The statements having made since the first days of August caused Turkey to put under discussion in Europe once again. Wolfgang Schüssel, the Austrian Prime Minister, firstly said that he did not believe in the expectation of Turkey-EU negotiations to be concluded with full membership. Talking at the Summit of Southeast European Leaders, Schüssel advocated the opinion of “the necessity to put an end to the enlargement process in the Balkans”. In his speech, Schüssel, proposing the establishment of a “hard partnership network”, stated that particularly he did not believe the EU negotiation process with Turkey would be resulted in the EU membership. Instead, he explained his expectation for Turkey-EU relations to be put in a way of “firm cooperation” rather than the other options. Schüssel also added that he was in favor of putting Turkey’s EU membership under a referendum in Austria in case of the possibility of Turkey’s participation to the EU. 

Afterward, the Financial Times claimed that Turkey is slowing the EU process down and Ali Babacan, the State Minister and Chief Negotiator of Turkey for EU Affairs, are not interested in the process enough. Claiming that nobody applies for getting information from the EU Information Office located in Taksim, Istanbul; the Newspaper wrote that Mr. Babacan prefers to stay in Ankara instead of going Brussels to make negotiations. At the end, the Newspaper stated that Mr. Babacan rejected even(!) their interview offer as maybe its real intention about why it used such tough expressions for Turkey and Mr. Babacan.

Also, the German Government Partner Stoiber shared its well-known statements with the public. After that, the Report on Turkey whose provocative points overbalanced was published in the Foreign Affairs Commission of the European Parliament (EP). The final version of the report will be shaped at the General Assembly. However, the chorus has not been completed yet. It has to be required for Mr. Sarkozy to greet the public before the upcoming elections. Such an opportunity did not have to be missed and it had to be used to get public support. Mr. Sarkozy expressed on the last Friday in Brussels that Turkey should never be a member of the EU and the EU membership negotiations with Turkey should be stopped right now since Turkey did not open its ports to the Greek Cypriots. Moreover, in the recent opinion polls, emphasize has been made on a striking decrease in Turkish concern to the EU and even reversely on the fact that there is an increase in sympathy to Iran. (Global Trends 2006 Research of Marshall Fund) By the way, it requires to be stated that we (USAK), as a ‘think tank’ whose centre is in Ankara, during the summer, have invited the Ambassadors of the Embassies of the EU countries in Ankara in order to learn their opinions about the forthcoming EU-Turkey relations expected to be in tension. So far, none of the EU countries, except Poland, have responded with a positive answer. This is because all the high-ranked staff including Ambassadors was in holiday. Yet, the Palestinian, Israeli and Saudi Arabian Ambassadors visited USAK so as to discuss the Middle Eastern agenda under tension. That is to say, the only side which is uninterested to the EU was not only Ali Babacan and Turkish public but they were also the representatives and public opinion of the EU countries in terms of politics toward Turkey.

When all pieces are put together about the latest developments mentioned above, the picture becomes an understanding point. It means a Turkey which turns its face from the West toward the East, even toward Iran. This would certainly be not a desirable Turkey approved or accepted by both Turkish and EU publics to be lived together.

Then, it requires asking such question: Why? Why the EU has woken up aggressively like the bears hibernating but forced to awaken? As it was obvious even from the beginning of 2006 that Turkey-EU relations would experience a difficult period in the fall, why have the statements made one after another with the purpose of making the relations tense?

On Turkish side, there are harsh statements of the Prime Minister and a government getting stuck in the Cyprus issue because of the limited time. The more the government are in trouble with Cyprus issue, the more harsh statements are made and this has caused the relations to be strained unavoidably. However, Ali Babacan who is complained about being inactive in Brussels prevented the relations to be more strained thanks to his imperturbable explanation just after Turkey Report of the EP Foreign Affairs Commission.

***

In order to answer all these questions, it firstly requires explaining why it is expected that the relations will be strained in the fall. First of all, as known, the EP Report on Turkey will be published. After that, the EU Commission will publish the Progression Report and, in the end, the EU Council, the institution taking political decisions, will give decisions about the developments in December. It seems so that the Cyprus issue will go on being the major topic of the relations till the end of the year.

Since the time is getting limited after the promise of opening Turkish ports in 2006, the Government nearly lost the control of the process. The taken steps began to be more timid and hesitant. Naturally, Turkey’s current internal dynamics and especially internal politics have important effects on the decrease in steps taken for the EU process. Whereas the appointment of the General Staff has to be an ordinary one, it gained a political dimension. They manipulated the situation to create a tense environment. Then, the upcoming presidential elections was brought to the agenda as a rare opportunity for the opposition groups both in and outside of the assembly which are trying to put pressure on the government about the Cyprus issue. After this election, the general elections will engage the agenda. However, the important topic on the agenda for the PM Erdogan is the presidential elections. The opposition made great effort for the elections not to be realized in the current government period. It is not clear yet whether these efforts will be resulted in the way they desire or not. It is also not clear so far how the political scene will be shaped at the beginning of 2007 if the PM becomes insistent on settling in the presidential house. Therefore, it seems not possible for the Government to approach to the EU matters in a more libertarian way – even if it is a really important period for the EU process. In terms of Cyprus issue, the Government will also prefer to perform more cautious. The political deadlock in which the Government would fall is obvious in a case of newspapers headlines about a Greek Cypriot ship at an Istanbul port emptying its container. The Government will probably not want to undertake the cost of such situation in the detriment of the elections. It therefore wants to pass over this process with a minimum damage. In such situation, the government needs time. It is in an endeavor to overcome the problems with a minimum damage by extending them in a long process. This process is naturally the one which will last until two planned elections in the next year. Obviously, the experts know very well how such process will damage the EU membership process if preferred doing nothing.

It would maybe possible to solve the problem in some extent if the EU backs up Turkish government by making positive explanations in terms of the solution for the internal political problems of the government. However, it is exact that the EU and the opposition countries within the EU do not show the tolerance and patience similar to the case they do toward Iran. This is because the situation within the EU countries is not different than the one mentioned above. In the EU, the internal politics is also major determining element which is strong enough to capture the EU process. The EU countries experiencing more severe political crises than the Turkish government go on using Turkey’s membership as an instrument insistently in their internal politics. Attracting attention of the EU public opinion, which are already not content with the enlargement aspect, toward Turkey; the politicians of the EU member countries get benefits in political term by saying “we will not allow them to participate in the Union”. This is why it seems not possible to expect alteration of the relations in a reasonable way in 2006. The current situation of the relations which will keep in tension is actually a process granted by two sides implicitly. The parties are not in favor of the deepening of this process within this year. The political will required for the realization of the deepening are not existent in both sides.

The EU anymore has to put up with the results of its wrong steps taken in 1990s in terms of the Cyprus issue with the purpose of putting pressure on Turkey. During that period, the EU assumed that after the EU accepted the Greek Cyprus on behalf of the whole island, it could facilitate the solution or Turkey would leave the negotiation table completely. But the desired result did not happen. In the current situation, the negotiations are going on. The EU has to make the Greek Cypriots pleased in terms of its relations with Turkey; of course this is the case for Greece too. How will the EU be able to take balanced steps in favor of Turkey in spite of these two members in such a situation in which veto threat is constantly repeated? To fulfill this, the EU wants Turkey first to behave in a self-sacrificing manner. However, it misses the fact that Turkish side is anymore far below its self-sacrificing limit. When the Erdogan Government came to the power in 2002, it stated that it would pursue a “win-win” policy for the foreign affairs. However, currently, there remained nothing to win in terms of the Cyprus issue for the Erdogan government as long as there is no counter-step from the other side.

On the other hand, Turkey does not want to take any step in 2006 due to the internal affairs. It seems that the Turkish government is tired with doing lots of things just in a short time after considerably long time wasted for the solution. There should be no expectation from the JDP (AKP) government to make more political ‘hara-kiri’ as the latest surveys shows decrease in its public support for the first time from 35% to 25%. It is obvious that any possible wrong steps to be taken on the matter of Cyprus issue will have a profound effect on the success of AKP in the 2007 elections.

***

What the other factor slowing down the relations apart from the Cyprus case is the disturbance of someone seriously from the democratic developments and the point reached in terms of fundamental rights and freedoms since 2001. To whom did the democratic developments bother? First of all, it bothers the PKK terrorist organization. This is because progress in democracy and expansion of the freedoms fulfilled by the government became initially for the benefit of the Kurdish people. The decisions taken about the education and publication in mother tongue were the taboos of the secular Turkey. The region was attracting the investments as long as it overcomes the security concern and naturally the unemployment which is one of the reasons of the terror was decreasing. However, these democratic developments did not make the PKK terrorist organization pleased. This is because they began to lose the political ground and consequently their propaganda instruments. The thing to do for the PKK had to cause more blood and tear shedding down in order to prevent their losses. Likewise, the tension increased once again seeing that the bombs are exploding and the funerals of the soldiers are sent to everywhere in Turkey. The obtained progress in democracy in consequence of so much effort came to the point to be lost. Inappropriateness of the ‘law of Struggle against Terrorism’ was discussed. The English case, the length of the custody had been discussed for couple of months.

Even, the case came to the point of falling into trap of the organization without finding out exactly the aim of the terrorist organization well. The main policy of the organization was the limitation of fundamental freedoms and thanks to this situation it was the creation of environment for propaganda. In spite of so much pain, such a fault did not take place. This is a really important progress for the sake of the realization of the Copenhagen criteria in Turkey. This is mainly because the Copenhagen criteria require the fundamental rights and freedoms to be permanent and organizational. Even this stage displays the phase covered by Turkey in terms of the EU membership in a positive manner.

Another factor slowing down the EU-Turkey relations is also the formation of a ‘nationalist construction’ which is nurtured with the extremist nationalism increasing in Turkey as it does in Europe and which has the most dangerous feature of the separatist movements even if it has a claim of supporting Turkey’s integration. It is tried to be shown by those who carry the role of falcon in cases of the purchase of properties by the foreigners in Turkey, Cyprus, Northern Iraq and Lebanon that there seems to be an environment in Turkey as if there was a Turkish-Kurdish struggle. In spite of the provocations, the Turkish people were not deceived thanks to their common sense. However, this movement is quite disturbed from the continuation of the EU process.

***

The picture is rather different on the other side of the medal. The EU side is also engaged with its internal problems. The EU looking for its Constitution has not find out a solution to increasing racism and enmity against the foreigners yet. The EU member countries have still not regarded the immigrants whose number reached almost 25 million as its own part and have not integrated them yet. The policies excluding them are still among the most striking ones and they benefit from this situation mostly in politics. The EU pluralism is getting to be far from being a union or community of values for the benefit of the human rights. The expressions, excluding the foreigners which are used by the politicians like Sazkozy as in the case of France or the other EU countries, are the key indicators the possibility of cutting off the branch the EU is sitting on for the sake of the interests in one day. However, the interesting is that those who cut off the braches their own branches on which they are sitting do not realize they would also remain under them. In fact, trifling with the foreigners and immigrants for the EU means at the same time to put the dynamite on the future of the EU. None of the countries should assume that they would save themselves by playing with the fire. It would not be hard for the hundreds of thousands of the people to go out the streets for demonstrations as the French case.     

The EU countries should give up the policy of making Turkey’s EU membership a discussion topic in all stages in order to find solutions their own internal problem. When will Turkish membership be realized as the closest time? In the year of 2014. In that period, who will have the power of the administration of the countries such as France, Austria and Denmark? It is not clear from now on. Then, why is there a need to make a decision about Turkey’s membership in referendum for almost ten years by ignoring the will of the political powers of this period? There is only one reason: getting the public support in the elections, in other words greeting the electorates.

The politics requires a serious responsibility in the fields of international relations. If you claim that you have the leaderships of both the region and the world in terms of the fundamental rights and freedoms, you have to fulfill its requirements. The European Parliament has to give people what for the massacres executed in Rwanda, Algeria, Bosnia, Serebrenitsa, Libya, Africa, Aborigines and the other places in 20^th century before the ones claimed as Pontus Greeks and Syrian Orthodox. Without regarding these facts, the focus on just this region carries the feature which would destroy the sincerity of the relations completely.            

By the way, it requires adding that the Pope does not need to make an effort so as to understand the Koran. It is enough for him to understand and tell his own religious book. For some reason or other, in the world, they are always not the Christians those who present their other cheeks (in Algeria, Libya, Bosnia etc.)…