The writer is an academic at the International Relations Department of Near East University in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC).
ISTANBUL
Turkey and Europe have been neighbors for centuries, sharing the same geography. Turkey politically preferred the West in the international arena and became a member of all Western international organizations. It is a member of leading organizations including the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Council of Europe and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
In 1963, Turkey also signed an agreement creating an association with the European Economic Community -- long before it became the EU. The country applied for full membership to the community in 1987, signed the Customs Union agreement in 1996 on its path to the EU accession, and negotiations for full membership started on Oct. 3, 2005.
Since then, the EU has misinterpreted Turkey's moves for Westernization, and the negotiations have remained "structurally asymmetrical," with the bloc assuming Turkey’s desire for accession “indispensable,” and attempting to continuously obtain concessions from the country, putting forward Turkey's political and economic problems.
To give a concrete example, since Turkey's application for full membership in 1987, all reports of the Council of Europe established an “organic link” between the accession process and the Cyprus issue. Although it is known that it is a sensitive issue for Turkey, the country was portrayed as the most responsible actor for the deadlock in Cyprus. Turkey was asked both to contribute to the process and recognize the Greek Cypriot administration of Southern Cyprus.
The accession negotiation process is full of double standards and paradoxes against Turkey.
Turkey is the only country that signed the Customs Union agreement without being a member of the EU. Under the agreement, despite not joining the decision-making mechanisms, Turkey was obliged to abide by the foreign trade agreements, economic policies and customs agreements that the EU signed with other countries.
Also, Turkey eliminated tariffs and duties on all goods coming from Europe, while the sectors in which Turkey has a relative advantage -- such as agriculture and textiles -- have been excluded from the Customs Union agreement.
Moreover, Turkey has been deprived of rights, including financial aid and freedom of movement for workers, although these rights were included in the additional protocol in 1973 and confirmed to enter into force with the Customs Union agreement.
The Negotiation Framework Agreement signed in 2005 was an essential document of the negotiation process and determined the principles, procedures, and chapters of the accession negotiations.
The document has specific expressions, not mentioned for another candidate country before. These expressions suggest that the negotiations could be unilaterally suspended by the EU at any time, an open-ended negotiation process, not guaranteeing full membership.
The most striking article involving double standards says that even if Turkey becomes an EU member, the country would face limitations on free movement and structural and agricultural policies for a certain period.
It also even stated that the EU could impose “permanent” restrictions on free movement, permanent residence and work permits for Turkish citizens. It is quite challenging that these expressions in the Negotiation Framework document contradict even with the fundamental rights of the EU.
If we compare the accession process to a marathon, regardless of whether Turkey runs its best, the EU referees will move the finish line forward, aiming to never end the race.
Today, the most fundamental problem in Turkey-EU relations is that the EU becomes literally a “side” after the Greek Cypriot administration of Southern Cyprus joined the EU. The Greek Cypriot administration and Greece manipulated the EU policies.
Turkey and the TRNC were pushed for being “others” in the eyes of the EU. Therefore, the expansionist policies of Greece and the Greek Cypriots and Turkey’s rightful demands stemming from international agreements were ignored. Turkey was condemned due to its hydrocarbon activities in the region and was even faced with EU sanctions which have limited effects.
When we look at the other side of the coin, Turkey is an important and strategic country in many aspects. It is the only democratic and Muslim country that maintains an accession process with the EU. Turkey has become the most important regional power with its rich history, cultural structure, undeniable military power and expanding diplomatic activities.
Turkey is also a bridge between Europe and Asia, and an energy corridor located on the world’s most important hydrocarbon reserves and transition routes.
The EU tries to see Turkey through old models, despite Turkey’s expanding geopolitical, political and economic power. It is a problem for the future of the EU, rather than Turkey.
Relations with Turkey will also determine the EU’s role in regional politics particularly when we are currently in need of respect among those considered "different". Developments in the Mediterranean and Middle East regions have once again demonstrated the accuracy of this claim.
Without Turkey, the EU could not be successful in solving regional problems such as illegal migration, international terrorism, cultural, environmental and identity problems, as well as unemployment and rising racism.
For ensuring its security, today the EU gives particular importance to two issues, including migrants and energy transfer. Even a small number of Syrian migrants have directly affected election results in Europe.
The key to the migration problem is in the hands of Turkey. Hosting over 5 million Syrian refugees under legal procedures, if Turkey allows legal and illegal migration to Europe, it is obvious that the continent will be in chaos.
The Berlin Conference is a result of Turkey’s consensus with Russia and Turkey’s decision to deploy soldiers in Libya. The conference aimed to prevent not only the flow of migrants from Libya but also the disruption of natural gas and oil trade from Libya to Europe.
The security issue is another aspect that shows that the EU highly needs Turkey. It could not be possible for the EU, which does not even have a regular army, to create military power in the future having an impact in the region.
In this regard, it is certain that the defense of the EU will be under the initiatives of the NATO and U.S. in the near future. The situation has become more pessimistic with the U.K., the most significant military power of the bloc, leaving the EU and as U.S. President Donald Trump trying to exercise power over the EU by implementing “America first” policies.
Under these circumstances, having limited opportunities, capabilities and never-ending debates on the military budget and sovereignty, it seems extremely difficult for the bloc even to play an effective role in regional politics, let alone global politics.
All these problems are based on the struggle for hydrocarbon sources in the Eastern Mediterranean. The cheapest and safest energy lines undoubtedly will reach Europe passing through Turkey.
The political and economic stability of Turkey, which strengthens its role as an energy corridor in the region especially with the Turk Stream and Trans Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline projects, has vital importance for Europe.
Despite this clear situation, it is a contradiction that, with the manipulation of the Greek Cypriots and Greeks, the EU tries to deny Turkey’s international rights in the Eastern Mediterranean and protect its stance.
Cooperation between the EU and Turkey will also enhance the EU's regional activities.
In conclusion, Turkey is a very significant country that the EU cannot ignore in political, military, economic, geostrategic and energy fields. The biased stance of the EU, manipulated by Greek Cypriots and Greeks, means the union shoots itself in the foot. The EU’s relationship with Turkey will determine its future role in international politics, even more so in the post-Brexit period.
*Opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Anadolu Agency.
