Turks face tougher targets than other EU hopefuls

By Stanley Crossick

Date: 30/09/04

WITH two European Commissioners publicly stating that they are against Turkish membership of the EU, the debate is hotting up on the issue. On October 6, the European Commission will recommend to the Union's Council whether accession negotiations should be opened with Ankara.

The Commission's task is not at all straightforward, not least because it is not by any means clear whether Turkey will have to have satisfied the 'political criteria' by the time the European Council meets on 17 December or whether the deadline is the time of actual entry into the Union.

If the EU is to follow recent precedent, there would be little question of requiring Turkey to deliver on all democracy and human rights obligations laid down in the so-called Copenhagen Declaration of 1993.

Looking ahead to the prospective accession of the countries of central and eastern Europe, the presidency conclusions of the European Council meeting in Copenhagen in June 1993 stated that: "Accession will take place as soon as an associated country is able to assume the obligations of membership by satisfying the economic and political conditions required.

"Membership requires that the candidate country has achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities, the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union.

"Membership presupposes the candidate's ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.

"The Union's capacity to absorb new members, while maintaining the momentum of European integration, is also an important consideration in the general interest of both the Union and the candidate countries."

Although this wording only directly addressed central and eastern European countries, by implication it should also apply to Turkey which was recognized as a "candidate state destined to join the Union" by the 1999 European Council meeting in Helsinki.

However, the conclusions of the Thessaloniki June 2003 summit stated: "The European Council supports its [Turkey's] on-going efforts to fulfil the Copenhagen political criteria for opening accession negotiations with the Union.

"Taking into account progress achieved, significant further efforts to this end are still required."

The Council then went on to introduce an apparent change of policy that went largely unnoticed at the time.

It reaffirmed its commitment to Turkey and announced that "if the European Council decides in December 2004 that Turkey fulfils the Copenhagen political criteria, the EU will open negotiations with Turkey without delay".

Thus the European Council has adopted a different approach to Turkey.

The other 12 candidates for membership - of which ten joined last May 1 - were asked to fulfil the Copenhagen political criteria before membership, whereas in the case of Turkey it is before the opening of negotiations.

Differences of treatment are being maintained for Bulgaria and Romania. The Brussels European Council conclusions of June 2004 urge these two countries "to further intensify their efforts in order to be ready for membership in January 2007".

"The Union underlines that particular attention should be paid to improving their administrative and judicial capacity," the Council said, confirming by implication that the criteria have not been satisfied.

No explanation appears to have been offered for this and, surprisingly, no explanation has apparently been requested - certainly not publicly.

And yet, the difference is important. Neither Bulgaria nor Romania completely fulfilled the Copenhagen criteria when negotiations were opened in 2000.

If the Commission follows literally the wording of successive European Council conclusions, it cannot recommend negotiations be opened, because compliance has to be achieved, not only in Istanbul but in all parts of Turkey and in the treatment of all minorities.

This would be unreasonable. Turkey, as the Union has acknowledged, has made significant progress and there is every reason to believe that, if the progress continues at the same pace, the Copenhagen criteria will be met as they have been met by the last ten acceding countries. There is plenty of time given that Turkey's accession is not foreseen before 2015, at the earliest.

The political test should therefore be whether Turkey is likely to satisfy the necessary criteria by the time of its accession. This carries no risk for the Union because opening negotiations only assumes entry when all conditions have been satisfied.

• Stanley Crossick, founding chairman of the European Policy Centre, Brussels, writes in a personal capacity.

Preview of the European Commission's recommendations on accession negotiations with Turkey, published on 6 October 2004.