Why The European Union Needs Turkey

WHY THE EUROPEAN UNION NEEDS TURKEY
By Guler Sabanci

Financial Times (London, England)
November 7, 2006 Tuesday
Asia Edition 1

Turkey has been an integral part the twists and turns of European
history for 700 years. She has had her good days and bad days, she has
played with strong hands and weak hands, but she has always been an
influential player at the table of European politics. Our countries
know each other rather well.

We should remember this long history of engagement when discussing
Turkey’s European Union membership negotiations, which formally began
just last year. An EU report on the progress of the talks, due to be
released tomorrow, is being seen by some as a "crisis point". Yet
there will be no vote on accepting Turkey as a full member of the
union for at least another decade.

The progress report is important but must be seen in this context. It
is an interim document that underlines what still remains to be done
as opposed to celebrating what has been achieved. By its very nature
it cannot do justice to the profound importance of these talks when
it comes to facing the global issues of tomorrow.

The main challenges facing humanity over the coming century cannot
be tackled at the level of a single nation state. Climatic changes,
potential pandemics, the gap between rich and poor, security and
immigration all are problems that require a governance system that
covers significantly more than current sovereign areas. The EU is a
vaguely understood, but courageous, search for such a new governance
structure. My country has to be a part of this. Turning inward and
trying to close the world out is a backward step, both for the EU
and Turkey.

The strategic importance of Turkey within Europe is undeniable. Her
experience with multi-ethnic and multi-denominational governance
structures, geographic position, historical ties with and knowledge of
areas to its south and east, its young population, access to energy
and control of water resources make Turkey a critical player in the
emerging EU.

The main problem is political. Economic fears are often cited but
those arguments are quite empty. For sure, the current rules of the
EU would require a transfer of resources to Turkey for about 10 to 15
years. However, in plain business terms the discounted present value
of Turkey’s contributions to an ageing Europe beyond that period is
greater than the outlay. In the long run, in economic terms Europe
needs Turkey more than Turkey needs Europe.

We are moving towards a lofty goal but the road there is narrow and
leaves little room for manoeuvre. After 700 years of dealing with
each other, all parties can point to historical reasons for caution.

As the process is not really one of "negotiating" but checking to
see if Turkey fulfils certain conditions for entry, it is by its
very nature unilateral. Any unilateral process is open to all sorts
of misunderstandings that need a conscious effort to prevent or undo.

There are some principles to follow that will make this process easier.

First, unilateral does not – should not – mean "arbitrary" or
"variable". If it is seen that way the "candidate" may lose interest.

Something of this nature has been happening to Turkish public opinion,
in particular with respect to Cyprus. After the accession of a
divided Cyprus to the EU – in spite of the Greek Cypriot rejection of
the United Nations plan supported by the EU – the agreement whereby
sanctions on North Cyprus were to be lifted as a first step seems to
have been forgotten. Yet the demands on Turkey remain.

Second, there is a need to find a way of providing "wiggle room" for
all parties to allow politicians to win the support of their public.

It is in no one’s interest to push any party into a corner from which
they cannot emerge.

Third, the EU must avoid blatant asymmetry. Turkey can not be chastised
for parts of its penal code that may inhibit freedom of expression
while member states try to criminalise historical debate about what
happened to Armenian and Turkish communities during the first world war
in a manner that inhibits free speech and research to expose the truth.

Fourth, there is a need to keep "pressure" in the system to ensure
that the requisite reforms are being implemented, in particular the
legal protection of the individual. This should not be hard as there
are many non-governmental organisations in Turkey pushing for such
reforms irrespective of the EU talks.

Most important there is a need for sincerity, an honest effort on both
sides to arrive at a successful result, Turkey’s accession as a full
member. It is unfortunate that pandering to domestic political concerns
has led to suspicions that the ongoing process may be insincere,
with member states going through the motions in full knowledge that
they have a preference for an outcome other than full membership.

In spite of all the fears over a significant setback, I am optimistic
that the talks will eventually reach a successful conclusion. A number
of things can, and will, change in the next decade.

Politicians will come and go and old fears will be faced by new
concerns. Our old continent has made errors of judgment in its long
history but seldom has it been unable to sense where its true interests
lie over an extended period of time.

The writer is chairman and managing director of Sabanci Group, the
Turkish conglomerate.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

You may also like

Emil Lazarian

“I should like to see any power of the world destroy this race, this small tribe of unimportant people, whose wars have all been fought and lost, whose structures have crumbled, literature is unread, music is unheard, and prayers are no more answered. Go ahead, destroy Armenia . See if you can do it. Send them into the desert without bread or water. Burn their homes and churches. Then see if they will not laugh, sing and pray again. For when two of them meet anywhere in the world, see if they will not create a New Armenia.” - WS