaari, will publish a progress report on September 7th. They do not mince their words. Actions by “some European leaders”, they say, have “all but derailed the process.” At the same time, there has been a “regrettable” slowing of reforms inside Turkey. Add in polls that show growing Euro-disillusionment inside Turkey, and a “vicious circle” is upon us, Mr Ahtisaari and his colleagues conclude.

Out of the 35 “chapters” in the accession talks, only one has been completed. Eight are formally blocked because Turkey has not kept an agreement to open its ports and airports to traffic from Cyprus, an EU member since 2004 (Turkey does not recognise the Greek-Cypriot republic and insists that Turkish north Cyprus is being unfairly blockaded). The reunification of divided Cyprus would unblock this impasse. Promising peace talks began in 2008 under a new Cypriot president, Demetris Christofias. Yet it is now “hard to trace” a sense of urgency on the Greek-Cypriot side, says an official. This could cost the president of Turkish northern Cyprus, Mehmet Ali Talat, his job: he faces an election next year, and hardline opponents are circling. The European Commission must also report to EU governments in December on Turkish compliance with its port-opening promise. The report may set the scene for a big new row.

Mr Ahtisaari’s commission calls for carping European politicians to shut up, more or less, and stick to EU promises to judge Turkey’s membership application purely in terms of compliance with EU rules and values. The problem is that it is hard to see such politicians shutting up. In places like Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and France, Turkey-bashing is a vote-winner.

Finnish common sense
Ask him in person, and Mr Ahtisaari, who won a Nobel peace prize for mediating in such tough spots as Kosovo, suggests that a bit of time may sort this out. Mr Sarkozy will not be around forever, and Turkey’s membership talks will take years, he says. “Having once been a president, I tend to say: presidents come and go.” The key is for Europe to keep its word, and allow the talks to continue. Other senior figures are more nuanced. The good news, maintains one, is that the Turkish elite still appears to believe in the membership talks. The main Turkish opposition party seems to be more EU-friendly than before. Recent government concessions such as the opening of a Kurdish-language television channel should gain credit with the EU, as will recent signs of a Turkish-Armenian rapprochement.

But the bad news is that Mr Sarkozy means what he says. Sources talk of “serious moves” by France to open a discussion with Turkey next year about alternatives to membership, to “put the cards on the table for the Turks”. France would want German backing before making such a move. The forthcoming election in Germany is likely to produce, as now, a coalition government that is divided on the Turkey question. That may help Turkey, as it ties Germany to the status quo of letting the talks go on.

Mr Aktar suggests that individual EU countries which back Turkey should name an unofficial target date for entry: perhaps 2023, the centenary of the Turkish republic. The whole EU would never agree to a deadline, he recognises, but even the idea of an end-point would helpfully boost morale.

It is an intriguing suggestion. On the EU side, the passage of time can be expected to make the case for Turkish entry stronger. Yet in Turkey the slow pace of talks is reducing the chances of success. If Europeans and Turks can meet somewhere in the middle, they might just make history.

I have to clarify that the reason i am posting such articles is to put a hand in order we, in G/c side understand how the international community is considering some aspects which finally will affect seriously our case.

We , Greece and ROC , basing our official policy on the base that Turkey will be pressed by EU membership procedures and be more soft or change targets on CB and Aegean territory.The facts however show that Turkey's foreign policy is much more sophistigated than a simple EU membership. Turks can wait centuries but they will not accept any discounts on their targets, like we do during the last 49 years.
Personally i am afraid that Turkey already changed volume and status of foreign policy and they can not compared with Greece or Cyprus who are stuck on old motion policies without longterm targets.

My point is, if someone ask the G/cs which solution they consider is possible to be workable and acceptable by Turkish side the same time, it will be very difficult to find someone of them to know the answer.(I am not sure whether G/cs leadership knows also how to reply).

[halil]

SWEDISH FM SAYS CYPRUS WILL FACE DANGER OF REMAINING A DIVIDED ISLAND IF TURKEY WAS LEFT OUT OF EU
He warned that such a development would not only have negative affects on Cyprus but also on Turkey-EU relations and EU-NATO relations as well as the stability in the whole region.

[Tim Drayton]

The following extract from the findings of a survey entitled “Transatlantic Trends 2009” by the German Marshall Fund of the United States makes interesting reading:

http://www.transatlantictrends.org/tren ... sh_Key.pdf

Euro Disenchantment
Only 32% of Turks held a favorable opinion of the European
Union. Just 26% thought it was desirable for Brussels to
exert strong leadership in world affairs. And, by two-to-one,
Turks thought they should act alone (43%) rather than in
concert with the European Union.
Nevertheless, nearly half the Turkish population (48%)
thought membership in the European Union would be a
good thing, up from 42% in 2008. This contrasted sharply
with the 73% who supported joining in 2004. (See Chart 19)
And Turks were skeptical about their chances for eventual
admission to the Union. Two-thirds (65%) thought it was
not likely to happen.
EU members were ambivalent about Turkish membership
in the European Union, with a plurality (42%) thinking it
was neither good nor bad. This result is in line with earlier
findings. But a near majority in France (48%) thought taking
Turkey into the European Union would be a bad thing,
up from a third (35%) who thought that in 2004. Overall, in
the last year, opposition to Turkish membership was up in 9
of 11 EU countries surveyed. Americans (41%) were twice
as supportive of Turkey joining the European Union as were
EU members.
Despite their skepticism about Turkish membership, people
in the European Union were fatalistic about Ankara finally
joining their club. Half (54%) thought Turkey’s EU membership
was likely, albeit down from 60% who thought that
in 2008. (See Chart 20) And only in France (56%) did more
than half the population believe that Turkey would never
get into the European Union.
European Union opposition to Turkish membership may
have reflected those Europeans’ belief that Turkey has such
different values that it is not really part of the West. Such
views were particularly strong in Germany (77%) and
France (68%). Only the Romanians (51%), by a bare majority,
thought the Turks shared Western values. And barely a
third of Turks (34%) believed they shared common values
with the West.

[YFred]

SWEDISH FM SAYS CYPRUS WILL FACE DANGER OF REMAINING A DIVIDED ISLAND IF TURKEY WAS LEFT OUT OF EU
He warned that such a development would not only have negative affects on Cyprus but also on Turkey-EU relations and EU-NATO relations as well as the stability in the whole region.

What? You mean Turkey is not collapsing before our very own eyes? So all my predictions on imminent collapse of the dreaded Turk have been proven wrong? I whole heartedly apologise to the forum for my predictions on TTC (Total Turkish Collapse)