Alliance Géostratégique

After Menekse Tokyay last week (« L’Islam peut aussi s’approprier le projet européen »), Dr Ekavi Athanassopoulou, Lecturer in International Relations at the University of Athens and Senior Research Fellow at ELIAMEP (Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy), has accepted to answer a few questions about Turkey and its candidacy to the European Union.

What is the official position of Greece regarding Turkey’s candidacy for EU membership? What about Greek public opinion?

Athens is very much in favour of Turkey’s accession to the EU as long as it fulfils the required by the EU criteria. The majority of Greek public opinion thinks along the same lines.

What has been so far the impact of Cyprus integration to the EU on Greece-Turkey relationships? On Cyprus’ partition?

Cyprus’ EU integration has happened irrespectively of Ankara. Athens would like to see Turkey ending its military occupation of Northern Cyprus abiding thus to UN resolutions and responding to the wishes of an ever increasing portion of Turkish-Cypriots. Until that happens Athens cannot truly trust Ankara. This lack of trust is at the core of Greece’s relationship with Turkey.

What are according to you the main obstacles on Turkey’s road to EU? Are they more related to Turkey’s domestic issues or to (some) EU members reluctance (partly for vote-catching reasons) to welcome this country in the Union?

The actual facts that constitute obvious obstacles are well known. Some of them have to do with Turkey’s domestic issues, some with European perceptions of Turkey. But there is no doubt in my mind that even if Turkey fulfilled all the EU criteria tomorrow many in Europe would not want to welcome it in the Union. The crux of the issue is Turkey’s size and enormous potential, we have to remember that Turkey is already an important actor in its region. This is the main obstacle on Turkey’s road to EU, because it means that it will be another potential pole of power within the EU. This is hard for many Europeans to accept. But also in Turkey the potential of the country raises serious questions regarding the desirability of its accession. Furthermore, the fact that Turkey is still in a process of defining its identity and consequently its role in the international system complicates these issues even more both in Turkey and in Europe.

Would Turkey’s membership have any impact on EU governance and decision-making processes?

Yes, it would. Because of the double majority voting system Turkey due to its population size (estimated to be 86,4 million in 2020, that is close to 18% of the union’s total), will find it relatively easy, if it so chooses, to form a blocking minority in the Council by aligning with 3 other states representing 17% of the Union’s citizens. For the same reason it will find it relatively easy to become a major motivating force regarding issues pertinent to its own more narrow interests. In short, due to its population size Turkey can become one of the big players in the union.

What could Turkey’s strategic position (between the Mediterranean and the Black Seas, Europe and Asia, Christian and Muslim worlds…) bring to EU Common Foreign and Security Policy?

The frequently cited idea that the EU needs Turkey in order to develop a “global vision” lacks seriousness. A global vision, or the lack of it, and the character of such a vision is related primarily to a frame of mind, not to strategic outposts. Historical experience is clear on this.

Having said that, with Turkey in, the EU will span two continents. This will be truly exciting, but at the same time a big challenge for the Union. Also Ankara’s experience in, and deep understanding of the Middle East in particular, can make a positive contribution to the shaping of the Europe’s foreign policy towards that part of the world.

However, there is also the risk that Turkey’s membership may prove to be a liability. Turkey’s location and potential means that it has regional interests and is faced with security pressures which the other European countries do not share. The most apparent example of such a pressure is the still unresolved Kurdish issue (which is simultaneously a domestic and a foreign policy issue for Turkey). Therefore, it will be unreasonable to expect Turkey’s future foreign policy orientation to be unequivocally Western; it will be more natural to be selectively Western or Eastern depending on Turkey’s perception of more narrow interests. Secondly, the EU may find itself dragged deeply into issues that it would perhaps otherwise choose not to touch. Thirdly, if Turkey joins, the current momentum to develop a Common Foreign and Security Policy may become overwhelmed by a whole new set of strategic parameters which would immediately be added to the Union’s agenda.

Do you see any reason why EU should refuse the Turkish candidacy?

If the EU believes that it is not up to successfully handling the host of new challenges represented by Turkey’s membership.

Finally, can we expect a full EU membership for Turkey in the foreseeable future? What do you think of the « privileged partnership » promoted by Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel?

Not in the foreseeable future. I would personally hope that the idea of Turkey’s membership of the Union is not politely shelved. A “privileged membership” may be a realistic short/medium term solution for both sides, but it reflects a very conservative approach to the inherent dynamism of international affairs. Of course, both sides should tread cautiously, but at the same time they should not shy away from exciting challenges.

Interview by JGP, Mon Blog Défense

Dr Ekavi Athanassopoulou is the author of several books on Turkey and EU, including:

1. Turkey: Anglo-American Security Interests, 1945-1952: The First Enlargement of Nato (London, Frank Cass, 1999 – First publication).

2. Israeli-Turkish Security Ties: Regional Reactions (Jerusalem, Gitelson Peace Publications, The Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2001).

3. (editor), United in Diversity?: European Integration and Political Cultures (London, I.B. Tauris, 2008).