Dr. Mehmet Özcan printable version send your friend

Will Turkey Makes the Problem Worse?

Turkish-EU relations, in their 45^th year now, are recently in a vicious circle of whether a date will be given or not. However, the decisions that will be taken in the December Summit and afterwards need to be closely scrutinized in terms of their repercussions. The December Summit decision and the ensuing process, which will judge whether Turkey is “included” or will continue to be “excluded” - “alienated” to be more exact, shall constitute one of the watershed events of history. Turkey, bordering the hotspot of the clash of civilizations, with its Moslem populace, its secular and democratic system of government, can enlighten the region. However, should Brussels once again shut the doors on its face, the rage and following instability will lead Turkey to annihilate the current level of cooperation.

When considering waves of international migration, while Turkey is a source country, its role as a transit route is more prominent. Turkey is the scene of intense illegal migration traffic due to its proximity to targeted European countries, its physical condition and its long and hardly manageable land and sea borders. For citizens of Asian countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, India, Sri Lanka, Syria, China, Bangladesh, and Palestine, it is a transit route, while for citizens of African countries such as Ethiopia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia and former Eastern bloc countries of Moldavia, Ukraine, and Russia, it is both a target country and a transit spot.

It is expected that as Turkey’s level of economic and social prosperity increases in parallel with the positive developments in the EU membership process, it will increasingly turn into a target country from a transit one in the illegal migration to the EU. There are several reasons for this: First of all, when comparing the population densities of EU countries with that of Turkey, Turkey has a remarkably low population density and should be in a position to sustain migration movements in the years ahead as in the case of Spain. While population density per square-kilometer is 90 in Turkey, the figure is 231 in Germany, 339 in Belgium, 478 in the Netherlands, and 243 in the UK, all target countries.

When looking at the citizenship of those who use Turkey as a transit route, it can be seen that they generally come from Moslem countries, living mostly in the Middle East. There are several reasons why these people would prefer an EU member and developed Turkey to the countries of Western Europe. First of all, Turkey has a climate similar to that of their countries of origin. Moreover, they will come across a geography that resembles theirs culturally. People with ethnic Arab and Kurdish identities will find people of their own ethnicity in Turkey. Western Europe, having a different climate, culture, and ethnic origin for the migrants will cease to be a source of attraction, replaced by an opulent Turkey, which they will perceive to be “like them.” This richness, caused by the cultural diversity between Turkey and the EU, shall stop the haphazard illegal migration to the EU and as a natural result render an EU-member Turkey an important problem in the solution of one of EU’s most pressing problems.

Another question is xenophobia. Xenophobia, rapidly increasing in Europe will make Turkey a more habitable country. For these illegal migrants, mostly who come from Moslem countries, shall not witness xenophobia in Turkey. They will not even perceive themselves as “alien” in Turkey. Afghan refugees, placed in the southeastern province of Şanlıurfa in the 1980s as well as non-Turkish Moslem Pomaks and Bosnians from the Balkans not only have not perceived themselves as “alien” in Turkey but also have not been met with xenophobia.

In order to halt illegal migration and human trafficking, the EU endeavors to find regional solutions to the problem and tries to cooperate with both countries of origin and transit passage. This policy was especially evident in the Seville European Council of June 2002. In the summit, it was decided that there was a need to engage in common administration, border controls and most importantly readmission agreements with transit and source countries. However, the current tendency in the current cooperation is also to keep migrant and asylum-seekers as far away from EU borders as possible. Naturally, keeping refugees and asylum-seekers away from the EU’s borders means their concentration in the countries that cooperate. Turkey is foremost among these countries.

The first question that comes to one’s mind is the respective benefits for Turkey that will have to shoulder such a burden and the EU that will gain dearly. The AKP government, which has activated quite significant reforms for the EU process and therefore prepared Turkey for the EU, assumes a strategy of “win-win” as its most important parameter in foreign policy. Turkey will gain, but so will the EU. From this perspective, it is obvious that Turkey shall not directly gain much from illegal migration in the short run. In return, Turkey will attain political and economic stability once accession negotiations are underway and EU membership will enter a path of no return. Moreover, projects supported by EU funds will yield many advantages to Turkey in the middle and long run, such as an expert cadre and technical capabilities. However, the EU’s gains will come about more quickly in the short run for solving illegal migration, as it will secure a valuable partner in Turkey that adopts the EU acquis.

As one of the most pressing problems of the post-Cold War era, illegal migration is also an internal security problem for the EU. EU countries and institutions are arduously working to solve the problem for years now. However, it is not possible to say that they have succeeded in that respect. The problem does not diminish, on the contrary, is on a steady increase. Far from solving the problem, the EU’s stringent policies force illegal migrants and asylum-seekers to appeal to organized crime networks.