International Strategic Research Organization (USAK) hosted a meeting with key European Parliament members concerning the recent developments and deadlocked relations between Turkey and European Union on 3rd of November 2010.
The conference titled “Future of Turkish-EU Relations” provided a unique opportunity for the speakers and participants to discuss the problems and trajectories in Turkey-EU relations. Turkish and European experts in their fields as well as the policy makers attended to the conference. The purpose of the conference was to provide overview and possible recommendation concerning Turkey- EU relations. USAK hosted the members of “Friends of Turkey Group” namely, Andrew Duff (President of the European Federalists, UK), Alexandra Thein (Germany), Anneli Jaateenmaki (Former Minister of Finland), Metin Kazak (Bulgaria), Marietje Schaake (Netherlands), Jelko Kacin (Former Minister of Defence of Slovenia), Diane Wallis (Vice President of European Parliament, UK), Anne Maria Corraza- Bildt (Sweden), Birgit Schnieber Jastram (Germany), Jo Leinen (Chairperson of Environment Committee,Germany), Jutta Steinruck (Germany); under the chairmanship of the Guner Özkan, the chair of Center of Eurasia Studies, and Alosz Peterle, Member of European Parliament, President of the Friends of Turkey group and former Prime Minister of Slovenia.
The conference began with two comprehensive presentations which addressed the Turkey-EU relations by USAK experts; Mustafa Kutlay and Ceren Mutus.
Mustafa Kutlay in his presentation, focused on three pillars of EU-Turkey Relations. Kutlay focused on the changing dynamics of Turkey’s EU journey, future of Turkey- EU Relations and the discussion about the whether Turkey drifting away from the EU.
Regarding the dynamics of Turkey- EU Relations, Kutlay stated that “free market economy and economic development” together with “institutionalization of democracy and development of human Rights” are the two main objectives for Turkey. Furthermore he also touched upon two other pillars “stability in foreign policy in instable regions” and “modernization within the context of Westernization.” However, according to him, the last two pillars are not priorities for Turkey at the existing conjuncture.
Ceren Mutus who is an expert on European Studies in USAK, briefly mentioned about the political reforms initiated between 2001 and 2004 and concluded her speech by shedding light on the legal and technical content of the recent constitutional package.
She claimed that the sweeping reforms that have been undertaken by Turkey between 1999 and 2004 were mainly due to the concrete commitment made by the EU towards Turkey’s membership. Turkey, with the aim of fulfilling the Copenhagen criteria and become eligible for the formal negotiations, pushed forward ambitious reform packages. In this context, death penalty was removed from the Turkish Constitution, the legal protection of socio-cultural rights of Turkish citizens irrespective of their ethnic and religious origin has been improved, the role of the military in Turkish political life has been significantly diminished, the freedom of expression has been enhanced and recently a comprehensive judicial reform promoting the well- functioning of the justice system was adopted.
After the presentations, Alojz Peterle takes attention to the difference between the planning and preparation from implementation. He emphasized that at the beginning of the process, there was romantic atmosphere. However Turkey’s membership is different and more difficult than the other candidate countries. Moreover he believes that, both sides done much of things such as reforms and values over the last decade. Furthermore, he marked that EU should show its interest and prove the support of Turkey’s membership during the process.
Former Finland Prime Minister, Anneli Jaateenmaki contributed to the discussion by highlighting the fact that there is a long list of reforms, but it is difficult to implement. Even it seems good and efficient; the implementation is not strong.
President of the European Federalists, Andrew Duff emphasized that Turkey’s military is so big and corrupted. It also failed to defeat PKK. He also raised the questions as follows: “Why Turkey is so tolerant to this big army and its activities. “If Turkey’s PM and President order army forces to withdraw from Cyprus, would they obey?”
Anna Maria pointed out her disappointment about the negative attitude toward the closed chapters which was shown by experts. She continued attracting attention to the different perspectives of the parties. For instance, according to her some people, of course, scared about Turkey’s membership because of the recession the process of secularization and Kurdish Issue.
USAK Expert, Prof. Ihsan Bal, respond the comments by stating that, “Turkish public mind is changing about the implementation of the reforms. Western political reforms and values will be implemented because there is a public demanding and politicians try to respond positively to these demands. To be honest, reforms are implemented more strictly and effectively when we compare it with 10 years before.”
He gave some interesting samples during his speech. For instance, he believes that “If military coups occur citizens will protest unlike 1980’s. Of course, some of the people want coups and military actions. We can label them as “ultra-nationalist” groups but they are a small minority group. In that respect democratic initiative towards Kurds got support and military is silent because of the huge majority support backing the project.”
According to Kurdish issue, he argues that it is a combination of economy and security. He mentions that the terms of numbers of killed-terrorists shows the military success but it is not the solution way. Of course democratic governments use military tools in order to solve the problem, like Britain, but it is just part of the issue. In other words, governments not take the military decision solely. They should use civil agents, such as police force and intelligence services take more roles in the region at the problem.
He emphasized the importance of the USAK report in 2005 which triggered the reform in military institution. “Army takes some steps and become more professional. It reduces the number of compulsory service man. But reforms need time, can be effective in long term. To be realistic the change over one night is impossible.”
Bal take attention to Cyprus issue as well. He underlines that there is not only one way to solve the issues. Turkish military presence is not the sole reason for the problem. Both sides should make some other progress and take actions. Moreover, Turkish Cypriots isolated and it is not fair while other side is recognized as EU member and enjoys benefits of the membership. In other words; we say “yes” to referendum but, get no benefit. Cyprus issue should take consider as package not as a chapter.
Güner Özkan closed the conference by admitting Turkey’s active policy in the last decade. He believes that those active policies are not aiming to replace EU, Turkey just diverse its options. He clearly pointed that; there will be no alternative to EU for Turkey. More importantly, he said the other alternatives are not comparable to the EU. In the ten year period, we hope to have more deep economic and political relations with EU.
By Firat Güzeldag and Kasim Ileri (JTW)
Journal of Turkish Weekly, 3 November 2010
|
International Strategic Research Organization (USAK) hosted a meeting with key European Parliament members concerning the recent developments and deadlocked relations between Turkey and European Union on 3rd of November 2010. The conference titled “Future of Turkish-EU Relations” provided a unique opportunity for the speakers and participants to discuss the problems and trajectories in Turkey-EU relations. Turkish and European experts in their fields as well as the policy makers attended to the conference. The purpose of the conference was to provide overview and possible recommendation concerning Turkey- EU relations. USAK hosted the members of “Friends of Turkey Group” namely, Andrew Duff (President of the European Federalists, UK), Alexandra Thein (Germany), Anneli Jaateenmaki (Former Minister of Finland), Metin Kazak(Bulgaria), Marietje Schaake (Netherlands), Jelko Kacin (Former Minister of Defence of Slovenia), Diane Wallis (Vice President of European Parliament, UK), Anne Maria Corraza- Bildt (Sweden), Birgit Schnieber Jastram (Germany), Jo Leinen (Chairperson of Environment Committee,Germany), Jutta Steinruck (Germany); under the chairmanship of the Guner Özkan, the chair of Center of Eurasia Studies, and Alosz Peterle, Member of European Parliament, President of the Friends of Turkey group and former Prime Minister of Slovenia.
The conference began with two comprehensive presentations which addressed the Turkey-EU relations by USAK experts; Mustafa Kutlay and Ceren Mutus. Mustafa Kutlay in his presentation, focused on three pillars of EU-Turkey Relations. Kutlay focused on the changing dynamics of Turkey’s EU journey, future of Turkey- EU Relations and the discussion about the whether Turkey drifting away from the EU. Regarding the dynamics of Turkey- EU Relations, Kutlay stated that “free market economy and economic development” together with “institutionalization of democracy and development of human Rights” are the two main objectives for Turkey. Furthermore he also touched upon two other pillars “stability in foreign policy in instable regions” and “modernization within the context of Westernization.” However, according to him, the last two pillars are not priorities for Turkey at the existing conjuncture. Ceren Mutus who is an expert on European Studies in USAK, briefly mentioned about the political reforms initiated between 2001 and 2004 and concluded her speech by shedding light on the legal and technical content of the recent constitutional package. She claimed that the sweeping reforms that have been undertaken by Turkey between 1999 and 2004 were mainly due to the concrete commitment made by the EU towards Turkey’s membership. Turkey, with the aim of fulfilling the Copenhagen criteria and become eligible for the formal negotiations, pushed forward ambitious reform packages. In this context, death penalty was removed from the Turkish Constitution, the legal protection of socio-cultural rights of Turkish citizens irrespective of their ethnic and religious origin has been improved, the role of the military in Turkish political life has been significantly diminished, the freedom of expression has been enhanced and recently a comprehensive judicial reform promoting the well- functioning of the justice system was adopted. After the presentations, Alojz Peterle takes attention to the difference between the planning and preparation from implementation. He emphasized that at the beginning of the process, there was romantic atmosphere. However Turkey’s membership is different and more difficult than the other candidate countries. Moreover he believes that, both sides done much of things such as reforms and values over the last decade. Furthermore, he marked that EU should show its interest and prove the support of Turkey’s membership during the process. Former Finland Prime Minister, Anneli Jaateenmaki contributed to the discussion by highlighting the fact that there is a long list of reforms, but it is difficult to implement. Even it seems good and efficient; the implementation is not strong. Anna Maria pointed out her disappointment about the negative attitude toward the closed chapters which was shown by experts. She continued attracting attention to the different perspectives of the parties. For instance, according to her some people, of course, scared about Turkey’s membership because of the recession the process of secularization and Kurdish Issue. USAK Expert, Prof. Ihsan Bal, respond the comments by stating that, “Turkish public mind is changing about the implementation of the reforms. Western political reforms and values will be implemented because there is a public demanding and politicians try to respond positively to these demands. To be honest, reforms are implemented more strictly and effectively when we compare it with 10 years before.” He gave some interesting samples during his speech. For instance, he believes that “If military coups occur citizens will protest unlike 1980’s. Of course, some of the people want coups and military actions. We can label them as “ultra-nationalist” groups but they are a small minority group. In that respect democratic initiative towards Kurds got support and military is silent because of the huge majority support backing the project.” According to Kurdish issue, he argues that it is a combination of economy and security. He mentions that the terms of numbers of killed-terrorists shows the military success but it is not the solution way. Of course democratic governments use military tools in order to solve the problem, like Britain, but it is just part of the issue. In other words, governments not take the military decision solely. They should use civil agents, such as police force and intelligence services take more roles in the region at the problem. He emphasized the importance of the USAK report in 2005 which triggered the reform in military institution. “Army takes some steps and become more professional. It reduces the number of compulsory service man. But reforms need time, can be effective in long term. To be realistic the change over one night is impossible.” Bal take attention to Cyprus issue as well. He underlines that there is not only one way to solve the issues. Turkish military presence is not the sole reason for the problem. Both sides should make some other progress and take actions. Moreover, Turkish Cypriots isolated and it is not fair while other side is recognized as EU member and enjoys benefits of the membership. In other words; we say “yes” to referendum but, get no benefit. Cyprus issue should take consider as package not as a chapter. Güner Özkan closed the conference by admitting Turkey’s active policy in the last decade. He believes that those active policies are not aiming to replace EU, Turkey just diverse its options. He clearly pointed that; there will be no alternative to EU for Turkey. More importantly, he said the other alternatives are not comparable to the EU. In the ten year period, we hope to have more deep economic and political relations with EU. By Firat Güzeldag and Kasim Ileri (JTW) |
Wednesday, 3 November 2010 Journal of Turkish Weekly |