Turkeys Prospect of Becoming an EU Member - Coursework Example

Turkey’s EU Membership Introduction Turkey’s prospect of becoming an EU member has showed insignificant progress based on the chapters that have been opened. Turkey was formally recognized as a candidate for EU membership in 1999 when the EU stipulated the predefined political conditions that the country was to meet in order to commence its accession talks (Akcay, 2012). Over the years, Turkey and its political figures have demonstrated remarkable efforts in bolstering democracy and human rights in an effort to comply with the stipulations of the EU. Despite these efforts, Turkey remains the only country awaiting EU membership as a candidate. However, there exist two factions within the EU, the Euro-federalists and the advocates for European identity. Arikan (2006) noted that while Euro federalist believes that Turkey accession to UE membership would deter the development of a stronger federal European Union, the advocates argue that turkey lacks European identity. This present essay is aimed at assessing the why Turkey’s accession process to EU membership has progressed so far without success. The essay will first highlight in the historical context of the Turkeys application to become an EU member. The discussions will also contrite on the geographical and religious factors impacting on the candidature of Turkey to EU membership. The essay will further analyze the regional, European and international politics that have dominated the accession process of the country in joining the European Union. Subsequently, the discussion will elaborate on the presented factors against and for turkey’s membership to the EU. The essay will conclude with an assessment of the current situation of the accession process. Turkey and EU Discussion The Turkey-EU relations could be traced back to 1950, when turkey continuously interacted with the European economic commission (EEC) (Buzan and Diez, 1999). The formal relationship between Turkey, the EU Predecessor EEC began in 1963 when the Ankara agreement was signed. However, Turkey’s cordial relationship with the European community was short-lived after Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 and the subsequent military coup of 1980 which destabilized the politics of the country (Jung & Raudvere, 2008). As a reaction to the military invasion of the Cyprus, the EEC suspended its relations with Turkey in 1982 and was eventually lifted in 1986. After lifting the suspension, another pivotal point in Turkey- EU relations were marked by the Helsinki summit in 1999, where Turkey was granted official candidate status in the EU (Nello, 2009). With the granting of a candidate status, policy makers in Turkey embarked on political and economic reforms that would be termed as pro-EU agendas in the bid to meet the political specifics of the Copenhagen criteria. According to Maclennam (2009), the period between 1995 and 2004 was marked with significant constitutional amendments that rectify the military based constitution of 1982. The amendments mostly fast-tracked democracy in the state, improvement of the fundamental rights and political liberty within government of Turkey. Among other constitutional amendments, the Turkish government abolished the death penalty. Turkeys unrelenting efforts were formally recognized in EU in 2004, when the European Council officially opened accession negotiations. The European Council noted that Turkey had successfully fulfilled the key political elements of the Copenhagen criteria (Maclennam, 2009). However, the decision by the European Council to officially commence the accession process was fiercely criticized by key parties in the EU as being highly premature. Emergent debates over the suitability of Turkey’s candidature to become an EU member, has negatively impacted on the accession process with only one chapter of the 35 accession chapters being successfully completed ten years since the its began. The stalemate over the completion of the remaining chapters have been either as result EU suspension or Turkey’s adamant refusal to recognize Cyprus (Gabriel, 2011). In the light of these developments, profound indications highlight on the overwhelming consensus in support of Turkey’s membership to the EU. The EU commission has continued to term the accession process as open-ended and has continued to maintain ties with Turkish authority over the negotiation process. It is paramount that subsequent analysis of the delayed accession process of Turkey’s membership first examines the structure and the framework of the EU’s accession criteria. According to article 49 of the Lisbon treaty of the EU states that any European state that respects and promotes the values enumerated in article 2 may apply to become a member of the EU (Arvanitopoulos, 2009). On the other hand, article 2 (TEU) states that the “ EU is a community of values committed to the respect of human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, respect for human rights and the minority pluralism and tolerance.” From the statement, the debate over membership of Turkey raises two questions pertaining to article 2 (TEU). These questions include: what is European state and does turkey qualify as a European state based on the highlighted precepts. According to Aguilera and Rosenstein, (2009), Europe could not be defined by geographical borders since there doesn’t exist exact boundaries between the European and Asian continents. Vis a vis, it follows that Europe states have a fair chance of becoming members of the EU even in cases where its largest sections lie outside the European. To support Turkey’s case, when Denmark became a member of the EU, Greenland despite geographically being on the North American continent, become a member of the European commission (Aknur, 2012). On the other hand, the EU is only open to a European state, so what constitutes a European state? EU definition of the European states is derived from the provisions of the Council of Europe (CoE) which noted that based on the history, culture and understanding of the values of the European family, all Balkan states are to be regarded as European states together with the states of the European continent (Great Britain, 2008). Turkey, therefore, qualifies as a European state after being admitted as CoE in 1949 and the subsequent signing of the European charter on human rights in 1954 (Great Britain, 2008). By virtue of its membership of the CoE, Turkey, therefore, meets the judicial and political identification as a European state. Another key prerequisite requirement for the commencement of the accession process is meeting the Copenhagen criteria. According to Copenhagen criteria, prior to being granted candidate status to EU membership, states should demonstrate adoption of the acquis communautiare in their national legal framework, effective market economy and a constitutional based democratic governing system (Oxford Business Group, 2007). The negotiation process of Turkey’s accession to membership has also been termed as unique compared to previous accession based on the newly included benchmarks, referendum, and permanent safeguards (Wendicke, 2008). Benchmarks stipulated by the commission states that Turkey work towards the normalization of bilateral relations with Cyprus. In addition, the accession process will only conclude after the establishment of a financial framework for the period after 2014. Subsequently, the commission’s leadership has been limited with the strengthening of the EU’s members control over the accession process of Turkey as results of emergent elements which have been incorporated in the process. These provisions have been formulated to be implemented in phases, the negotiation, ratification, and the accession phase. There exist benchmarks which the commission together with the member states will ascertain whether Turkey has met the minimum standards before the opening of an accession chapter. Also, following the conclusion of the negotiation process, member states hold the right to conduct a referendum on the accession of Turkey. Under the accession phase, the negotiation process will drastically enlarge the permanent safeguard clauses when Turkey gains the accession to EU membership (Szczerbiak, 2008). Despite Turkey’s explicit showcasing of its interest to become members of the EU and the underlying qualifications based on the Copenhagen criteria and CoE provisions, the accession process has been strategically thwarted by opposing parties within the EU states. The following section attempts to examine the political, cultural, religious and economic elements impacting either positively or negatively on the accession process. According to Gabriel (2011) the sluggish nature of the accession process of Turkey to becoming EU member has been underlined by the divergent identity of the Turkish with respect to EU’s values and beliefs. Individual identity and subsequently publics identity play a crucial role in shaping the dynamics of the political structure of any given institutions. Religion has emerged as being central to the subject of identity among the public. Vis a vis, an analysis of the religious framework of Turkey indicates the existence of religious background that could view as foreign to the core traditional religion of the EU’s member states. According to Bach, (2006) religion by itself has an insignificant impact on the EU relations. However, dominating relationship between religion and state institutional through the shaping of the national and international identity greatly determines the orientation of the EU relations with member states and candidates such as turkey. Despite the constitutional recognition of the state as being secular, religion has remained a foundational pillar of Turkish politics and culture. Islam has been deeply rooted within the social fabric of Turkey with a recent survey by Bogdani (2011) indicating that 51 % of Turkish consider themselves as Muslims before being Turks. Vis a vis, majority of the EU members are of the opinion that the membership of Turkey may eventually distort the traditional identity of Europe. Based on the studies by Kentmen (2008) the core religious tradition of EU members has been Protestantism and Roman Catholic. With the accession of Turkey, Islam will equally have a significant influence on the formulation institution’s policies and doctrines. On the hand, the domination of the EU by Christian affiliated states has given rise to its labeling as a Christian club. Turkey continues to assert that among the Islamic states, it emerges as the most westernized state both culturally and geographically. Turkish policy makers continue to stress that until the EU grants Turkey accession, the body will remain a Christian Club outfit. On the contrary, the leading religion in Turkey, the Turkish Islam has strongly emerged as key proponents of anti-Europeanism. However, Islamic hardliners to EU membership of Turkey have receded following the prospects of human rights protection based on the values and principles of the EU. Critical examination of the tension between the EU and Turkey in relation to religions lies on two core principles, the principle of pluralism and the principle of subsidiarity. Under the principle of subsidiarity, EU upholds that member states reserve the right to regulate religious and cultural issues independently. The EU may only intervene in cases where all member states have a stake in the issue. On the other hand, Pluralism holds that the EU has a duty influence member states in order to develop a conducive environment which safeguards fundamental freedom and liberty of the citizens. Consequently, Keyman and Ziya (2007) noted that Turkey may be forced to adopt a social model which may be viewed by Islamic leaders and adherents as infringing on their beliefs and customs hence the looming tension between Turkish Muslims and EU member states. However, what are the EU values which have resulted in the highly contested debate with regards to Turkeys culture? According to Pelkmans (2006), the core values of the EU are democracy and justice. Pelkmans (2006), went ahead and noted five norms of the EU, peace, liberty, democracy, the rule of law and the human rights. However, there lacks consensus over the distinctive core values of the EU, hence democracy and justice being identified as the overriding principles. Therefore, the European council holds that each member state should uphold the legitimacy of the union through practicing these principles. Therefore, as a candidate for EU membership, questions have been raised over the liberty, democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights by the Turkish institutions. According to Yavuz, (2009) Turkey can only, therefore, rise above these criticisms through the restructuring of its internal policies and agencies to demonstrate its allegiance to the core principles of the EU. The implications of the core values of the EU have played a decisive role in the accession process of Turkey with regards to the occupation of Cyprus. Under the core value of justice and democracy, EU stipulated that Turkey reiterate its commitment to the community by withdrawing its forces from the illegal occupation of Cyprus in order to progress with the opening of the negotiation chapters. Turkey’s accession to EU membership has further been subjected to its relation to Cyprus. For Turkey to become a member of the EU, it must recognize the Republic of Cyprus which already became a member of the EU in 2004 (Salih, 2013). The regional relationship between Turkey and Cyprus has always been unstable as results of the historical background of the two states. The culmination of the current stalemate between Cyprus and Turkey occurred in 1974 when Turkey illegally invaded Cyprus and the subsequent occupied of 37 % of the Cyprus’s territory (Salih, 2013). With regards to the values of the EU, Turkey’s continued occupation of Cyprus constitutes outright violation of the fundamental human rights and freedom of the people of Cyprus. Reuters (2015) stated that Turkey’s invasion and occupation of territory have been the main deterrent of its accession to EU membership. On their part, Turkish authorities adamantly maintain that they invaded the states to protect minority Turkish citizens who were being victimized. While Turkey has remarkably complied with the requirements for its accession, it has failed to recognize the sovereignty of Cyprus and withdrawal of its troops from the country. The dynamics of Turkey- Cyprus relations have given rise to international crisis characterised by Cyprus’s resolve to block six chapters of the accession process while Turkey as a veto member of the NATO has restrained from cooperating with Cyprus (Timmerman, 2008). Amid the regional tension, Turkey further sent vessels to the Exclusive Economic Zones of Cyprus to explore the hydrocarbon in October 2014. In reaction to the exploration, the administration of the Greek Cypriot suspended the bilateral talks between the two states indefinitely. Nevertheless, Turkey’s accession to EU membership can never progress without the resolution of the Cyprus issue. Apart from being the fundamental hurdle to Turkey’s accession to EU membership, the perpetual violation of Cypriots rights and freedom has also strained the already fragile relationship between the EU community and Turkey. The debate over the accession of Turkey to be an EU member has further gained momentum within the public discourse of the EU and Turkish community. Notably, the EU community has emerged as the most outspoken over the issues of membership. While to some extent, the public opinion has been majorly shaped by the policies and political ideologies of the leaders. There exist mixed reaction over the nature of membership that Turkey should be granted. Although Turkey awaits accession to full membership, recent debates have been punctuated with calls for a privileged membership. Former French president Nicolas Sarkozy and the German Chancellor have asserted their position for a privileged membership as opposed to full membership for Turkey (Harmsen and Menno, 2005). Different calls by EU leaders have been marked by analysts as renewed measures to deter the accession process of Turkey as the calls have not been highlighted in the negotiation framework. Consequently, calls by EU leaders have also been noted to resonate with the public opinion from their member states. Public debate over the candidature of turkey has been most intense in France. According to studies, by Gerhards and Hans (2011), majority French oppose the accession of Turkey as an EU member. Studies conducted during the period 2002 and 2008 have indicated public opposition to the accession to range from 69 -71 % (Gerhards and Hans, 2011). But what are the underlying factors which seem to be driving French opposing to Turkey’s membership? According to Joas and Knobl (2009), the answer lies in the political and cultural diversity between the two states. The majority of French further supported the formulation of stringent economic and political conditions for the accession of Turkey. The European public believes that Turkey is characterized by extreme cultural incompatibility with the values and principles of European states. The analysis of the German perception of the Turkish accession to the EU also provides new insight into Europe’s view of the Turkey and its candidature to the EU. Unlike French’s general opposition to Turkish accession, Germany presents three factions that oppose the candidature of Turkey on the basis of three core issues. The first line of arguments asserted by the Germans is founded on the issues of identity. Those against the accession argue that the membership of Turkey would result in a clash of civilization between the traditional Christian EU and the Islamic-based turkey. The second subject built against Turkey lies in the instability of Turkish institutions. The third subject lies in the geopolitical and security repercussions associated with Turkey’s geographic extent (Oborune & Zalel, 2011). The Germans believe that Turkey’s inclusion into the EU will spread the instability of its regional neighbors, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan closer to the EU communities. As results of the widespread debate over Turkey’s accession, the media has also been dragged into the debate. According to Aydin-DuZgit, (2013), the number of Germans in support of turkey has been noted to be on the rise and so are the media agencies in the country. Notable print media, TV and radio stations have been branded as pro-Turkey, especially the leftist newspapers such as the Suddeutsche Zeitung and Frankfurter Rundschau (Barroso, 2009). On one hand, the Turkish community which has high stakes in the process has remained a key proponent of the accession process and acting as a representative of over 200 communities in the country. However, the German Christian community has been influential in highlighting the cultural differences between the Turkish and European communities that would hamper cooperation between the two parties. The perception of the European public on the issues of Turkey’s accession has further been underscored by the positions held by their leaders. Coincidentally, the Angela Merkel, German Chancellor and the former French president, Nicolas Sarkozy strongly opposed the accession of Turkey into the EU, reiterating the wishes of their respective citizens. It follows that either the public shapes foreign policy adopted by the governing leaders or European leaders directly and indirectly influence the public opinion on international relations. On the contrary to French and German’s position, the United Kingdom’s Prime minister has emerged as a key supporter of Turkey’s integration into the EU. According to BBC, (2010) the prime minister has gone ahead to express his concerns over the slow pace of the accession process. However, Merkel has continued to reiterate that the negotiation process for Turkey’s membership was still an open- ended process and stresses that Turkey should further its internal reforms to advance the accession process. Merkel has been particularly concerned with the democratic framework of Turkey, noting that the governmental institutions still needed to work on their democratic values with respect for fundamental rights and freedom of the public. To a greater extent, Merkel’s sentiments on the integration of Turkey have been the stand of her political party, the Christian Democratic Union, conservatives who have traditionally opposed the inclusion of Turkey into the 27 state block. Her opposition notwithstanding, the Chancellor has asserted her support for the reopening of the chapters and subsequent negotiation on the candidature of Turkey. Germany host the largest Diaspora of Turks in Europe and is also the largest trade partner to turkey within the EU commence (Ecfr, 2015).This has made the accession issue even more sensitive in the country. The United States, through Barack Obama, has shown their support for Turkey’s integration into the EU community. The president was quick to express his concerns about EUs reluctance to further the negotiation process (WSJ, 2009). However, Obama’s view has been discredited by European leaders as America‘s cultural diplomacy to advance its agenda in the Muslim world. With regards to United states, Turkey is strategically placed both geographically and culturally to further the international interests relating to the highly volatile states such as Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan. On the other hand, Turkey relies on Washington to continue supporting its interest in the European community. Vis a vis, the two countries have predominantly enjoyed strong bilateral relations across various administrations. The delayed accession of the turkey could further be examined from the economic perspective of candidature membership. According to Guerin and Stivachtis (2011) majority of EU member states are of the opinion that Turkey offers weak economy, which is hinged in large, poor, undeveloped and unstable state. One of the prime concerns of EU members lies in the instability of the state which has been characterized by economic booms and crises over the last five decades thereby derailing developments in the country. As a results of the 2001 economic crisis, the GDP of Turkey fell by 7 % and states inflation rate soared to over 70 % (Candemir and Peker, 2015). However, after the crisis, the country institutionalized economic reforms which resulted in steady economic growth until 2013 with an average annual growth rate of GDP of 4 %. Despite the country’s success story at the macroeconomic level, developments at the state level have been deterred by the absence of dedicated reforms particularly in the education sector. Poor education quality has resulted in poor workforce, which has in turn negatively impacted on the local industry and market. According to Candemir and Peker (2015), another economic constraint lies in the structural deficit in the country’s current accounts. The country recorded current account deficit of 5636 USD million in November 2014. The currently witnessed current account deficit in Turkey could be attributed to the state’s energy dependency and the low savings by the younger generation. The current account deficits negatively impacts on the accession process as the provisions of the EU stipulates that candidate states should indicate functioning market economy, which is able to absorb the European market forces and the subsequent competitive pressure. The continued registration of current account deficits will lead to increased currency vulnerability to loss of investors confidence. On one hand, the state is in a position to significantly benefit from the European structural policies aimed at streamlining the economic policies. Subsequent structural reforms will further bolster the investment climate of the country and hence attract direct foreign investment and thereby financing the current accounts. To maintain its recognition as a functioning economy, Turkey must fast track its structural reforms and mitigates the current account deficit so as to ensure continued progress of the accession process. It is further paramount that the discussions highlight on the Turkey’s political parties and their positions towards the EU integration. Turkish political parties can either be labeled as Eurosceptics or Euroenthuasists. Eurosceptics are mainly anti EU-ism while Euroenthuasists support their integration into the EU community. According to studies by Harmsen and Menno (2005), the key euroenthuasist parties include AKP, DSP, the Democratic People’s Party and the New Turkey Party. AKP has stood out as the most outspoken party and an integral component of the country’s Europeanization. Under the leadership of Recep Tayyip, the Party has won 8 elections in a row and currently holds a majority of the seats in parliament (Minkenberg, 2013). The AKP has been identified with the modernization and Europeanization, with its leaders asserting the EU integration would lead to improved democracy and respect for human rights (Engert, 2010). Based on its 2001 Party program, integration of Turkey into the EU was one of its core agendas, vis a vis, the party has a mandate to fulfill its promises to the public. Similarly, DSP’s manifesto also upholds that the future of Turkey lies within the EU community (Engert, 2010). According to Baaykan (2012), DSP was instrumental in meeting the legislative changes stipulated by the EU as mandatory for the fulfillment of its membership. DSP was responsible for the enactment of the legislature, which abolished the death penalty in the country and the expansion of the cultural rights. Consequently, Eurosceptic parties include CHP, DYP, ODP and the LDP. CHP purports to acknowledge the gains of the EU integration; however, it holds that integration should only occur under the provisions that Turkey become a member on the basis of equality with other members and subsequent respect for the country’s traditional principles and practices (Baaykan, 2012). The party is thus opposed to other specialized membership as recommended by Merkel and Sarkozy. CHP is further opposed to the conditions set forth by EU in relation to the Cyprus- Turkey crisis. The party argues that Turkey has geographical and cultural right to be part of the EU without the linkage of its relations with Cyprus (Baaykan, 2012). The party, hence maintains that it fully supports the EU accession but without the specific memberships options and amendments of its relation to Cyprus. It hence follows that Eurosceptics parties are not wholly opposed to the EU integration of Turkey; however, they oppose the westernization of the traditional values, beliefs and culture. The parties thereby seek to establish a framework that will advance the integration process, but also preserve the national identity and values of the Turkish society. Unfortunately, overwhelming discussions and debates have only dwelled on the limitations of Turkey as a candidate for EU membership. However, it will be prudent that such debate parallels discussions on the respective gains that EU stands to achieve as a consequence of Turkey’s accession to the union. On the onset, Turkeys EU membership presents crucial foreign policy implications. Turkey’s geographic location provides instrumental geopolitical relevance to EU member states. Akcapar (2006) noted that the country borders the Central Asia, Middle East, the Balkans and the eastern Mediterranean. Turkey will play a crucial role in influencing the foreign policies with countries adjoining it. By extending the borders of the EU to the highly volatile states such as Iraq and Afghanistan, Turkey’s membership will add relevance and push upwards agendas relating to the Islamic states in the region. Coincidentally, Turkey has already established bilateral relations with the Arab countries, strategically initiating diplomatic programs to safeguard its interests in the Arab world (Akyol, 2009). As a member of NATO and critic of Iran’s nuclear program, it accession to the EU will pave the way for more robust cooperation between the European nations and United States in surveillance of Iran’s nuclear activity. On Transnational perspective, the EU will be able to shed off its negative image as Christian club and Turkey will also provide an excellent example of an Islamic state founded upon the values of liberty, justice, democracy, respect for human rights and freedom of the people (Barroso, 2008). As a diplomatic tool, EU will be in a position to utilize Turkey to further its interest to neighboring states through cultural diplomacy and soft power. Furthermore, Diez (2005) asserted that Turkey as an EU member will ensure the security of energy supply by virtue of its bordering the world’s leading producers of crude oil. Vis a vis, the planned accession will facilitate the securing of energy resources and subsequent transportation of the into EU’s single market and also expanding market outlets for the oil producing states. From an economic perspective, the inclusion of Turkey into EU’s Single market will result in an unprecedented increase in demand for goods and services from the present member states. Turkey currently has a national population of 74 million; thereby it would be the most populous member of EU after Germany (Diez, 2007). The accession process could further boost investors’ confidence in the countrys economy as witnessed by the previous cases 10 members’ accession to the EU. Heightened investors confidence will trigger foreign direct investment from EU members to Turkey. Consequently, Diez et al., (2005) stated that the resulting acceleration of the economic growth of turkey will further drive upward EU exports into the country. The facilitation of free labor movements will also positively impact on the labor market of EU states as Turks will highly migrate to other members states. Continued migration into EU’s market will significantly increase labor supply. However, Turkey as a nation stands to be the main beneficiary of the accession process based on its present current account deficit, unmanageable population and highly and politically unstable neighbors. This is the reason underscoring Turkey’s adamant efforts to join the EU. What is the way forward for both Turkey and EU in the light of the current stagnation of the accession process? The situation has transformed into complex scenario where over half of the Negotiation chapters have been halted by the EU following Turkey’s failure to withdraw its troops from Cyprus and France stance opposition to turkeys Membership. On the other hand, both parties, the EU and Turkey are presently faced with more urgent issues ranging from the recent terrorist attack in France and the radicalization of Islamic state (IS) (Carnegie Europe, 2014). As a result, both parties have sidelined the accession agendas and more concern with the insecurity Europe. According to Aydin-Duzgit (2013), the most suitable way forward for the accession could only be found strategic dialogue. Guerin and Stivachtis (2011) propose a strategic dialogue that should be undertaken in phases and different levels to engage both EU and Turkey. The process should include at least four meetings per year where all the 27 EU member states and representatives of Turkey would attend. Consequently, the agendas of the meeting should not be focused on Turkey’s internal issues but on the issues relating to the regional neighbors. Discussions on foreign policies should highlight on issue relating to Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Africa and Pakistan. Moreover, the talks should also integrate Turkey as partner to the Common Security and Defense policy framework of the EU. Turkey cooperation with EU through the Common Security and defense Policy program will aid in showcasing Turkey’s defense and security assets within the highly unstable Islamic states. Conclusion The accession of Turkey to become a member of the EU has been hindered by myriad of factors ranging from member state’s opposition to its candidature, ideological misunderstandings, limitations of the negotiation process and laxity on Turkey’s part. From the discussions, Turkey explicitly has right to join the EU on the basis of its geography, culture, and historical heritage. However, both leaders and the public from the member states have expressed their concerns over the integration of turkey in the regional block. Critical analysis of the issue raised has that highlighted that European identity and its clash with the tradition and culture of Turkish community underlines the fierce opposition. While majority of the European community emerge as opposing the accession, there exist a relative consensus within the Turkey’s political elite over the gains the country would enjoy from becoming a member of the EU. This notwithstanding, Cyprus remains the major hindrance to turkey’s accession since it is already a member of the EU. On their part, Turkey under AKP has managed to oblige with stipulated conditions aimed at restructuring the country’s institutions and economic policies but only failed to recognized Cyprus a sovereign state. The current scenario signals increased tension between Turkey and Cyprus over Illegal exploration of hydrocarbon by the Turks. It is viewed that only strategic dialog between the three parties, EU, Turkey and Cyprus will lead to the commencement of the stalled accession process again. References Aguilera De Prat, C. R., & Rosenstein, J. (2009). Political Parties And European Integration. Brussels, P.I.E. Peter Lang. Akcapar, B. (2006). Turkeys New European Era: Foreign Policy On The Road To Eu Membership. Lanham, Md, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Akcay, B. (2012). Turkeys Accession To The European Union: Political And Economic Challenges. Akçomak, S. And Parto, S. (2006) How Black Is The Black Sheep Compared To All Others? - Turkey And The Eu. Unu-Merit Working Paper #206-024 . Aknur, M. (2012). Democratic Consolidation In Turkey: State, Political Parties, Civil Society, Civil-Military Relations, Socio-Economic Development, Eu, Rise Of Political Islam And Separatist Kurdish Nationalism. Boca Raton, Fla, Universal-Publishers. Akyol, M. (2009) In Turkey’s Accession To The European Union: An Unusual Candidacy. Edited By Arvanitopoulos, C. Berlin: Springe Al-Monitor, (2015). ISIS emerges as threat to Turkey - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East. [online] Available at: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ru/originals/2014/03/isis-threat- turkey-syria-jihadists.html [Accessed 10 Feb. 2015]. Arikan, H. (2006) Turkey And The Eu: An Awkward Candidate For Eu Membership? 2nd Ed. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited Arvanitopoulos, C. (2009). Turkeys Accession To The European Union: An Unusual Candidacy. Berlin, Springer. Aydin-DüZgit, S. (2013). Global Turkey In Europe: Political, Economic, And Foreign Policy Dimensions Of Turkeys Evolving Relationship With The Eu. Roma, Nuova Cultura Baaykan, F (2012). Positions Of Turkish Political Parties On European Integration. Southeast European And Black Sea Studies, 12(1), Pp.25-44. Bach, M. (2006). Europe In Motion Social Dynamics And Political Institutions In An Enlarging Europe. Berlin, Ed. Sigma. Barroso, J. M. D. (2008) ‘The Future Mission Of The Eu Without Justice And Solidarity No Peace’, Osnabru¨ (Germany), 23 May 2008, Speech/08/264, Available At: Http://Europa.Eu/Rapid/Pressrelease Accessed 9 February 2015) Barroso, J. M. D. (2009) ‘European Values In The New Global Governance’,Opening Of The Brussels Office Of The European Jewish Congress, Brussels, 14 October 2009, Speech/09/470, Available At: Http:// Europa.Eu/Rapid/Pressreleasesaction.Do?Reference Speech/09/470 &Format Html&Aged 0&Language En&Guilanguage En (Accessed 15 February 2010). BBC (2010). Turkey Must Join Eu, Says Cameron. [Online] Available At: Http://Www.Bbc.Com/News/Uk-Politics-10767768 [Accessed 10 Feb. 2015]. Bogdani, M. (2011). Turkey And The Dilemma Of Eu Accession: When Religion Meets Politics. London [U.A.], Tauris.a Buzan, B. And Diez, T. (1999). The European Union And Turkey. Survival, 41(1), Pp.41-57. Candemir, Y. And Peker, E. (2015). Turkey Current Account Deficit Exceeds Forecast. [Online] Wsj. Available At: Http://Www.Wsj.Com/Articles/Turkeys-November-Current-Account- Deficit-Exceeds-Forecast-1421161881 [Accessed 10 Feb. 2015]. Carnegie Europe, (2014). The Impact of ISIS on Turkey and Beyond. [online] Available at: http://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/?fa=55975 [Accessed 10 Feb. 2015]. Clesse, A. (2004). Turkey And The European Union: 2004 And Beyond. Amsterdam, Dutch Univ. Press [U.A.]. Diez, T. (2005). Turkey, The European Union And Security Complexes Revisited. Mediterranean Politics, 10(2), Pp.167-180. Diez, T. (2007) Expanding Europe: The Ethics Of Eu-Turkey Relations. Ethics & International Affairs 21(4) 415-422. Diez, T., Agnantopoulos, A. And Kaliber, A. (2005). File: Turkey, Europeanization And Civil Society: Introduction. South European Society And Politics, 10(1), Pp.1-15. Ecfr (2015). Relations With Turkey On The Cyprus Question - Ecfrs European Foreign Policy Scorecard 2015. [Online] Available At: Http://Www.Ecfr.Eu/Scorecard/2015/Wider/32 [Accessed 10 Feb. 2015]. Engert, S. (2010) Eu Enlargement And Socialization: Turkey And Cyprus. New York: Routledge Gabriel, L. (2011). The Eu Accession Of Turkey As A Chance For Human Rights And Minorities? MüNchen, Grin Verlag Gmbh. Http://Nbn-Resolving.De/Urn:Nbn:De:101:1- 20110829252. Gabriel, L. (2011). The Eu Accession Of Turkey As A Chance For Human Rights And Minorities? MüNchen, Grin Verlag Gmbh. Http://Nbn-Resolving.De/Urn:Nbn:De:101:1- 20110829252 Gerhards, J. And Hans, S. (2011) Why Not Turkey? Attitudes Towards Turkish Membership In The Eu Among Citizens In 27 European Countries. Journal Of Common Market Studies 49, 1- 26. Great Britain. (2008). Keeping The Door Wide Open: Turkey And Eu Accession : Seventh Report Of Session 2007-08. London, Stationery Office. Guerin, S. S., & Stivachtis, Y. A. (2011). On The Road To Eu Membership: The Economic Transformation Of Turkey. Brussels, Vub Press. Harmsen, R. And Menno S. (2005). Euroscepticism: Party Politics, National Identity And European Integration. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Joas, H. And Knöbl, W. (2009) Social Theory: Twenty Introductory Lectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Jung, D., & Raudvere, C. (2008). Religion, Politics, And Turkeys Eu Accession. New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Http://Www.Palgraveconnect.Com/Doifinder/10.1057/9780230615403. Kentmen, C. (2008). Determinants Of Support For Eu Membership In Turkey: Islamic Attachments, Utilitarian Considerations And National Identity. European Union Politics 9:487–510. Keyman, E.F., And Ziya Öniş. (2007). Turkish Politics In A Changing World. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi University Press. Maclennam, J. C. (2009) In Turkey’s Accesstion To The European Union: An Unusual Candidacy. Edited By Arvanitopoulos, C. Berlin: Springer Minkenberg, M. (2013). Representing Religion In The European Union: Does God Matter?. West European Politics, 37(1), Pp.232-233. Nas, C. (2005) Eu And Turkey: Challenges And Opportunities In Enlargement And Foreign Policy [Online] Available At [Accessed 19/02/2010] Nello, S. S. (2009) The European Union: Economics, Policies And History. 2nd. Ed. Berkshire: Mcgraw-Hill Education Oborune, K., & Zalel, I. (2011). Debates On Turkeys Accession To Eu: Cfsp/Esdp. MüNchen, Grin Verlag Gmbh. Http://Nbn-Resolving.De/Urn:Nbn:De:101:1-201103281363. Oxford Business Group. (2007). The Report: Turkey 2007. London, Uk, Oxford Business Group. Pelkmans, J. (2006) European Integration: Methods And Economic Analysis. 3rd Ed. Essex: Pearson Education Limited Reuters, (2015). Cyprus Remains Stumbling Block In Turkeys Eu Ambition: Merkel. [Online] Available At: Http://Www.Reuters.Com/Article/2013/02/25/Us-Germany-Turkey-Eu- Idusbre91o10l20130225 [Accessed 10 Feb. 2015]. Salih, H. I. (2013). Reshaping Of Cyprus: A Two-State Solution. Szczerbiak, A. (2008). Opposing Europe Or Problematizing Europe? Euroscepticism And‘Eurorealism’ In The Polish Party System In Opposing Europe? The Comparative Party Politics Of Euroscepticism, Vol. I, Ed. P. Taggart And A. Szczerbiak, 221–42. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Timmerman, C., Rochtus, D., & Mels, S. (2008). European And Turkish Voices In Favour And Against Turkish Accession To The European Union. Bruxelles, P.I.E. Peter Lang. Wendicke, A. (2008). Eu Membership: An Unfeasible Plan For Turkey. MüNchen, Grin Verlag Gmbh. Http://Nbn-Resolving.De/Urn:Nbn:De:101:1-2010082912596. WSJ (2009). Obama Urges EU to Accept Turkey, But Member Nations Remain Cool. [online] WSJ. Available at: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123897560753691203 [Accessed 10 Feb. 2015]. Yavuz, M. H. (2009). Secularism And Muslim Democracy In Turkey. Cambridge, Uk, Cambridge University Press. YüCel, V., & Ruysdael, S. (2002). New Trends In Turkish Foreign Affairs: Bridges And Boundaries. San Jose, Writers Club Press. Read More