Tuesday, 9 June 2009
The 2009 European Parliament Elections, the biggest trans-national elections in EU history, were held on 4-7 June, 2009. According to the provisional results released by the European Parliament last night, EPP-ED, the center-right political group is estimated to have won 267 seats, while on the other hand, PES, the center-left political group seems to turn out the biggest loser of the elections with 159 seats, compared to 217 seats in the 2004 elections. Another striking but expected result regards the voter turnout recorded in the elections. According to the figures, the 2009 rate is lower than the 45.47 percent recorded in 2004.
Actually, taking into account the previously released numbers, a considerable emphasis should have been put on these elections. About 375 million people across 27 EU member states would vote to fill 736 seats in the 2009-2014 European Parliament. However, the EU media fell short of its responsibility to recount the election process efficiently. The EP elections did not attract the attention of European voters as national elections normally do.
Why is Voter Turnout so Low?
There are both structural and periodical reasons behind the unwillingness of European voters and low profile of elections. One of the leading structural reasons is that the European Parliament (EP), which should have functioned as a legislative organ of the Union, has been deemed to share its powers with other institutions. In more concrete terms, the other institutions have transmitted some of their powers to the EP in time, due to the pressures linked to enhancement of the Union’s legitimacy. Besides, the EP is far away from undertaking functions which grab people’s attention. For these reasons, the EP, which represents “the European people” in the EU jargon, lacks meeting the requirements of its position and this constitutes the main rationale behind the public disinterest to the EP elections.
Regarding periodical reasons, the unwillingness of European people towards the elections does not only result from a stance against the EP, but also against the EU in general. The European people abstain from giving support to the advancement of European integration which has bureaucratized more and more and created new problems instead of solving the old ones. EU-15 countries have not yet absorbed the “big-bang” enlargement in 2004. When accompanied by the unpleasant consequences of the recent financial crisis, the European people have become more visibly irritated. The European Commission’s projections for 2009 are 10.9% in unemployment; -4% in growth rate; 6% in budget deficit and 72.6% in public debt. These numbers are well above the EU’s growth and stability pact.
Overdose pragmatism: ‘Black shipping’ Turkey for Elections Victory
Taking into account the abovementioned deep-rooted problems, what do EU leaders do to overcome this situation? The majority of EU leaders, as a pragmatic homo politicus, tend to overlook the current problems and search for ways to gain victory in the elections by relying upon non-relevant issues of the elections. Xenophobia, racism in general and Turkey opposition in particular head the list. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had exploited Turkey opposition during the 2005 elections in Germany, stayed silent for a while after the elections. However, with the installation of the new election process, Ms. Merkel began to introduce the expression of “privileged partnership” which is ambiguous in terms and context. As long as the Turkey opposition serves for politicians’ own interests, they will not be reluctant to use Turkey as an election tool. On the other hand, it is useless to debate on Turkey opposition dominating French politics. Statements of Sarkozy and far-right political parties are much closer.
Centre-right Parties to veer Far Right, whiter Far-Right?
The essence of the problem lies exactly at this point. Far-right political parties are gaining power in Europe and this constitutes a big threat for “European values”. In this context, centre-right parties must act responsibly against this threat and relax the political atmosphere by making constructive statements that criticize increasing racism and xenophobia. If parties at the center of the political spectrum continue to act like radical ones, this will inevitably lead to the adoption of their views and statements. On the other hand, the racist and marginal parties whose political stance is shared by centre right parties are becoming tougher against foreigners and EU citizens who are established in the Union but not originally European. In this regard, contexts of “Islam” and “Turk” turn out to be the most important “enemy” of these kinds of parties. These parties are rejecting Turkey’s EU membership in any case. The main problem is that centre parties are getting closer to these parties and accordingly they are exploiting the fundamental values of the EU such as democracy, freedom, justice, equality, human rights and rule of law. Another striking point regarding this issue is that while the U.S., following Obama’s election, is trying to regain its lost prestige in the world, the EU on the other hand is losing its “soft power” and resembling the Bush period. Although this approach can pave the way for short-term gains, the EU should take into consideration the negative consequences of this strategy on European values and EU perception in the world in the long-term.
The EP Elections and Turkey: Imagined Relations
The link between the EP Elections and Turkey should be technically questioned. Indeed, there is not a direct link. The Parliament is not approving Turkey’s membership or Turkish citizens are not voting. However, since the day that the EU political actors have discovered Turkey’s membership as an important tool in elections, Turkey has increasingly dominated the EU agenda. At the end of the day, the European values are suffering. The European brutality that caused the death of millions of people during the Second World War had settled its ultimate target as to ensure peace and stability based on European values. The process dating back to 1951 must eliminate these short-sighted perspectives in order to ensure its credibility. If the European Union transforms into an entity in which xenophobia and discrimination based on race, sex, religion, nation and culture prevail above the fundamental freedoms, then what is going to be the role of EU in world peace? There is an apparent ‘race to the bottom’ among the EU countries regarding Turkey opposition and this was proved once more in the 2009 EP Elections. At this point, EU politicians have to ask themselves this question:
Is the contemporary EU, dominated by Sarkozy and Merkel, the same EU that Jean Monnet and Spinelli long struggled to establish? If not, surely we all know that it is not; who is responsible and what is the correct address to fix the mistakes?
Assoc. Prof. Mehmet Ozcan
Translated by Ceren Mutus
Edited by Kaitlin MacKenzie
The Irish Referendum and the Future of the EU: Is it far too late to turn back?
