Turkey's potential EU membership

Résumé du document

The European Union is preparing for an enlargement phenomenon. After having successfully grown from six to 25 members, the European Union is now marching ahead. However, there are some countries which, because of their history of their geographical, economic and political situation, cannot easily adhere to the EU. Turkey is a case in point. The accession of Turkey, which was requested since 1987, was rejected by an evasive answer of the commission at the end of 1989. In the summit meeting of Luxembourg, in December 1997, the member nations unanimously agreed on the fact that they could not take in Turkey as a part of the "European Club?. This was defended by Germany and the whole of the democratic Christian governments. However, in 1999, the European Commission decided to grant to Turkey the statute applicant country. The question that is raised immediately after this move is whether the same strategy is applied to the EU's relations with countries on the southern shore of the Mediterranean? Questions like these open up the whole debate about what it means to be European, what is the ultimate purpose of European integration and what are the EU's interests in the world at large. It is time to redefine and reinforce the EU's preferential agreements with its neighbors, and to do so in the most wide-ranging terms as possible. After a short presentation of Turkey and conditions required for European Union membership, we will examine why Turkey was selected to be a part of the list of the countries retained for widening and discuss the handicaps which Turkey suffers from as a candidate for the selection to the EU.

Extraits

[...] The problem is that the definition of the European borders is artificial and varied in time; the geographical argument (argument that 40% of French would privilege) is only one pretext. Dominique Strauss-Kahn affirms that his idea of Europe is a great group of country bringing not only the countries of the continent but also the whole of the Mediterranean countries like Morocco and Israel. Historical and cultural argument Turkey would not be historically European, like some people pretend. This is completely false. Indeed, Turkey, since the fall of the Roman empire of the East, has been essential for Europe. [...]

[...] Turkey and Europe belong to different universes in all connections. Beyond the democratic delay of Turkey, this only argument is enough to push back the idea of the accession of Turkey in Europe, if we want that it is strong, plain, coherent and effective Conclusion Turkey is the first of the 13 countries, on standby for integrate the EU, to have deposited its request for entry in the European organization. The first request for candidature was presented in 1963. This one was formalized after the return of the democracy in the country in 1987. [...]

[...] First of all, force is to note that Turkey, in spite of some projections before any symbolic systems, does not respect today any of the four conditions fixed at its adhesion. The respect of the rights of the minorities and equality of the citizens, whatever their origin or their religion. The Turkish laws provide that the Christians, the Alevis, the Jews are regarded as second-class citizens. To reach the responsibilities, it is necessary to embrace the Islamic religion and to Islamize its name. The religious membership is always registered on the Turkish passport. [...]

[...] European politicians still remember Turkey's many failures to deliver on reformist promises in the past. The most egregious example was arguably the abandonment by Tansu Ciller's government of promised reforms after the EU had lifted pressure through its agreeing the 1996 Customs Union with Turkey. For some Turks at least, there is no such thing as homegrown reform; only reform driven from outside. In spite of the positive outcome of the commission report, things could easily have gone wrong right up to the last minute. [...]

[...] The most controversial of these principles is secularism. Strict Kemalists interpret secularism to mean that religion should remain outside of public life and that political parties should not promote religious causes. Those who advocate a more flexible interpretation of secularism maintain that religious groups and causes should not be excluded from the public realm. Since the 1950s, the role of religion in politics has been a persistent and contentious issue in Turkey. The military, which sees itself as the ultimate guardian of the principles of Kemalism, has intervened in the political process on four occasions—in and 1997—because it feared that political parties posed a threat the secular nature of the state. [...]