Le Dilemme turc ou les vrais Enjeux de la Candidature d'Ankara (The Turkish Dilemma or the Real Stakes in Ankara's Candidacy)

Citation

Richardson, J. (2006), "Le Dilemme turc ou les vrais Enjeux de la Candidature d'Ankara (The Turkish Dilemma or the Real Stakes in Ankara's Candidacy)", Foresight, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 82-83. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680610647165

With Turkey in the European Union's spotlight for perhaps a full decade ahead as the 25 existing members debate her admissibility, this analysis by Del Valle and Razawi of the Turkish attitudes involved is hypertopical. Under the presidency of Tony Blair, the EU began in October 2005 formal debates on whether or not Turkey will join its club. One technical stumbling block, replete with serious political overtones, is Turkey's continuing refusal to recognize the Republic of Cyprus. (Turkey still occupies the northern part of this Mediterranean island).

More substantively, perhaps, the different forms of opposition or resistance manifested among the 25 may prove to be insurmountable. The main author of the draft European Constitution (not yet approved, much less ratified), Valéry Giscard d'Estaing has declared on several occasions that Turkey simply does not belong in Europe. Tony Blair says yes, France's Jacques Chirac ditto (thus far), and Germany's Angela Merkel will probably opt for a strong stand against despite the “pro” position of her predecessor Gerhard Schröder. Austria remains, thus far, adamantly against but is willing to consider a status of “privileged partnership” for Turkey. As for Italy, who knows at the moment what Silvio Berlusconi's (or his successor's) final position will be?

Seen from the opposite shore, so to speak, the views of the Turks themselves are what make up the brunt of the thesis developed by authors Del Valle (a geopolitical analyst) and Razawi (a war correspondent). They remind readers that Turkey is not geographically an endemic part of Europe, and that the very fact of her application for political integration within Europe is a challenge to the European‐ness of the Union. Would the Turks themselves –our two authors ask – be able to authenticate others' utterances of the EU's identity, its geographical confines and civilizational features? How, too, might the traditional Europe then define its own future development and goals in a globalized world?

1 Pitfalls and apprehensions

The authors consider today's Turkey still rather far from the millet (nation) that some of its pro‐Europeanists would claim. One reason is the continuing, often pervasive, influence of the military. The uniformed National Security Council (MGK), for example, directly manages as much as 43 percent of the country's economy. The idea of even attaching Turkey to Europe, caution the authors, would also extend a wary Old Continent's “war frontiers”. This could, in turn, give rise to the resurgence of a new, centralized Turko‐Arab caliphate (a jurisdiction presided over by an Islamic spiritual leader) which, in the authors' view, would surely constitute a “profoundly new” sort of state. The authors construe such sentiments as a search by many Turks for a new “Ottomanism”.

Before this would happen, however, authors Del Valle and Razawi emphasize that Turkey in its quest for EU status has not yet conformed with the Copenhagen criteria of 1993, conditions for admission to the EU.

1.1 Copenhagen criteria and Madrid requirements

When the European Council met in Denmark, in 1993, it prescribed that States desiring accession to the European Union should have achieved the following:

• •

  Stability of their institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and respect for and protection of minorities.

• •

  The existence of a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union.

• •

  The ability to take on obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.

The Council further decided at its meeting in Spain, in 1995, that the candidate country must have created the conditions for its integration through the adjustment of its administrative structures … (This is a prerequisite of the mutual trust required by EU membership). Source: Europe‐Enlargement, via Internet

Will this, realistically, come about? In a detailed Chapter II the authors remind that the Copenhagen guarantees have not been met. They are specific about this. Democracy: the destiny of the country's ethno‐religious minorities remains “precarious”. Rule of law: the main criticism levelled is that Turkey still has not accounted for the genocide of its Armenian minority during the First World War. Respect for human rights: these, including the freedom of expression, remain flouted (bafoués, p. 90), although torture is no longer “systematic”. Protection of minorities: Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is quoted as insisting that recognition of the Greek‐Cypriot sector of Cyprus is “out of the question”. The status of the Kurds, too, is far from resolved.

Given these incongruities in a nation aspiring to democratic membership, the authors emphasize that Turkey remains a country torn between its own prosperous western sector that looks west:

• •

  its élite and its universities being more or less respectful of the Kemalist policy established in the 1920s; and

• •

  an Islamo‐Asian eastern portion very much in harmony with the rest of southwestern Asia.

Both regions have supported strongly, furthermore, an overall Islamic‐conservative tendency within the country as a whole since the 1980s.

Del Valle and Razawi have produced a book that is anything but a sterile succession of words and phrases. They present convincing results of interviews with political leaders, the intelligentsia of the country, and even representatives of Turkey's minorities, some of whom are thanked in the Acknowledgements. (Carefully compiled Appendices spell out in full, with figures and dates, the stakes involved for all parties.) In sum, the authors call on Europe's “moral union” to look after itself with the utmost care, safeguarding against what could be an Islamist Trojan horse, so that Europe not lose both its “soul” and its “identity”. Strong words.