BY ALI BAYRAMOGLU
YENI SAFAK- On their path towards European Union membership, many candidate countries first fulfilled the political criteria and then the technical ones. The Copenhagen criteria make up the initial phase for candidate countries through which their democracies are harmonized with the EU’s understanding of the rule of law. In the second phase, negotiations cover technical, social and economic issues. Naturally, it is always the first phase which sees the most intense discussions in the candidate countries, as they feel that their national sovereignty is being threatened.
However, this hasn’t been the case in Turkey. Despite two years of radical reforms, significant discussions on the country’s national sovereignty have been absent. Opposition to reforms has come from bureaucrats and certain small groups only.
On the other hand, a reactive atmosphere is dominating our country in the runup to Oct. 3 when our membership negotiations are expected to begin. This attitude is of a political and social nature, reminding me of sovereignty discussions. Although these reactions don’t refer to a clear opposition to EU membership, they rather signal a more inward-looking national attitude. The closer we get to the EU, the more we try to box ourselves into our own boundaries.
There are two overlapping problems that we need to deal with. First, Turkey must reinforce its recent reforms in terms of both mentality and implementation. The Armenian issue, a possible retrial of terrorist Abdullah Ocalan and the Fener Greek patriarch issue are some of more critical problems that Turkey will have to face in the future. By their very nature, these problems are different from the issues related to the reform process. Unlike in the past, we will have to deal with problems aside from civilianizing the state structure and maintaining a balance between military and civilian institutions. This time we’ll tackle deeper problems, ones hard to identify and distinguish from others such as redefining our social identity and facing our past. The Armenian and Kurdish problems are here to stay. We can’t avoid discussing them. Thus, such tense issues are very likely to spark social opposition and reactionary mechanisms in the future, which would probably lead our country to a kind of polarization. In this stage, we’ll experience both domestic tensions and international ones.
Each area of tension feeds another. For example, the possibility of Ocalan’s retrial might exacerbate tension between different groups and incite ultranationalist reactions even among the most unexpected circles. This will be a true test for our democracy. Political and social rationality is crucial now.
The second big problem is an issue which has yet to be resolved despite all of the recent reforms, one which refers to a cherished ideal, a democratic hope: the civilianization of the state structure. The military is still very influential in civilian politics and institutions. All of these problems can’t be solved immediately. I guess we need some time to set in motion domestic dynamics which will heed nothing but the national will.
Today, our biggest problem is that out society has yet to choose between transformation and maintaining the status quo. In time, we will all have to face ourselves…