Europe’s sincerity is being tested
Listening to some European ambassadors over the past several days and to Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül yesterday, it appears that there is a strong wall of misconception between the European capitals and Ankara.
First of all, there is a general belief that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) government has a bad track record of not insisting on policies and priorities and of making U-turns when confronted with major difficulties. According to one assumption, even though it might be outraged initially since it would not want to risk the derailment of Turkey-EU relations either because of the Cyprus problem or due to Europe’s hesitance to launch an accession talks process specifically aimed at accession and emphasizing a third option should accession not become possible at the end of the day, the Recep Tayyip Erdogan government would express dissatisfaction, make “a hell of a lot of noise” and then sit back, “evaluate what’s at risk” and take recourse to a policy of preparing Turkish public opinion that “the result obtained was indeed not such a bad outcome for Turkey.”
It is correct that this AKP government has been the most volatile government Turkey has ever had. They may be dying for something today but may come up with a more rational and conciliatory approach on the same issue tomorrow. It’s true that they have made numerous U-turns since coming to power and that even Turks sometimes have difficulty understanding whether they are serious or just testing the water. We keep on worrying that they have a hidden agenda. But all this aside, we would advise our European friends to avoid ignoring the limits of Turkey and of any Turkish government that is in office.
The AKP government is pro-EU and is pursuing a pro-settlement policy on Cyprus. Yet, how can they be expected to sell to the Turkish public an EU summit outcome that includes recognition — de facto or de jure — of the Greek Cypriot state as the “Government of Cyprus” — which to most Turks would mean abandoning the Turkish Cypriots — as a “good deal,” particularly if there is no clear-cut prospect of membership and no settlement possibility anytime soon on the island.
The second mis-conviction regards the trust in the “ability” of Turkey to understand the “peculiar conditions” in some European countries regarding Turkey, appreciate the hesitation of the Europeans and eventually agree on a set of clauses providing permanent and semi-permanent derogations in the EU Acquis in the event of accession.
It is correct that unlike previous governments, the AKP government adopted a rather bold pro-EU policy and did not try to escape the pressure for reform exerted by Europe by hiding behind the “but these are requirements of the special conditions for Turkey” pretext. Now, how could Turkey be asked to understand the “special conditions” in some European countries because of the “public sentiments” towards Turkey, its size, neighbors, religion or culture?
The third — and equally important — incorrect approach is based on a policy of deception — but somehow it’s forgotten that the people they are dealing with in Turkey are quite aware of what’s going on. The deception, disguised as “safeguarding the interests of Turkey,” is that some European “friends” of Turkey are claiming that “By their nature, accession talks or any negotiations process are open ended. No one can guarantee from the beginning of the process that there will be an agreement at the end of the day between the sides participating in such talks. But even if the talks fail to end in Turkey’s accession, we want it to remain anchored to Europe. Therefore, we want to say from the beginning that should talks fail to end in accession, Turkey should be offered a special and advanced association relationship with the EU.”
There can be no good intentions in such rhetoric. Any alternative to Turkey’s EU accession would be nothing less than trying to avoid marriage after a 40-year or so engagement and instead offering this country the role of Europe’s mistress. The conditions for Turkish accession talks should be no different from those previously applied to candidate countries. Hoping that Turkey will remain anchored to the EU despite a possible rebuff is nothing but a gross insult to this country.
Apart from these misconceptions, something is also wrong with the gift-wrapping: “What’s important will be the date. Forget everything else since it won’t mean anything once the accession talks start.”
No one in Turkey is fooled by the “date is important forget the rest” story, as the accession talks experiences of other countries bear witness to the fact that the council decision on the start of accession talks indeed acts like a constitution for the entire process. What one would consider a “detail” today may come up tomorrow as a biting reality that you can’t escape so easily. Therefore, every single word of the Turkey paragraph emerging from the Dec. 17 summit will be as important for this country as the date for the start of talks will be.
