TAT - ANKARA
After the Brussels Summit on 17 December 17 2004, The Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan and his companions were welcomed as the “conquerors”. The welcome which was started at the airport continued with a “feast” in the Ankara Kýzýlay Square. Although the Prime Minister Erdogan said “We are not spoiled and will never lose our self-control”, the tv-radio news and newspaper headlines were full of “how we pull up stakes with Europe and European leaders, “ and “how we oppressed the Greeks and get what we want”. However, the obstinate opponents of Europe claimed that in December 17 Turkey sacrificed Cyprus in return of the accession date. According to these people Turkey has gained nothing even before the summit. If such is the case which one is the real fact? December 17 is the date of “Turkish Entrance into Europe” or is the date of gaining nothing by adding more concessions” to the existing ones.
***
First of all, when we look at the remarks before the Summit we see that Turkey went to the EU Summit with “four red lines”:
1. An exact date should be given for the negotiations and this date should not be open-ended.
2. Before the start of the negotiations Turkey can not take any more steps in Cyprus Issue.
3. The aim of the negotiations should be full membership. The alternatives which will distort the full membership, such as, “privileged partnership” or ‘B Plan’ can never be accepted.
4. Permanent derogations (limitations) can never be accepted by Turkey.
***
At the end of the Summit each of these lines were exceeded. If we handle them one by one, the first months of 2005 do not come true, instead the EU, with a French insistence, determined October 3, 2004 as the starting date.
In addition, the exact date of the end of negotiations has not been defined, it has been especially stated that the negotiations will be open-ended. In other words, the negotiations between Turkey and the EU might be continued forevermore. For this reason, December 17 has not given guarantee for Turkey’ full membership. Until now, Turkey has been waiting for 41 years, and according to the draft Turkey can wait 41 more years without any progress.
Secondly, Turkey was the one who promise not to take a step in Cyprus before the negotiations. Turkey and the TRNC (Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) have realized all of the EU and UN requirements and have made all of the concessions, however, Turkey faced with new concessions in the Summit, also added that before solving the problem, EU have declared the membership of the Greek Cypriots as the only representative of the island despite all of the concessions Turkey has made. Besides, though there have not been a signed written agreement, Turkey has pledged to take a step in Cyprus Issue before the start of the negotiations. The South (Greek) Cyprus with the other 9 newly joined member countries will be included into the scope of the Ankara Agreement until the October 3. Namely, an indirect recognition will eventuate. This step does not mean that Greek Cyprus will be recognized as the only legitimate Cyprus State, but should be noted as a concession for Turkey before the negotiations. In other words, the second red line is also dispersed. Turkey, before the starting of the negotiations, takes a step in Cyprus.
Thirdly, Turkey had declared that essentially the aim of the negotiations should be full membership, and the privileged partnership would not be accepted. Although the EU leaders tell that their ultimate aim is the full membership, the expressions of “if Turkey does not assume the obligations of membership it must be ensured that it is fully anchored in the European structures” in fact means a ‘kind preparation’ for a “privileged partnership”. There is no difference between the Summits indirect ‘membership formula’ and the “privileged partnership” proposal of the German Christian Democrats and the French opposition to Turkey. “Privileged partnership” can be defined as the enlarged definition of the customs unity. Briefly, this red line has not been accepted in the summit.
***
Another Turkish requirement was that the EU cannot bring any permanent limitation (derogations) in funds, agricultural politics, free movement, etc. According to the Turkish officials any permanent derogation damage the spirit of the Union, and in this respect Turkey was quite right. A full membership which could not offer free movement right has no meaning for Turkey, because, thanks to the Customs Union and a 41-years-old relation with the EU, Turkey has all the ‘privileged relationships with the Union’. Unfortunately, when we look at the Decision of the Summit, the EU brought just the opposite of Turkey’s demands onto the table, and during the Summit very little could be changed. In other words, Turkey again has gained almost nothing on this issue. The concessions for Turkey do not allow a normal membership.
Consequently, Turkey went to Brussels with four basic “sine qua non” but nearly none of these were accepted and all of these red lines were exceeded.
***
If all of the Turkish demands were refused, in this respect can we call it as “a great victory”?
Tayyip Erdogan and his team can be considered as heroes?
Answer is ‘Yes’.
Turkey has gained a victory in December 17 and Erdogan and his team are to be appreciated because of their success in Brussels. Although it is early to ‘shoulder them’ or to ‘prepare feasts in the public squares’ they are to be congratulated.
Above all these, the “red lines” which were defined before December 17 were really realistic requirements and if this fact was not noticed by Abdullah Gul, Turkish Foreign Affairs Minister in Ankara but soon has realized in Brussels. December 17 summit barely showed that European public’s 1000-year old prejudices have stayed unchanged. Until now, Turkey has not been considered as a “serious candidate” by the member countries of the EU. They have never deemed Turkey as a “real European” and a “real candidate”. The public opinion which is manipulated by religionist extreme Christians, anti Turkish Greek, Greek Cypriot, Armenian and PKK lobbies has formed a great obstacle for Turkey to overcome.
In conclusion, the EU leaders’ will to take Turkey as a member is not enough. If there is not a strong and real intention behind the back of the documents signed, then the agreements are not considered to be worthy. In this condition, the concepts such as, Cyprus, permanent derogations, full membership, etc. lose their meanings. If there is will in them these ‘details’ would gain importance.
In the Brussels Summit Turkey has strengthened this mentioned good-will and has developed envision that Turkey is a real candidate for the EU. Before and during the Summit Turkish leaders proved that Turks are ‘true Europeans’, however they confronted the old racist and discriminative European habits. Turkey passed the test; the EU’s test is still in process. Because of this reason Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan and his team should be congratulated. They became successful in keeping Turkey on the way of the EU membership.
It can be said that, like the December 17, there will be more summits in near future. Turkey needs time to erase all of the prejudices and this period of time is taken from the EU. Besides, the defenders of Turkey in EU have become more powerful. One may ask that Turkey who has not erased these prejudices for 41 years could have erase them until October 3? However, an important point should be considered that the EU and Turkey have never reached a kind of relationship in which they can truly communicate with each other: As said before, EU had not considered Turkey as a “real candidate”. On the other hand, Turkey only communicated with the EU leaders and did not realized importance of dealing with the European public opinion. Also the real intentions of the decision former makers in Turkey are a debatable issue. Whereas, after the September 11, Turkey and EU are open to listen and understand each other.
December 17 is a great victory for Turkey because the main need of Turkey is not EU but the EU process, and Turkey took what it really wanted.