front page" "
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyp Erdogan has good reasons for being pleased. At the end of his visit to Brussels, on 23 September, he put an end to the crisis that threatened to dash Turkey’s hopes of joining the European Union (EU). The report of the Turkish Parliament’s adoption of the reform of the penal code had caused a controversy. The Turkish prime minister succeeded in minimising this recent conflict. In spite of that, the EU Commissioners are playing a game of hide and seek. The report prepared by Commissioner Verheugen, due to be issued on 6 October, will have to answer four questions. First, effective respect for human rights in Turkey: though observing the clear progress made by the country over the last two years, the NGOs present in Turkey express some misgivings. Many problems are still outstanding in terms of the use of torture, the judicial persecution of human rights activists, the lack of religious freedom (especially with regard to the Christian churches), and violations of the rights of ethnic minorities (e.g. the Kurds). Second, the financial impact for the EU: the Turkish government has an economic policy that will be difficult to conciliate with that of the EU. In demographic terms, Turkey’s clout is equivalent to that of all ten countries that entered the EU with this year’s enlargement. So Turkey would rapidly become the leading force within the Council and would send 95 deputies to the European Parliament. EU agriculture Commissioner Franz Fischler estimates at 11.3 billion Euros the annual surplus cost for the common agricultural policy, whose budget now amounts to 56 billion. According to Commissioner Jacques Barrot, the annual increased charge for regional policy would be 10 billion. Turkey’s per capita income is four times lower than that of the enlarged EU, and its entry into the EU would force Europeans either to considerably increase their budget or to drastically modify their solidarity policies. Third, negotiation methods: hitherto, the negotiation chapters (agriculture, welfare, etc.) were closed on the basis of the commitments assumed by the candidate countries. In Turkey’s case, the Commission would like to wait until the adaptations requested are put into practice. So instead of being satisfied with promises, their effective implementation would be awaited. Fourth, the 2015 horizon: the analysis presented by Commissioner Verheugen must also permit the Commission to make precise recommendations for the conduct of the negotiations. Even though no date would be indicated for entry into the EU, membership before 2015 would be excluded, given that “no funds will be available before 2014”, as a senior administrator of the Commission had admitted.
