Who is most to blame for the sudden deadlock between Turkey and the European Union?
Turkey, by a small margin, if you have to make that call, in that it has not complied with its promise to the EU to open its ports. It knew it had a year or so to do it, and it did nothing. That was reflected in the severity of the European Commission’s verdict yesterday.
But the stalemate would not have arisen without egregious stubbornness of Greece and Cyprus, urged on by France and Germany, who have made no bones about their coolness towards the entire notion of Turkish membership.
At this point, the European Commission has to decide whether it wants to encourage Turkey, never mind who is most in the wrong.
Advertisement
The message yesterday was that it doesn’t — and that it doesn’t want the talks to stall. It can’t have it both ways; that dangerous game will end in Turkey’s angry exit.
Yesterday’s report by the Commission dealt a harsher blow than expected to Turkish hopes: suspension of eight “chapters” for discussion in accession talks. They are not the three that Britain had lobbied for, nor the six for which Turkey had been braced. More damaging, perhaps, was the recommendation that no chapter of talks be closed until the question of Cyprus and access to Turkish ports is settled. So far, Turkey and the Commission have agreed only one of the 35 — on science.
Some reprimand was in order. Turkey had promised the EU under the “Ankara protocol” that it would open its sea and air ports to vessels from Cyprus, which it does not recognise. In the end, Turkey refused.
Brussels’ reaction could have been worse. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister, called the recommendation unacceptable, but Turkey is well aware that the Commission could have frozen talks, or set a new deadline for opening the ports. On the other hand, Turkey has a point, too. The EU promised to ease the economic isolation of northern Cyprus (recognised by Turkey) when it, but not the south, voted for reunification in 2004.
The Cypriot Government in Nicosia, which joined the EU in 2004 and is recognised internationally, has blocked these.
Advertisement
Yesterday Egeman Bagis, a foreign policy adviser to Erdogan, said that the EU should continue the talks to promote reform in Turkey, and not link them to solving the Cyprus problem, which it did not apply to Cyprus’s accession.
He is right. To drive head-on for the most difficult issue, without more common ground established, is to end the talks under the guise of diplomacy.
The Pope’s support for Turkey was helpful to its cause, despite the uncertainty about whether he really gave the wholehearted endorsement of Turkish membership that Ankara claimed.
A spokesman clarified the Pope’s remarks, saying that he had told Erdogan that although the Vatican did not have the power or competence to intervene, it “viewed positively and encouraged” the process of entry “on the basis of common values and principles”.
This is nuanced, but it is still a shift towards the principle of Turkish membership. It is not one that members of the EU have made together. If they want to keep the option of Turkish membership open, at this fragile point in relations, they need to be prepared to overlook some provocation to keep the talks on the rails.