Cuarto Ejercicio - Monetizaci´ on Total

The European public disfavour in regards to Turkey‘s accession influences the perceptions of the European political elite who are still busy constructing the EU‘s identity. The EU is already experiencing problems in regards to its identity and legitimacy which is well reflected with its democratic deficit and European public disinterest for further

integration. Its identity which entails both inclusive and exclusive characteristics is still under construction and contested between diverse camps. On one hand, we have those who

highlight the exclusive aspects of EU identity based on geography and culture. On the other hand, we have those who highlight the inclusive aspects of EU identity based on democracy, liberty and human rights. In recent years, this contestation of the EU‘s identity became even more intense which was reflected by the harsh debates about whether to include a reference to Christianity in the European Constitution or not.

The dualistic and contested nature of the EU‘s identity brought competing discourses on Turkey‗s accession. The emergence of Turkey‘s EU entry as a concrete possibility after the radical domestic transformation of the country since 1999 has triggered a hard debate in

108 Europe concerning the future of the EU‘s enlargement. A severe division between the

member states of the EU as well as between different political camps within these states has emerged in regards to Turkish membership. While countries like the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain have been in favour of Turkey‘s admission, the current governments of France, Germany and Austria are leading the camp which proposes a privileged partnership to Turkey instead of full membership. Nevertheless, centre-left parties in Germany and France (that is Social Democratic Party (SPD) and Socialist Party (PS) respectively) took a more positive approach towards Turkish membership.

In general, the centre-left political parties who highlight the inclusive aspects of the EU identity are more sympathetic towards Turkey‘s accession compared to those on the centre-right who highlight the exclusive aspects of the EU identity. For example, the centre- right political parties of Turkey are denied membership of the European People‘s Party which is made up of Christian Democrat and conservative parties in EU countries and several times declared that Turkey does not belong in the European project. On the other hand, the leftist parties in the country have been accepted as associate members of the Party of European Socialists which is made up of social democrat parties in the EU. European leftist parties‘ sympathy towards Turkish membership is related to their social-democrat identity and ideology which supports a secular and socially progressive policy, immigration and multi- culturalism and a foreign policy which promotes democracy, protection of human rights and where possible effective multilateralism.

In this context, these parties generally emphasize the importance of Turkey‘s

accession for Europe‘s security and position in the international arena. In their view, the EU needs Turkey in order to be a true global player in international politics. Since they highlight the inclusive aspects of EU identity they represent Turkey as different only in terms of its socio-economic and political development level. As a result, they see Turkey as eligible for EU membership as long as it achieves a successful transition towards becoming more

democratic and liberal. Moreover, they argue that Turkey‘s accession will eliminate the wide- spread misperception of the EU as a ‗Christian club‘, will consolidate the EU‘s identity as a union of like-minded democracies and will contribute to the prevention of a potential clash of civilizations in the future. They particularly see the transformation of Turkish Islamists as an opportunity to spread Western-values among the Islamic world. With its conservative outlook and commitment to democracy and a liberal economy, the AKP is seen as an ideal role-model for democratization of the Middle East.

109 Joschka Fischer said;

‗To modernize an Islamic country based on the shared values of Europe would almost be a D-Day for Europe in the war against terror, [because it] would provide real proof that Islam and modernity, Islam and the rule of law... [And] this great cultural tradition and

human rights are after all compatible‘235

Former British Prime Minister Blair also expressed the importance of Turkey‘s accession for the identity of Europe by saying;

‗the accession of Turkey would be proof that Europe is "committed not just in word but in deed to a Europe of diverse races, cultures, and religions all bound together by

common rules and a sense of human solidarity and mutual respect‘236

On the other hand, centre-right parties‘ such as the German Christian Democrats (CDU) led by Angela Merkel and the French Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) led by Nicolas Sarkozy opposes Turkey‘s full membership and proposes privileged partnership with Turkey instead. Their opposition towards Turkey‗s membership can be explained by two important factors. First of all, strong public reactions against Turkey‘s accession have made the enlargement an important issue for domestic power struggles in these countries. Mr Sarkozy made his opposition to Turkey‘s EU entry a central element of his presidential campaign. Right after becoming the official candidate of the UMP he made his strongest statement against Turkey‘s EU entry by saying;

‗I want to say that Europe must give itself borders, that not all countries have a vocation to become members of Europe, beginning with Turkey which has no place inside the European Union... Enlarging Europe with no limit risks destroying European political

union, and that I do not accept‘.237

Secondly, these parties are holding either a Christian Democrat or conservative identity. The supporters of these ideologies are often conservative on cultural, social and moral issues and generally oppose secularization. For this reason, centre-right parties in Europe emphasize the exclusive aspects of EU‘s identity, and are more likely to consider it as a ‗civilisational project‘ in which Christianity plays a unifying role. In this context, European

235 _{Quoted in Robert Kagan, "Embraceable EU," Washington Post, 5 December 2004.} 236

Statement by Blair on March 24, 2004, Available at: http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/040324201934.zs7t bbvc

237 _{Zaman Newspaper, 14 January 2007, ‘Sarkozy: Turkiye’nin AB’de Yeri Yok’, (Sarkozy: Turkey Has No Place in}

110 parties of the right perceive Turkey as a threat to the collective identity of the union as it subverts the boundaries of European identity and blurs the clear distinction between self and other. In other words, the possibility of Turkish entry into the EU weakens the right camp‘s

claim to a distinct European identity based on a common cultural heritage.238

As David Campbell suggested, foreign policy can sometimes be pursued as a boundary-producing practice which makes exclusion and tells people what to fear. In this context, Turkey‘s differences are represented within discourses of fear and danger. Most discussions regarding Turkey‘s accession to the EU include statements of the need to defend Europe. For example, former French President Giscard d‘Estaing expressed his opposition to Turkey‘s membership on the grounds that she is not a European country and argued that her

accession will be the end of Europe.239 In a similar manner, in one of his interviews current

President Sarkozy stated; ‗Turkey is an Asian state which has less European values then Lebanon and Israel…Therefore its membership would affect future enlargement plans and

would bring membership demands from such countries or even from Morocco‘.240

In the context of this contestation over its collective identity, the EU pursues an ambivalent policy towards Turkey. Strong public support in Turkey for EU membership also contributed to this ambivalence by generating an assumption among the European political elite that Turkey cannot turn its back to the EU and will stay in the European sphere of influence regardless of the outcome of the talks. In this context, the eligibility of Turkey for joining the bloc is still openly debated both among the European elite and the public despite the fact that it was confirmed several times by the European Commission. It is no wonder that Turkey, although recognised as a candidate in 1999 and started accession talks in 2005, is still generally seen as being a long way far from full membership

238

Rumelili, B. (2004), ‘Constructing Identity and Relating to Difference: Understanding the EU’s Mode of Differentiation’, Review of International Studies, Volume 30, pp.27-47

239

BBC News, 8th November 2002, ‘Turkey Entry Would Destry EU’, Available at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2420697.stm, [Accessed on 1 April 2008]

240 _{Turkish Daily News. 26th February 2005, ‘Sarkozy’s Formula: Turkey’s EU bid vs. EU Integration’, Available}

111

B) THE POSITIONS OF TURKISH POLITICAL PARTIES: