Will the "EU-Turkey Model" hold?
Steve, I would like to ask a few questions before we wind up our discussion here. In RBNG, you state that if the Turkish military had actively opposed the Copenhagen Criteria, that would have been detrimental to their public image as the vanguards of modernization and, consequently, hurt their popularity. I share your point here. But would you not agree that Turkey’s top brass has been increasingly outspoken about its critical -- even hostile -- view of the EU lately? Is it the Turks’ diminishing respect and/or appetite for the EU that facilitates such overt opposition from the military? Could the e-memorandum of April 27 have been even possible if a good deal of EU’s soft power in Turkey had not evaporated? What might be the domestic indications if, in the coming months, Sarkozy et al. stick to their line that Turkey should not even be considered for full membership? Do you trust your “EU-Turkey Model” thesis, which, by the way, I fully agree with, will remain valid in the years ahead or might the EU and the Turkish military become inadvertent partners in delaying Turkey’s transition from authoritarianism?
Sarkosy's election makes Turkey's EU bid deader than dead.
May 25, 2007 6:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the Turks realize that a lot of people don't want them in the union. If there were referenda on admitting Turkey in current EU member states, Turkey can totally forget EU membership.
Sarkozy has absolutely no reason to change his anti-Turkey stance because he knows the French are behind him on this. This doesn't make Turkey's EU bid deader than dead, but it's on ice right now (and in the foreseeable future).
May 25, 2007 6:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yasemin, I hope you won't mind my asking you for a comment again on the perspective of those scared by the Islamicists and distrusting their promises of maintaining a more open democracy. I tend instinctively to agree with you, and I wrote a close friend over there who is scared, saying that I'm in a tradition of religious tolerance that would surely allow certain public displays.
She wrote back that she is very much more of a believer than I think (or that I am), although in a sort of dream of all religions merging. She thinks of Turkey's secularism not as authoritarian but as allowing her to believe what she wants. She sees many of the religious displays as authoritarian, in being forced by men on the women who practice them. She still fears that displays of religious belief by those in government approach too closely government sanction and, potentially, imposition of belief that would oppress her as well.
I've mixed feelings, but any comments? As I say, aside from this, I don't think it's at all about a choice between Islamic democracy and a military state like Egypt's. It's more complicated. It's about whether it's possible to maintain a non-Islamic state without military intervention and one that continues to allow public criticism of the military, and it's about strong popular feelings on both sides. Whether that's possible I can't answer, so I leave that to you and others.
John
http://www.haberarts.com/
May 25, 2007 6:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's been deader than dead for a long time now, and EU hypocrisy has been staggering. Turkey is entitled to every bit of their bitterness toward the EU.
May 25, 2007 7:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
You seem to be forgetting that the EU is a union of many countries. Some of them, primarily the UK, would very much like to see Turkey in the EU and have always been supportive of Turkey's EU bid. (Brits really, really don't want "deeper" political union in Europe, and the "wider" the EU is, the harder closer political integration becomes.)
Turkey lost out big time when Cyprus was admitted into EU. That pretty much torpedoed Turkey's EU chances - neither side will budge, only Cyprus is in the EU and Turkey isn't.
May 25, 2007 8:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
This may be worth a read for those interested in the current Turkey-EU :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6135406.stm
There are several other relevant articles if one follows some of the links on the right hand side of the page.
May 25, 2007 8:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
So what? The UK can wish all it wants. It won't get its way. Nothing of substance in Europe gets decided without the support of both Germany and France. (But plenty gets decided without the UK.) Both Merkel and Sarkozy are dead set against it, and the opposition in both countries will only grow with time.
So, yes, deader than dead.
And the UK has known that all along, by the way, and there's a great deal of disingenuousness on their part in the way they've used the Turkey question as a way of scoring cheap Atlanticist points. But they're not the only ones. There's tons of blame to go around.
May 25, 2007 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too many people miss the point about Turkey and the EU.
The main factor against it is not:
1. that Turkey is not in Europe
2. that Turkey is mostly Muslim
3. that Turkey's democratic credentials are dodgy.
4. that Turkey plays hardball with Cyprus.
Nope.
The main argument against it is that Turkey would be the EU's poorest country and (soon) the largest as well.
It's the economy, stupid!
May 25, 2007 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Reflection Cafe
Interesting discussion. Yasemin Hanim has brought thoughtful and challenging questions. Turkey-EU relations is a wonderful case to see how domestic and international politics entangge, in two ways, with mixtures of many elements: conflicting and mutual interests, cultural similarities and differences, clash of normative views on state, society and religion. For useful ideas on Turkey-EU relations see the Reflection Cafe's collection on this topic:
May 30, 2007 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink