Posted on 10/12/2002 7:35:17 PM PDT by pkpjamestown
The European Commission’s Progress Report on Turkey fanned the flames of our discussions on the EU and confused everybody yet again. The issue is now being used as a tool to attract votes in the partys’ election campaigns. Under such circumstances, there are a series of questions that need to be answered objectively. Yesterday we looked at what decision might emerge from the Copenhagen summit in December, which will be the second most important development after the Progress Report. Now let’s answer a few more questions.
Did the European Commission’s Progress Report treat Turkey unfairly?
As I’ve said before, the report should be taken as a whole, with its negative and positive aspects considered together. Generally the report is an objective document, but certain issues and figures were exaggerated. Actually most of the other candidate countries weren’t completely pleased with the report’s sections on themselves either. The commission might have acted much more constructively, particularly concerning the issue of setting a date for our membership talks, in light of the progress that Turkey has made of late. One can justifiably say that the authors of the report treated Turkey unfairly in not doing so.
Why is the issue of setting a date so important?
This year, the EU is putting together its enlargement policy. Ten additional countries are slated to become EU members in 2004. 2007 was set as the membership date for two other candidates, Bulgaria and Romania. Thus, it’s important for Turkey to get a date for membership negotiations at December’s Copenhagen summit. With the EU’s ranks swelling by 10 countries in 2004, it might be more difficult then for the EU to admit Turkey.
Is the Copenhagen summit our ‘last chance’?
Recently everybody was saying, ‘If Turkey can’t get a date by the end of this year, it will miss the train’ and everybody saw Copenhagen as our ‘last chance.’ Obviously it would be wonderful to receive this decision at Copenhagen. However, it’s not true to say that if this doesn’t happen, then our ‘road forward will become a dead end.’ At least Turkey has some time before the Thessalonica summit next June, during Greece’s EU term presidency. A date for negotiations with Turkey might be given there.
How would Greece’s term presidency affect the decision?
Athens has recently been acting in a manner which favors Turkey’s membership. Turkey might actually have fewer difficulties in the period of January-June 2003 with Greece’s support. If there is progress on finding a solution to the Cyprus issue, it would then be that much easier for Turkey. Otherwise Greece might use its tenure at the EU helm to advance its own interests.
What should Turkey’s first priority be?
The government should reply with a report based on rock-solid information and distribute it to all the parties concerned. The political parties should pursue common action instead of blaming each other in their election campaigns. It would be better if a ‘common declaration’ were issued, as suggested by Deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz. It would also be very beneficial if the major political parties sent delegations to Brussels, Copenhagen and other important European centers. Some EU circles are unsure whether Turkey wants to continue its path towards EU membership. Such a declaration would put an end to their suspicions. However, this cannot wait until after the Nov. 3 elections, but should instead be done at once.
Is there any hope for the Copenhagen summit?
The ‘political factors’ and Turkey’s ambition can keep these hopes alive. If Turkey moans that ‘there’s no hope’ and fails to take action, of course it won’t be able to get the result that it wants from the Copenhagen summit.
SOURCE: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PRESS AND INFORMATION
And don't fight it. It's inevitable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.