AKSAM- Retired Ambassador Coskun Kirca writes on the recent Laeken summit and its repercussions for Turkey. A summary of his column is as follows:
What the Laeken European summit has wrought for Turkey cannot be regarded as positive steps for its full EU membership. During the Nice EU summit, the number of deputies allotted for the member states in the European Parliament was stated, but no such provision was made concerning Turkey. This deficiency was not compensated for during the Laeken summit. In terms of 'realpolitik', the failure to address this point has no importance, as the EU member and candidate countries have as yet been unable to define what kind of a structure the Union will have when it completes its enlargement process. This aspect bears great significance for Turkey. Will the EU remain a union of nation-states or will it choose a federal mechanism? Polls show that Turks would not easily accept a federal-type arrangement. The public should be clearly told how much Turkey's freedom of action would be lost on foreign policy and defence issues - taking the difference of interests among us into consideration- if we entered the EU under the present circumstances. The Laeken summit decided to convene a convention in order to make recommendations to the member states regarding the future structure of the EU. Turkey will participate in this convention with the right to voice its opinion, but no right to vote. Every member and candidate country will be represented at the convention by a government representative and two deputies and former French President Valery Giscard D'Estaing has been named its chairman. This is not an ordinary political matter. Turks have to choose between accepting or rejecting assimilation in a European federation. Our fantasy that a relative standard of prosperity will be reached by becoming a member of the EU should be abandoned. The latest news coming from the EU is another cause for concern.The EU has not included the PKK or DHKP-C in its new list of terrorist organisations. EU circles are stating that it prepared this list to finger the terrorist organisations acting within its borders, and that a list of international terrorist organisations would be made later. If this is true, Germany is still unable to see that the PKK is operating within its own borders. Even if the EU puts the PKK and DHKP-C onto a second list, such a difference cannot be reconciled with the recent decision taken at the NATO Council that terrorism, wherever it may take place, is a threat to all civilized nations. Turkey should bring this issue to the Nato Council immediately. How can Turkey enter such a Union which bases its policy on such a distinction? Still another issue is that the EU has not accepted as yet to begin monitoring the harmonization of Turkish laws with the community acquis, even while it is conducting such studies with six other candidate countries. However, none of these countries have entered the Customs Union or harmonized ther joint trade and services policies, whereas Turkey certainly has. At present the only positive development in Turkey's relations with the EU have been seen in the proposed European army. There is no other reason for Turkey to be pleased with the EU's current positions.
SOURCE: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PRESS AND INFORMATION