- A new vision for European Union ?
First, just a short note on the concept of frontier :
1) The concept of “Frontier” really started with the Nation-state. In Middle Ages the frontier was: . the walls of the Castle to protect the Life and Property of the Lord. . It then became the walls of the Bourg to protect the Life and Property of the Bourgeoisie. Of course, there were walls like the China Wall and even the Hadrian Wall built between England and Scotland against bandits, but these were not frontiers. They were military humps. EU is something beyond the Nation-state. EU project is not an end in itself but a means for a better world; such a project cannot have “final” frontiers to begin with,
2) In our day, everything is changing every morning, so especially “final frontiers” is contradiction in terms,
But as Graham Avery named it, we know what we are talking about, don’t we? This is a debate on Turkish accession, nothing else or almost.
Today, by “frontier” between EU and Turkey we understand a wall against the modern bandits we used to call “foreign workers” and that we now call “terrorists”.
Avery has been particularly refined on this. He didn’t conclude: “EU needs Turkey like it needs a hole in the head”. He said: “This is something to be decided upon in the course of events to come”.
I couldn’t agree more, although the normal job required from a discussant is to disagree. Turkish candidacy is obviously difficult because EU is right now in a very difficult position both economically and politically after it had to absorb the ex-communist states, as duly described by Graham Avery.
A less cautious speaker would’ve given at least two more reasons:
1) Turkey is too big (to swallow). This is the concern of the EU bureaucracy/statesmanship, cold blooded/rationalist as all elites are expected to be,
2) Muslim Turkey is too different (from the European culture). This is the concern of the western European masses in particular, hot blooded/emotional as all masses are, particularly in times of hardship.
In political science what you look at (Turkish accession) is not that important. More important is where you look from.
Therefore we should look from these two angles to guess what awaits us “in the events to come”.
The point of view of EU bureaucracy/statesmanship:
1) “In the light of the developments in the crisis region I think it would be appropriate to include in the Union a Secular and Muslim State » G. Verheugen, Commissioner for Enlargement, May 9th, 2003.
2) “The Union must not miss this historical opportunity. Inclusion in the European family of a Muslim country which applies our democratic and humanitarian values is an asset for the geopolitical position of the Union. A multicultural structure which would assimilate religious differences and strengthened by a vigorous democracy could actually transform into a world power a European Union the frontiers of which would extend as far as Iran » Eneco Landaburu, Director General of Enlargement, May 13th 2003.
3) “To be taken seriously one needs to develop a military power also. Europe can arrive to it by extending its borders towards especially to Turkey and Russia” (S. Berlusconi, Italian Premier, May 19th 2003).
4) “The lesson that the war on Iraq teaches us : We don’t need several small States in Europe, but a big one » (Dominique de Villepin, French foreign minister, during his official visit to Turkey in May 2003).
5) “There could be a potential conflict in the 21st Century between the West and the Islamic countries. This is why Turkey is extremely important” (Verheugen, at the conference on Turkey and the EU, From Association to Accession?, 6 and 7 November 2003, Amsterdam).
6) “9/11 is one of the biggest conflicts between the Islamic world and Western democracies. If we choose to include Turkey in our camp our chances to stay away from such conflicts and to reach a peaceful solution will increase. A Muslim country like Turkey can become a member of the Union” (Verheugen to Der Spiegel on Nov. 6th, 2004).
7) “Turkey is a country of extreme strategic importance, a crossroads of culture and geography, and an example for other Islamic countries on the road to pluralist democracy” (The Times, editorial, Nov. 6th, 2003).
8) « We fear that the biggest conflict of the 21st Century will be witnessed between Western powers and the Islamic world. Turkey is the most important country to demonstrate that democracy, the rule of law and human rights are compatible with Islam . After 9/11 the heads of States and governments of the EU countries have understood that the attachment of Turkey to Western democracies is imperative » (Verheugen, The 9th European Forum, Berlin, Nov. 16th, 2003).
9) “These attacks will draw Turkey closer to Europe” (Verheugen, in the aftermath of Istanbul bombings, Nov. 21, 2003).
10) “Turkey has been attacked because she is on our side” (Verheugen, Nov. 26th, 2003).
11) “All the heads of States and governments have said in 1999 that Turkey could become a member, but they wouldn’t want it. Today the majority of them support the accession of Turkey for foreign policy and security reasons. This reasoning started on 9/11” (Verheugen, interview to Focus, January 2004).
12) “I too once shared worries about an eventual neighborhood with Syria and Iraq. But everything is clear since 9/11. We already are neighbors with these two. Strategic importance of Turkey is very big for peace and stabilization of our country” (Joschka Fischer, interview to Die Tageszeitung, February 21st, 2004).
13) “Schröder now underlines Turkish accession because there is a great strategic reality behind, an analysis shared by all the leaders of the Union. If a country like Turkey who could play a determinant and conciliatory role between Western democracies and the Islamic world would become our partner, this could play a central role for the political and economic security of Europe” Verheugen, interview to Deutschlandfunk radio, February 24th, 2004).
14) “If we succeed to include a Muslim society into our community of European values, we’d be able to refute the argument of the Islamic fundamentalists who claim that Islam and Western values are incompatible. (Martin Schulz, February 24th, 2004).
15) “The chances of Turkey to accede to the Union were null ten years ago; today they are very big. This stems from factors other than the process of rapid reforms” (Bruce George, President of the Defence Commission, House of Commons, March 9th, 2004).
16 )“Like many others I too had to change my strategic evaluations concerning Turkey after 9/11. Before, the question was: “Where is Turkey ? ». Now the question is : « What is Turkey ? » To this question the Turkish government gives a very impressive and very definite answer : ‘Modern Turkey will set an exemple as to how Western democracies and the Islamic world can establish relations founded not on a conflict but on tolerance, mutual comprehension and cooperation”. Verheugen,, March 9th, 2004).
17) «To support Turkish candidacy is very important to reconcile with moderate Islam which is a part of the war against terror… Islamist militants want to divide Muslim and Christian worlds. We could fight against this by stressing history and commun values that Europe shares with the Islamic world. For me the most crucial test in this domain is the process of inclusion of Turkey in the European Union” (Jack Straw, during his visit to Denmark, March 23rd, 2004).
Between March 2003 and beginning of 2004 what all these politicians and statesmen of Europe, from Verheugen to Berlusconi to Fisher, to Jack Straw, etc. are saying?
They are all saying the following: “Dear Turkey, please come and become a member”
Why this very sudden and radical change? Obviously because of the fear created by:
1) the invasion of Iraq and the ensuing split in the EU between the “hard nucleus” and “the Troyan Horse + many others”, and also,
2) by the terrorist acts called « Islamist ».
EU quickly understood 2 things:
1) As long as I lack a military pillar I will remain a second-class power vis-à-vis the Hegemonic Power and thus open to disintegrating centrifugal forces attracted by it. It’s impossible that I build an army now. But I should at least be able in a position to intervene into the crisis theatre. I can do this only through a country touching the Balkans, the Caucasus, and the Middle East: The only one is Turkey.
2) No one can kill the mosquitos by bombing the marshes. The only way to calm Islamic countries is to claim that democracy and Islam are compatible. The only example is Turkey, associating Islam with secularism and democracy.
In short, the good old Realpolitik!
At the end, given the nature of international politics, Turkey could be admitted because it’s too big and too different. Dialectics.
The Point of View of the EU Masses:
After Turkey got closer to Europe as a result of 2001-2004 reforms, EU masses are getting closer to Turkey very quickly because of / thanks to globalization/terrorism:
1) People used to say (they still say it): Turkey is a nationalist country, wanting to impose her own conditions upon the Union.
So are European countries now: the debates on European Constitution prove that the masses want an EU that does not “bother” their nation-state.
2) People used to say (they still say it): Turkey is an undemocratic country, she is far from multiculturalism. She tortures her citizens.
The most multiculturalist of them all: The Netherlands.
Three Turkish candidates are excluded from Dutch party lists because they are against the G-word,
Minister Rita Verdonk is hardly a multiculturalist with her language tests and obligation to speak Dutch on the street. One does not have to yell “How happy is the one who says I am a Dutch” yet, but we are close to it,
The CIA controls all electronic banking transactions in Europe and tortures suspects in some EU countries (Rumania and Poland).
3) People used to say (they still say it): Turkey is not a secular country. Religion is under strict State control. State is the sole educator of the Imams and applies censorship to their sermons.
Holland is doing the very same now: It controls the sermons in the mosques and opens State-sponsored religious schools to educate the Imams (not the priests)
These are unbelievable and negative developments, but the European masses are getting closer Turkey little by little. The two partners are getting closer in “bad” things.
At the end of this process, Europe could perhaps decide that Turkey is not “too different” after all. This also could help in the process. Dialectics.
RSS 2.0