Why does Britain want Turkey in the EU - Essay Example

Why does Britain want Turkey in the EU? Introduction Traditionally, Turkey has been considered as a significant country regarding its strategic position. The importance of Turkey in terms of geography could be assumed if observing its borders: ‘To the west - Bulgaria Greece and the Mediterranean sea; To the east - Armenia and Iran; To the north - The black sea, Azerbaijan, and Georgia and To south - Syria, Iraq, Iran, and the Mediterranean sea’ (Turkey area and population, 2007, see also Figure 1 below). Moreover, because of its position, Turkey ‘offers opportunities for trade and investment across a wide range of sectors; as well as its large domestic market, Turkey is an important trading gateway to the Middle East and neighbouring countries Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and further a field Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan’ (UK, Trade and Investment, 2007) Figure 1 – Turkey (UK Trade and Investment, 2007) However, apart from its significance in terms of geography, Turkey has a key role in the development of cooperations in the energy sector between European countries and Asia. Regarding this issue, it is supported by Sasley (1998, 1) that ‘Turkey is at the crossroads of several volatile, strategically and economically important regions, including the awkward triangle of the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Caucasus’. On the other hand, Turkey has for many years requested for a European membership; however the relevant efforts did not have a positive result. In fact, all negotiations made towards this incorporation of Turkey within the European Union have failed. In accordance with Tekin (2005, 287) the participation of Turkey in EU could have three forms (in other words a series of scenarios would be possibly applied by EU in order for the latter to approve the entrance of Turkey in the European Community): ‘privileged relationship offer, wait and see attitude, and start of full membership negotiations’ (Tekin, 2005, 287). Other scenarios could be also proposed by EU taking into account the terms required for the participation of Turkey in the EU (as these terms are formulated in accordance with the views of all member states). Current paper examines the issue of entrance of Turkey in the European Union specifically from a particular perspective: the position of Britain regarding this effort and the possible advantages that Britain (as well as EU) could have if Turkey was finally accepted as a member state. Chapter One 1. UK and Turkish policies – common characteristics and aims Britain has traditionally focused on expansion (both geographically and financially) trying to change the existed political and financial structures of the countries occupied. In fact the specific country has been expanded in the past in many regions around the world (including China, India and Africa). At that time where all these ‘invasions’ were made the creation of protectorate was a common phenomenon among the powerful countries of that period (18th and 19th century). Even before of this period, in ancient times, the occupation of land has been traditionally related with the need for increase of resources available for domestic use and development (water, oil, valuable metals and so on). On the other hand, Turkey has been created after the entrance of populations that used to live in upper and central Asia in the land that surround part of Mediterranean Sea. In this case, the appearance and the establishment of Turks in Mediterranean are related with strong military conflicts (between the Turkish army and the populations that used to live in the area which now belongs to Turkey). In other words, both countries tend to use power for the geographical expansion and the retrieval of the appropriate energy resources (as in the case of the conflict over the water of Tigris and Euphrates where Turkey, Syria and Iraq participate). In modern era, the retrieval of the necessary energy sources is mainly an issue of negotiations among the states involved. Britain and Turkey continue to influence at a high level all energy conversations referring specifically in certain areas (greater area around Britain in the case of UK and Caspia Sea and Mesopotamian area in the case of Turkey). Now, the military strength of these two countries has been transformed into appropriately structured proposals and schemes that influence the negotiations for the distribution of energy sources not only in the regions mentioned above but also in many other regions internationally (both countries are members of NATO and of other international organizations). It should be also noticed that in the conversations held before of the International Organizations the two countries usually follow similar strategies while in many cases these two countries support each other where arguments or differentiations are set by other participants. The bid of Turkey to enter the EU has created severe turbulences within the EU; however it has been extensively accepted that the effort for the retrieval of an appropriate scheme for the participation of Turkey in EU should be continued. 2. Security (energy, military and political) benefits for UK from the entrance of Turkey in EU In the context described above UK can have significant benefits from the entrance of Turkey in the EU. First, Turkey has a strong political presence in the greater Mediterranean region and in this way Britain could be supported in order to develop its interests in this region. Furthermore, Turkey has a series of significant energy sources. Towards this direction, the study of Sasley (1998, 1) showed that ‘most of energy sources of the greater Caspian region are found in the Caspian Sea basins five states--Russia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Turkmenistan, and Kazakstan; recent appraisals, suggest there are 15-29 billion barrels in the area, comparable to North Sea oil reserves; Some believe that an additional 163 billion barrels remain to be discovered while $75 billion worth of private capital has been committed to the Caspian region, and Turkey is geographically close enough to warrant a considerable share in these energy resources’. Turkey, because of its position has a strong influence on the decisions taken on all energy-related issues in the greater region. The country has its own energy sources but it also has a share on energy sources on which other countries also have a share (the case of Tigris and Euphrates mentioned before). As for the participation of Turkey in E.U., there are many issues that should be primarily resolved. However, in terms of the benefits offered to Britain by the success of this effort, it could be stated that the entrance of Turkey in EU would be quite beneficial for Britain. For this reason, the interest of Britain for the success of Turkey’s bid has been kept intense all these years. In accordance with an article published in International Herald Tribune ‘starting membership talks with Turkey is one of Britains chief priorities during its six-month presidency of the EU, which lasts until December; however, it has come under criticism from other countries that it is doing little else to revive confidence in the EU after the failed referendums on the EU constitution earlier this year in France and the Netherlands’ (International Herald Tribune, September, 30, 2005). In other words, the involvement of Britain in the effort of Turkey to enter the EU has been made clear to all states around the world – especially in EU where there is still a lot of skepticism regarding the participation of Turkey in the EU. Britain is making a lot of efforts to promote the bid of Turkey; between the two countries there is also a continuous cooperation regarding a series of issues, like energy and tourism. In fact in a recent visit of the British Minister of State for Energy Malcolm Wicks in Turkey, it was stated (by the British Minister) that “we consider the improvement of the renewable energy issue against global warming and energy supply security all in one’ (Turkish Daily News, September 18, 2007). The above statements were made during a ‘meeting of the British Minister of Energy with Yusuf Günay, head of the Energy Market Regulatory Agency (EPDK)’ (Turkish Daily News, September 18, 2007). Mr Gunay informed the British Minister on the plans of Turkey to develop its energy projects by adopting and applying a series of innovative plans and developing its cooperation with the other states particularly regarding the transfer of energy from central Asia to Europe. Regarding the above, the entrance of Turkey in the EU will have the following benefits for Britain (divided into sub-directories): a) Energy. As already stated before, Turkey has significant sources of energy. Apart from this the country has an important role to the formulation of decisions related with the administration and the distribution of energy in the greater region (including the central Asia). This means that Britain – if Turkey was accepted in the EU – would have an access to the energy market of the particular area. In this way, the possibly transfer of energy from Asia to Europe could be also arranged improving the position of Turkey towards the EU but also the role of Britain to the control of energy provided in the European market. b) Military. Turkey is a country with a significant military power. Furthermore, it could be stated that Turkey has the role of the supervisor in the Mesopotamian area where the piece is continuously under risk. In case that Turkey will become a member of the EU, Britain will have a powerful ally in the region. In this way the (indirect) control over the area by Britain will be increased significantly. However, there are also certain issues that need to be taken into consideration like the conflict with Kurds which has led both parties to severe losses. It should be noticed that the role of military in Turkey has been of significant importance regarding the political decisions of the country. In fact, military in Turkey has an active involvement in the country’s internal and external environment. Regarding this issue, it is noticed in an article published in BBC News (23 October 2007) that ‘Turkeys powerful military - which sees itself as the guardian of the secular system - has a long history of involvement in politics; in recent years, as Ankara has set its sights firmly on European Union membership, the profile of the military has been lower in public life’. Under these terms the chances of Turkey to cooperate with other countries – like in Britain – in strategic political decisions involving in the greater area should not be regarded as feasible. c) Political Traditionally, all decisions made in the greater east-Mediterranean region require the participation of Turkey. In fact, this country has played a major role in the administration of many issues involving in this area as well as in the greater Mesopotamian area (like the case of Iraq where Turkey refused to participate in the war trying to promote the peaceful resolution of the problem). Of course, the significant political role of Turkey in the region could be regarded as a result of the size of the country and its population. Indeed Turkey should be considered as a powerful country in the eastern Mediterranean region having a population of approximately 74,3 million that is increasing continuously (All about Turkey, 2007). In the political field, the cooperation of Turkey with other countries would be characterized as difficult to be realized mostly because the country faces severe conflicts by minorities (especially Kurds) that live within the country. In fact, it is noticed that ‘Turkey is home to a sizeable Kurdish minority, which by some estimates constitutes up to a fifth of the population; however, they complain that the government has tried to destroy their Kurdish identity and that they suffer economic disadvantage and human rights violations’ (BBC News, 23 October 2007). In accordance with the above, the entrance of Turkey in the EU could face severe problems as of the applicability of the reforms required in order for the country to meet the standards (mostly political and financial) of the rest member states. Specifically for Britain such cooperation would be possibly viable only if arranged under specific terms and conditions that will be precisely followed by Turkey. Otherwise, it would be rather difficult for the two countries to proceed to commonly accepted political decisions mostly because of the active involvement of military in Turkey (as analyzed above). In other words, any possible benefit for Britain in the political sector from the entrance of Turkey in the EU could be identified in the existence of a powerful (in terms of involvement in the political decisions referring to the greater east Mediterranean area) ally in the specific region. This ally could support the British view on many issues related with strategic political decisions in the greater east Mediterranean and Mesopotamian regions. It should be noticed that the financial benefit for Britain by the entrance of Turkey in the EU cannot be measured. In fact, it seems that the relevant benefit could be only indirect (in terms of commercial and energy agreements between the two states) and it may take a significant amount of time before its realization. In fact a recent research proved that ‘economy on the level of ordinary Turks, have worsened in the last years, as inflation has been at the level of 100% or more, while normal wages have been risen at a lower speed; there have been serious measures on trying to bring the Turkeys foreign debts down, which means that a large part of the national production has been sent out of the country’ (Encyclopaedia of the Orient, 2007). Under these terms, Britain (as also the rest EU) will be potentially benefited by the entrance of Turkey in the EU; however it is more likely that this benefit will delay unless radical changes will be applied in the country. The issue of existed conflicts with the Kurds in the internal and the decrease of the percentage of GDP should be thoroughly considered by Britain (as also by the rest of the member states) before proceeding to any commercial or energy arrangements with Turkey. It is necessary that appropriate reforms are made primarily in the internal of the state – especially in the military sector – in order for the country to be developed in accordance with the Western standards. Chapter Two 1. Entrance of Turkey in the EU and economic benefits for UK (trade, investments) Entrance in the EU has been a target for Turkey for many years. In fact the country applied for a membership in 1959; however despite the years that have passed and the progress made in Turkey’s policies the above target has not been achieved yet. For this reason, it is noticed that ‘nonetheless, Turkey has since seen the EU grow from six to twenty-five members, without itself becoming any closer to membership’ (Pahre et al., 2005, 2). On the other hand, it is mentioned by Tekin (2005, 287) that ‘Turkeys close relations with the EU date back to the Association Agreement signed in Ankara in 1963 between Turkey and the European Economic Community (EEC)’. However, despite the efforts made until today, Turkey is still excluded from EU for a series of reasons, including the differentiation in cultural and social ethics. The bid of Turkey for a membership has been set under a poll carried out under the supervision of European Commission. In this poll, it was revealed that approximately 52 per cent of Europeans do not want the participation of Turkey in the European Union. In the above poll it was also revealed that ‘in ten of the fifteen pre-enlargement member states there is a majority against Turkey, with opposition running as high as 80 per cent’ (Browne, 2005). The above poll brings UK in a difficult position having to support Turkey regarding its entrance in the EU. From another point of view, the above results could be regarded as indicative of the refusal of European populations to welocome Turkey in the EU. However, despite the above European leaders continue to support the participation of Turkey as a candidate for the EU in the next enlargement attempt. Regarding this issue, it is noticed by Tekin (2005, 287) that ‘the European debate on (re)locating Turkey with respect to Europe geographically, economically, politically, and civilisationally--has not been finalized’. The development of Turkey’s economy has been continuous the last years. In fact, in accordance with a report published by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, UK (2007) ‘Turkey is one of the worlds most rapidly industrialising markets; it is also a major trading partner of the UK; Turkey is the 6th largest Economy in Europe and the 17th in the World, attracting Foreign Domestic Investment (FDI) of $30 billion in 2005-6’. It is for the above reasons that the commercial cooperation of Turkey with Britain is significant for both countries. In fact, several commercial agreements exist between Britain and Turkey in both directions (i.e. each country imports and exports goods to the other). In this context, it has been found that ‘in 2005 the UK exported £2.6bn in goods and services to Turkey, making it Britain’s 23rd biggest export market’ (UK, Trade and Investment, 2007) Moreover, in accordance with a recent research ‘the volume of UK-Turkey bilateral trade reached $12 billion in 2006 and the UK is Turkey’s 2nd largest export market; British firms cover a wide range of sectors, with over 41 British companies investing in Turkey, such as BP, Shell, Vodafone, Unilever (UK), HSBC, Aviva, Tesco, and Cadbury Schweppes’ (Foreign and Commonwealth Office, UK, 2007). It seems from the above that Britain has significant financial interests in Turkey and the entrance of the latter would be extremely beneficially for the former especially regarding the development of trade and energy transfer. 2. How will likely Turkish membership affect the EU, and how will the UK benefit? The efforts of Turkey to join EU have lasted for many years (as already mentioned before). Primarily, it appeared that Turkey had many chances to enter EU even from its first steps. The role of Turkey in the politics of East Mediterranean and the Mesopotamian areas was the main reason for this assumption. Towards this direction, it has been noticed by Evered (2005, 268) that ‘although Turkeys initial optimism in the early 1990s that it could conduct itself independently and even be a leader in all directions (in Europe, the Middle East, and post-Soviet Eurasia) was quickly diminished by the states own economic and geopolitical limitations, the image of Eurasia is still crucial in how Turkey presents itself, both at home and to the West’ (Evered, 2005, 268). In other words, Turkey continues to fight for its entrance in the EU. The significant financial support by EU related with the membership should be considered as the major reason for the continuation of this effort by Turkey despite the difficulties. However, the entrance of Turkey in EU could have a negative impact on the socio-political structure of the European Union. In fact, in accordance with the study of Pahred (2005, 8) ‘with the addition of Bulgaria, Romania, and Turkey, cohesion countries will make up 36% of the population, 41% of the votes in Parliament, and 43% of the votes in the Council of Ministers, while contributing only 9% of the EU’s overall GDP; Turkey will be a natural leader of this group, with 14.2% of the EU’s total population, 11.2% of the seats in Parliament, 7.8% of the votes in the Council of Ministers, but only 3.0% of GDP’ (Pahred, 2005, 8). In accordance with the above, if entering the EU Turkey could become a major force within the Community influencing (or even defining) the decisions made within this area. Currently, trade between Turkey and European Union has been promoted through a treaty signed in 1995. More specifically in accordance with the ‘treaty of enhanced cooperation and customs union in 1995 EU is committed to limited financial support towards Turkey’ (Jung et al., 2005, 182). On the other hand, the study of deJasay (2005) showed that ‘there is already free trade between Turkey and the EU except in farm products and some services; capital movements are also free while movements of labour would probably not become much freer for many years than they are at present if the treatment of Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and the other states admitted in 2004 is any guide; only Britain freely accepts workers from these countries, and Turks are not likely to fare much better initially’ (de Jasay, 2005). In other words, the membership of Turkey in the EU could not lead to severe differentiations regarding existed conditions of trade with the other EU countries. However, a membership could result a significant financial support to Turkey while Turkish companies (Jung et al., 2005, 182) ‘could have a complete access to the European market’. In accordance with the strategy that the country should follow the current period (2006-2007) regarding its membership in Europe, the following comments have been made by the Commission of the European Communities in a report published in 8/11/2006 (section 5.1. – title: ‘Remaining challenges from the fifth enlargement’): ‘Achieving a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus issue and the unification of the island remains an important challenge; the regulation on direct trade with the northern part of Cyprus proposed by the Commission remains to be adopted; enhanced efforts and a spirit of compromise are needed to enable its speedy adoption’ (MFA, 2007). In the above report the following issues have been also noticed: ‘in 2007, it is necessary to ensure freedom of expression without delay by repealing or amending Article 301 of the Penal Code and by overall bringing the legislation into line with European standards; apart from the freedom of expression, further efforts are needed to strengthen freedom of religion, women’s rights, minority rights and trade union rights’ (MFA, 2007). All these suggestions are in fact guidelines that Turkey should follow in order for its bid to be successful at the next enlargement. On the other hand, it should be noticed that the entrance of Turkey in the EU could result to the temporary financial pressure of EU but in the long term the expected benefits could be many. Moreover, the economy of the country has been developed significantly the last years. In fact a research made by the UK Trade and Investment (2007) reveals that ‘Turkeys economy has gone through one of the longest periods of uninterrupted economic growth in its recent history; real GDP growth has been above 5.5% since 2001 and projections for 2006 are for 4.5-5% growth, slightly lower, but still good. 2006 GDP per capita (Purchase Power Parity) is expected to be $8385’ (UK, Trade and Investment, 2007). However, these data are related mostly with the commercial sector and they cannot represent the true condition of the country’s economy which seems to be differentiated as of its performance if referring to all its sectors. In accordance with the above the entrance of Turkey in EU could be expected to cause severe problems to the Union at least from a financial aspect. The community will be called to provide a significant monetary support to the new member; this amount is very doubt if it is available under current conditions of the global and the European markets. On the other hand, if becoming a member, Turkey ‘would have the greatest number of council votes within twenty years, and receive the largest budget transfer; free migration may increase the Turkish immigrant population in Germany from 2 to 3.5 million in thirty years’ (Flam, 2004, 191). Apart from the above issues, other obstacles continue to exist in the completion of the procedure of accepting Turkey in the EU. More specifically, it is noticed by Flam (2004, 191) that ‘the main obstacles to accession are not economic, but political; historical experience stops Turkey from eliminating the decisive political role of the military, giving Kurds and other minorities cultural rights and upholding basic human rights’. The role of military – as already explained above – in the political life of Turkey is significant. Under these conditions, Turkey would not wait to be regarded as a state available for negotiations regarding its entrance in the EU. The country continues to give the impression that military is the fundamental power within the state, a situation that does not seem to bother particularly the political leaders in the country who recognize the primary role of the military in the country’s political system. Conclusion The acceptance of Turkey as a member state of EU is a difficult decision mostly because the risk involved is high. More specifically, the country has proved the last years that significant efforts are made towards the improvement of the social and political condition both in the internal and the external environment; however, the standards set by the EU have not been met still. In order to develop its economy in accordance with the Western standards, Turkey introduced a privatisation programme which ‘has included the sale of a number of key state assets including Telsim (Telecommunications), Erdimir (Steel), Tupras (oil refinery) and Turk Telecom; future privatisation will include Electricity generation and distribution, the State lottery, Railways, parts of THY and Tekel (tobacco and alcohol)’ (UK, Trade and Investment, 2007). On the other hand, in accordance with the study of Favell et al. (2002, 593) ‘we are currently witnessing a transformation in migration processes in Europe: from an historical situation in which these were dominantly shaped and restrained by state-centred and territorially bound forms of governance, to one in which they are increasingly defined and governed by market forces and the inability of states to enforce their jurisdiction over labour mobility’. The results of this process cannot be measured and evaluated in advance. Towards this direction, in his speech at Leiden University (2004) Dutch Commissioner Frits Bolkestein noticed that (Pahre et al., 2005, 3) ‘the entry of a land with 68 million inhabitants—and 83 million in 2020—will also change the European Union greatly’. As for UK, the possibly entrance of Turkey in EU could have significant benefits especially in the commercial sector. Possibly gains in political and military sectors could be also exist but only if the intervention of military in the country’s politics is limited. On the other hand, the oppositions towards the entrance of Turkey in the EU could not be considered as having a permanent character; it is very likely that after a while the European leaders will change their view regarding the participation of Turkey in the EU. However, this assumption is for now just an hypothesis. In order to support the bid of Turkey for the European Union, Clarke (2006, 13) supports the following: there are remarkable strategic benefits to including Turkey in the European coalition; Turkey shares its borders with Syria, Iraq, and Iran--all volatile nations that have at best tenuous relations with the West; in this way including Turkey in the European Union would provide a stronger and more legitimate Western presence in the region and could curb future terrorist activity’. However there are also opposite views regarding the participation of Turkey in EU. The final decision belongs to European leaders who will formulate their decision in accordance with the completion of the terms set to Turkey regarding its entrance in the EU. In case that Turkey will not follow the guidelines of EU (as presented also through the paper of the Commission of the European Communities published in 2006, section 2 above) then its entrance in EU is very likely to be postponed again in the next enlargement. As for its relation with the UK and the possible benefits of the latter from the entrance of Turkey in the EU, appropriate suggestions could be made in accordance with the following: ‘there are now some 430 British companies operating in Turkey; in addition, Turkish investment in the UK is also growing with some 65 companies now active in the UK’ (UK, Trade and Investment, 2007). For this reason, the support of UK towards the success of bid of Turkey for the membership should be expected to continue for quite a long. References Sasley, B. (1998) Turkey’s Energy Politics in the Post-cold War Era. Middle East Review of International Affairs, 2(4): 1-3 Tekin, A. (2005) Future of Turkey-EU Relations: A Civilisational Discourse. Futures, 37(4): 287-308 Evered, K. (2005) Regionalism in the Middle East and the Case of Turkey. The Geographical Review, 95(3): 463-468 Clarke, K. (2006) Crossing over? Turkey and the European Union. Harvard International Review, 27(4): 13-15 Favell, A., Hansen, R. (2002) Markets against Politics: Migration, EU Enlargement and the Idea of Europe, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 28(4): 581-598 De Jasay, A. (2005) Turkey and the E.U. club, [Online] available at http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/Columns/y2005/JasayTurkeyEU.html International Herald Tribune, September 30, 2005. Britain pushes harder for Turkey’s EU bid, [Online], available at http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/30/news/eu.php Turkish Daily News, September 18, 2007. Britain seeks cooperation with Britain on energy, [Online], available at http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=83711 Browne, A. (2005) Most want Turkey to stay out of the EU, poll shows, The Times Online, [Online], available at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article545446.ece Pahre, R., Ucaray, B. (2005) The myths of Turkish Influence in the European Union, [Online], available at http://www.ips.uiuc.edu/eu/pahre_ucary_turkey_may2006.pdf Jung, S., Kubacek, S. (2005) Economic aspects of Turkey’s accession to the EU. Student Economic Review, 19: 177-190 All about Turkey (2007), [Online], available at http://all-about-turkey.blogspot.com/2007/03/turkeys-population-to-reach-74-million.html Turkey area and Population (2007), [Online], available at http://www.worldwide-tax.com/turkey/turpopulation.asp Flam, H. (2004) Turkey and the EU, politics and economics of the accession. Economic Studies, 50(1): 191-210 BBC News. 23 October 2007. Country Profile: Turkey, [Online], available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/1022222.stm Encyclopaedia of the Orient (2007), [Online], available at http://i-cias.com/e.o/turkey_2.htm UK Trade and Investment (2007), [Online], available at https://www.uktradeinvest.gov.uk/ukti/appmanager/ukti/countries?_nfls=false&_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=CountryType1&navigationPageId=/turkey Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2007) Turkey: country profile, [Online], available at http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1007029394365&a=KCountryProfile&aid=1019745009611 Read More