European Environment Essay

Introduction Turkey’s entry into the European Union has been a matter of controversy for years. Although the nation is applying great effort to breaking the entry barrier, so far its efforts have been futile. Why? It seems too big, too poor and too different from Europe. The little piece of Turkish territory that is situated in Europe cannot persuade the European policy-makers that the nation is part of the European civilization. However, Turkey keeps pushing and at one point the nation might succeed in attaining its goals. In this paper, we will examine the advantages and disadvantages of joining the EU for the largely Asian country and for the EU itself. After all, the almost forty-year struggle for EU membership waged by Turkey should be motivated by the perceived advantages of the membership in the union. For the EU, the acceptance of such an unusual member can also bring some distinct advantages as well as disadvantages. EU perspective 1.1. Cons for Europe Unlike pros, the cons of accepting Turkey into what has previously been a group of white, Christian and affluent nations are apparent at first glance. Former European Commissioner Frits Bolkestein’s â€Å"too big, to poor, too different† is a perfect designation for what Turkey appears to be to the Europeans and what it bring them in the not-so-remote future, changing the landscape of Europe forever. Turkey is indeed too big in proportion to population. At the moment, it numbers about 70 million, but considering the rapid growth rates, it may soon become the largest European nation (Lamb 2004). As the EU often determines how much power to give the nations in accordance with their population size, Turkey may grab more power in the EU than European policy-makers are willing to give it. Anyway, â€Å"that would immediately shift the balance of EU power to the East† (Lamb 2004). At the same time, Turkey will bring the borders of the EU closer to the unstable Middle Eastern region. Iraq, Syria, Iran – all these explosive neighbors would come one step closer with the entry of Turkey. Those who oppose its entry point to the fact that it is already a member of NATO and so it is unlikely that joining the EU would help to broaden the cooperation in any meaningful way. Besides, Turkey is too poor to be admitted into the alliance that enjoys one of the highest living standards in the world. The completion of the integration process between Turkey and the EU would require opening the borders between the two nations to admit free flow of capital, goods and people. This could immediately flood the European Union with a massive stream of immigrants from Turkey willing to work for larger EU salaries. The probability of this unwelcome scenario is corroborated by the fact that â€Å"in a recent poll by the Turkish Gallup Institute, 23 percent of Turkish workers asked said they would move to Western Europe countries if part of the EU† (Lamb 2004). This would surely oversaturate the European labor market and increase unemployment. A constant concern is the clash between Muslim and Christian values. Although Turkey is already a borderline state between the two civilizations, it still remains a Muslim nation that retains much of the ethical concerns of this world. The clash of two very different civilizations is therefore a matter of concern. The cost of admitting Turkey can be overwhelming for the EU budget that has already aroused considerable controversies. The opponents of admitting Turkey insist that â€Å"Turkey’s membership will cost more than all ten of the countries admitted in May combined† (Lamb 2004). This is impossible to check since all the expenses cannot be quantified at this point. Surely, with a large agricultural sector, Turkey will be able to claim a large portion of EU agricultural subsidies, and the ‘old European’ nations like France and the UK may not like it, claiming those subsidies themselves. 1.2. Are there any pros? Although not all Europeans may want to admit it, accepting Turkey into the EU has not just cons, but pros as well. The nation, being big in the size of the population, can not only drag the block down with its sheer size, but also increase its weight on the international arena. The EU and the prospects of entering it are already a major factor in the politics of the nations situated in the geographic proximity of Europe. At the same time, the entry of Turkey will expand the boundaries of Europe and put more nations in the orbit of European influence. It will, effectively, enlarge the boundaries of European influence into Asia and provide a new vehicle for European impact on Asia. The very things that are believed to be the cons can be turned into pros. Thus, despite the calls of those envisaging the clash of cultural values between Muslims and Europeans, there is another counterclaim. Thus, Turkey as part of the EU can turn into â€Å"a bridge between the two cultures, and a proof that Europe isn’t a club just for Christians† (Lamb 2004). Turkey’s membership can prove a way toward achieving a workable compromise between the Christians and Muslims. The economic part of the cons, namely, Turkey’s alleged poverty can also be seen from the other side. Even if Turkey’s per capita income is behind that of most European nations, â€Å"Turkey’s economy — in contrast, incidentally, to many of the more established EU states — is growing rapidly† (Lamb 2004). This turns the nation into an excellent investment opportunity and makes it a desirable EU member since Turkey’s growth can last for years and decades after the entry to the EU and propel the region’s economic growth. Anyway, Turkey’s economic situation is not worse than that of poorer EU members like Portugal, and the subsequent fate of those states has demonstrated how much advances they have made. In comparison to the next candidates for EU membership, Bulgaria and Romania, Turkey has a higher capita income. Another area which has gives Turkey extra points is the geopolitical position of Turkey and its prospective role in strengthening the EU’s security. Thus, the proponents of Turkey’s membership say that it â€Å"could be a model for a modern Islamic democracy — one which could influence other Muslim states into moving towards Western ideals† (Lamb 2004). This, on its own, will urge the Muslim nations to abandon their anti-Western stance, if any, and focus on peaceful integration with the West. In addition, â€Å"Turkey has a large and powerful military presence and would offer the EU a stronger presence in a geo-politically vital region† (Lamb 2004). The opponents object, however, that Turkey has a negative image in much of the Muslim world and thus cannot be reasonably considered as having the power to break its negative perception to influence the West. The Turkish Perspectives 2.1. The Political Situation For Turkey itself, its membership in the European Union would mean a total shift of geopolitical direction. Although seen as advantageous by many, it is by no means certain that the majority or even all of the population support this move, perceived by many as too dramatic a shift from the previous political course. However, there are many distinct pros for Turkey in joining the EU. To realize how the EU accession will spearhead reforms and progress in Turkey, one needs to look closer at the history of this nation that became the first modern and secular Islamic state ever. The remains of the destroyed Ottoman Empire were turned by Mustafa Kemal, alternatively known as â€Å"Ataturk†, or â€Å"the father of all Turks†, into a secular republic. This was a breakthrough movement in the history of the Muslim world, offering an alternative to the previously monarchial structures. Kemal â€Å"abolished the caliphate, secularized academic curricula, †¦replaced Turkey’s Arabic script with a Latin one†, â€Å"disbanded religious courts, Westernized the legal system, and gave women suffrage and equal rights† (Philips 2004). Since then, the commitment to secularism and democracy, embodied in Turkey’s constitution, has been upheld by the Turkish military that have watched over the development of the country. This role given to the nation’s officers is established in Armed Forces Internal Service Law of 1961, the constitution of 1982, and the role of institutions such as the National Security Council (NSC). The Turkish military have with success fulfilled this role, batting off the inroads made by extremist and fundamentalist forces, preventing the threat of terrorism and separatism. Now, the admission of Turkey into the EU will provide further incentives to liberalize the state policies and give individuals freedom of expression. Thus, each nation that has a chance to be admitted into the EU must meet the so-called Copenhagen criteria that, among others, include â€Å"democratic questions concerning human rights, minority rights, prevention of torture and independent judiciary† (EMEP 2004). These requirements contain points that can contribute to the progress of human rights in Turkey. After all, the nation is said to have some after-effects of the Muslim rule in place that hamper the preservation of human rights. This concerns, for instance, the freedom of religion and the separation of religion and state. Thus, although Turkey is considered a secular state, it continues to give broad privileges to the mainstream Hanafi school of Sunni Islam and sponsor imams in government employment, sometimes even sending them to areas of the EU where Turkish minorities reside (Wikipedia). At the same time, the Greek Orthodox Church has faced hurdles in its functioning in Turkey. Thus, the church has not been able to open the Theological School of Halki (Wikipedia). Proponents of Turkey’s membership insist that the nation could have been inspired to change this if given a reasonable chance to enter the European Union. Besides, many note that Turkey still preserves some Islamic traditions that are a concern in terms of their compatibility with global democratic standards. Thus, the continuing existence of polygamous marriages is at odds, many say, with the EU policies on women rights and gender equality. Turkey continues to oppress its Kurdish and Alevi minorities, although it recently recognized officially the Kurdish language. In addition, Turkey signed the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDRHI) that contains some controversial statements including norms unacceptable for a member of a democratic community that the European Union is. Thus, â€Å"that declaration has contradictory statements on the equality of and the non-discrimination between sexes as claiming in principle that legal systems should be defined in accordance with Shariah† that has long been recognized by the EU as incompatible with its democratic values. The accession into the EU and, more importantly, successful integration with the union would most probably make the chances of Islamic fundamentalists even slimmer. The reforms implemented at the urge of the EU would further lessen the chances that Turkey will embrace Shariah as a state law code. The rights of Turkish minorities would be at smaller risk, and Turkey would have an incentive to implement the freedom of speech and religion. All this would most probably improve the political situation in the country, making it more susceptible to democratic values. At the same time, the opponents of the EU membership point to the peculiar role of the Turkish military in safeguarding the nation from the impact of Islamic fundamentalists. The army â€Å"has overthrown three prime ministers since 1960, and in 1997 it engineered a soft coup to oust the Islamic Welfare Party (REFAH), after just one year at the helm of an improbable coalition† (Philips 2004). At each time, the power was soon transferred to the civilian secular authorities. In this way, the Turkish military has served as a guardian of the country. However, the Western-style democratic reforms, it is feared, giving broader rights to the political expression of minority views, would also open the way for fundamentalists and Islamic hard-liners. The power of the military to contain them would then be undoubtedly curtailed, and the nation would prove more vulnerable to their potentially negative impact. The very mechanisms through which the military has sought to purge the nation of the overly zealous religious fanatics would be destroyed, and the nation would be unprotected. Besides, it is by no means a certainty that Turkey will be able to ensure the separation of religion and the state in case of its accession. Thus, the question of whether democratization would increase is open to dispute. 2.2. Economic Consequences While democratization is, despite the limitations described above, seen as a benefit of EU membership by many Turks, the economic consequences of joining the union remain more disputable. Will Turkey really benefit from the accession to the union that places heavy demands on the economic policies of the members to ensure integration? Will its firms be able to survive the competition against the well-developed European companies? Turkey, in case of gaining entry, will have to abide by the economic policies set down in EU’s Maastricht and Amsterdam Treaties that were established by the union long before Turkey’s plausible accession. EMEP, the Turkish Party of Labour, has long stated that the EU economic policies can be ruinous to certain sectors of the domestic economy. Thus, if the EU Council adopts a plan on the liberalization of the telecommunication industry, Turkey will be forced to sell its part of the PTT. The Turkish oil company, the Petrol Ofisi, also stands little chance, in the opinion of the EMEP, to withstand the liberalization policies. Finally, the agricultural sector of Turkey that is a significant part of the national economy, will not survive should the EU decide to give up subsidies for the producers of agricultural products such as beetroot, cotton, tobacco and other products. At the same time, for ordinary citizens accession to the EU continues to symbolize economic benefits that will hopefully be translated into higher life standards. To Turks, the entry has come to be associated with â€Å"a higher income, better healthcare and medical treatments, access to higher education, the freedom to travel, and a carefree retirement† (Zaptcioglu 2004). However, experts continue to worry about the realization of the Maastricht criteria for economic situation in a prospective member that, allegedly, will be harder for Turkey to meet than the Copenhagen ones. The nation now has a national debt of $270 billion. The Maastricht requirements mean that debts are no more than 60% of the national income (Zaptcioglu 2004). The skeptics’ plan to overcome this hurdle is â€Å"should pull out of the tariff union and at the same time apply to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank for different and better terms for paying off its debts† (Zaptcioglu 2004). However, it is controversial whether Turkey should risk spoiling relations with the West in this fashion in order to gain entry to the EU. The current economic impact of integration with the EU is also debatable. Thus, Turkey currently has a tariff union with the block it hopes to enter some day. This union was established with entering the Customs Union Treaty in 1995. EMEP (2004) points that the union works to the disadvantage of Turkey, leading to increase in its trade gap with Europe to the amount of $10 billion. However, this is not the opinion of only one political party that may be exploiting facts to prove a point. Manisali and Sinan Aygà ¼n, chairman of the Chamber of Commerce in Ankara, also lament the deprivation inflicted on the economy by the union. Aygà ¼n says that â€Å"Turkey has become an import country for European industrial products, but, according to the tariff union regulations, is not permitted to export its agricultural products into the EU† (Zaptcioglu 2004). This means that the union is not equitable and gives EU broader advantages than Turkey. There is certainly fear that the policies implemented in case Turkey joins the EU will be similarly skewed in order to give the EU an advantage. Thus, the accession to the EU could adversely affect the Turkish economy, subjecting the domestic policies to the dictate of the Brussels power. It is not certain that Turkey will be able to maintain its growth if it is forced to adapt to the adverse EU decisions on economic policy. 2.3. Impact on Turkey’s Foreign Policy Since demands concerning the foreign policies of the this prospective member are among the most important demands on Turkey, it is highly probable that the nation will have to change its relationships with neighbors. Thus, Turkey will most probably have to recognize Cyprus, something it has been reluctant to do for years. The island that remains divided into two parts after the conflict of 1974 involving a Greek coup d’etat and a Turkish military intervention. The island, divided into two parts, the Republic of Cyprus that is part of the EU and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus recognized by Turkey, remains a matter of dispute for Turkey and Greece. The EU accession will most likely lead to the requirement for Turkey to recognize the Republic of Cyprus. In the same way, the Aegean dispute between Turkey and Greece as well as the relations with Armenia remain open to controversy. The boycott of Armenia including the construction of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline outside of the Armenian territory was caused by Turkey’s perception of Nagorno-Karbakh area as unlawfully occupied by Armenia. Romano Prodi, ex-President of the European Commission, has made it one of the requirements to resolve the conflict with Armenia (Wikipedia). Thus, entering the EU, Turkey will have to abandon part of its sovereignty in decision-making and succumb to the EU demands. This will limit the ability of the nation to pursue independent policies that may differ from EU wishes. Conclusion Turkey’s accession to the European Union remains open to controversy. The union balks at letting in a state that due to its sheer size will exert influence on the EU environment and can make integration more difficult. The acceptance of a Muslim state is also a controversial subject because the ensuing clash between the Islamic and Western values is hard to avoid. From the perspective of Turkey itself, its membership in the EU is also fraught with positive and negative consequences. While it is certain that it will contribute to the democratization of the state and the improvement of the human rights situation, Turkey will also have to pay attention to the political stability. The unique role of the Turkish military in preserving the secular doctrine may be challenged, which will open the way for fundamentalists. On the economic side, the cons may outweigh the cons unless Turkey can count on substantial subsidies. Finally, accession to the powerful body of nations will mean greater security on the international arena. At the same time, Turkey will have to count on losing part of its sovereignty and the need to succumb to the EU authority on many important issues. Bibliography Accession of Turkey to the European Union. Wikipedia. 30 January 2006 . EMEP (The Party of Labour). Turkey and the European Union. October 2004. 30 January 2006 . Lamb, Scott. â€Å"TURKEY AND THE EU: The Pros and Cons.† Spiegel Online 14 December 2004. 23 January 2006 . Phillips, David L. â€Å"Turkey’s Dreams of Accession.† Foreign Affairs (September/October 2004). 30 January 2006 . Zaptcioglu, Dilek. â€Å"They Will Never Accept Us!† Quantara (2004). 30 January 2006 .