Political and economic affairs

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

Background and academic context

For the last forty years Turkey was on the course of integration into Europe, only during the last three years the negotiations moved from the stand point. Since 2005 the European Union has outlined the main criteria for the possible membership, these included: absolute Human Rights record, change of Constitution, less frequent involvement of the military forces into governmental and social affairs, freedom of voice and respect of minorities.(Aydin,2007) A separate criterion was the recognition of Cyprus as an independent member of the European Union and establishment of full political and economic affairs.(Capan,2007) Nevertheless, Turkey has achieved enormous progress in the way of democratic, economic, environmental and cultural aspects during the last five years.

At the same time, there is hardly a keen reaction from the EU member states on the accession negotiations, states are concerned with the mass of population that may gain access to the free movement legislation and capital involved in the process of integration (Narbourne,2007). Therefore, the aim of the dissertation is to explore and analyze Turkey as a candidate for the membership involving the SWOT analysis (Strength Weaknesses Opportunities Threats)

In order to evaluate Turkey's brought in benefits as a candidate, full scope of possible advantages it is necessary to evaluate all characteristics of the country, its strong and weak points and if it will be possible to eliminate downturns by the 2015 the predicted year for the finalization of the integration into the EU.

Furthermore, the dissertation will incorporate the international relations theory in the realist perspective in trying to evaluate the member states positions on the Turkey's accession and views of other involved parties such as Russia and Arab states on which the accession of Turkey will have a direct influence.(Muftuler,2008) For the basis of theoretical argument, the approach of costs and benefits will be taken as a framework and analysis will be carried out in order to try and establish if the benefits for the European Union will outweigh the costs and vice versa. (Nugent,2007)

The proposed topic involves complications in the sense of possible subjective approach by the member states and decisions of the political leaders as well as lack of specific literature explaining the issue. Hence, personal interviews will be carried out in Istanbul in order to bring in actual data and prove of the theoretical assumptions and outcomes outlined in the dissertation.

As a conclusion, recommendations will be given for Turkey as a prospective member in possible ways of improving the chances for the positive decision from the EU and proposals for the EU as a whole to try and evaluate whether the Union is too sceptical and strict in relation to Turkey and whether it is possible to change the overall social attitude concerning the negative influence of the first possible Muslim state on the "European Identity".

The Historical Perspective

The end of the Cold War, disruption of the Warsaw Treaty and all socialistic camps; as well as deepening of the political, economic and military integration of the Western Europe created all conditions for the European Community to try and become the centre of the military and political force (Alexander et al, 2008). Therefore, ability to participate in this organisation is seen very desirable by the countries of Eastern and Middle Europe (Aydin, 2005). The first adavntage lies not only in the economic advantages, but also in the sense of belonging to the "privileged club", which gives a member state an increase authority in the international arena. (Basci et al, 2007)

Therefore, it is not surprising that Turkey was one of the first countries to percieve a "European path". The first attempt to become a full member, Turkey filed in early 1987, however, the pro-Western orientation was developed much earlier. The most noticable steps on the course to EU were: the intergation to NATO in 1952 and the signing to the European Economic Community in 1995. (Dismorr, 2008)

"Turkey was no longer needed as a barrier against communism. Instead as a secular and yet Muslim country and loyal NATO ally it made the perfect partner..."

(Dismorr, 2008)

After many drawbacks and delays, Turkey was granted an official candidate role by the European Council in 1999 on the summit in Helsinki.(Dismorr, 2008) Future acceptance talks were described to begin in October 2005, with the condition of compliance on Copenhagen Criteria.( Balasubramanyan and Togan, 2001) Since then, Turkey began its marathon of reforms towards EU.

Yanah Alexander(2008) emphasizes several main directions that were percieved by Turkey:

  • Violation of Human Rights
  • Exemption of Torture
  • Freedom of Speech
  • Economic Reforms
  • Separation of political system from religion
  • Rights of Minorities
  • Improvement of the dialogue with Armenia and Cyprus

As author explains: "Turkey has indeed made dramatic advances over the last forty yearsespecially within the past half decade in democratic, environmental, cultural and economic concerns". (Alexander, 2008)

Macro economy of Turkey

Many of the publications concerning the Turkish membership are concentrating on the economic side of the accession talks. Bernard Hockman and Subidey Togan (2005) are providing an extensive analysis of the past, current and future economic policies that are followed by Turkey and their average impact on negotiations.

Therefore, as Hockman and Togan comment, putting aside "subjecive" matters of the EU accession talks and concentrating on the factual economic issues will bring a more desicive framework. To compare the current economic position of Turkey, several figures are presented: the growth of GNP increased from 3.8% in 2003 to 8.9% in 2004 and 4.9% in the first quarter of 2005. (Hockman and Togan, 2005)

"These results are impressive taking into consideration the economic crisis of Turkey in 2001 and even in comparison to the largers world economies. The growth of GNP in the United States in 2004 was 4.2%, Russia 7.2%, UK - 3.1%, Germany - 1.6% and China - 10.1%." (Hockman and Togan, 2005)

Therefore, authors emphasize the dynamic potential of the Turkish economy and develop further arguments to support the credibility of the country to become a prosperious EU member state. As Hockman and Togan (2005) describe: "Turkey offers strong long-term growth potential, equal to that of many other N-11 and BRIC economies. Our projections suggest that by 2050 Turkey could become a $6trn economy, making it the third-largest in Europe after Russia and the UK"

At the same time, while authors give an extensive description of the potential of Turkish economy, Erden Basci (2007) presents detailed infromation on the drawbacks of the current economic position, which highly contradicts positive picture of the previously presented authors. What is interesting, Erden Basci, being a Turkish author showed himself as not merely an opponent of the Turkey's EU bid, but expressed a high level of concern on country's ability to become an EU member in the future decade. Arguments given by the author can be summarized as follows:

  • Unequal distribution of per capita income across Turkey: "Turkey is strikingly modern on the surface in the main cities, but extremely traditional beneath, even tribal in some poor, remote ares." (Basci, 2007)
  • Europeanisation mostly in industrial centres (Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir)
  • Low level of intellectual property protection - results in slower technology implementation
  • Turkey spends only 3.5% GDP on education compared to 4.7% average across EU: "...educational standards are well below EU average" (Basci, 2007)
  • High level of unemployement among women and minority groups

Furthermore, Basci also pays attention to other factors, such as political system and cultural differences that cannot be ignored. Author follows a perspective of Turkey as a transition economy and "developmental nation-state", which in his view puts further constraints on the successful full membership.

On the contrary, Togan and Balasubramanyan (2006 give another interesting approach to Europe's position on enlargement. Authors do not deny drawbacks and limits of Turkish economy and its complexity as a potential member, however, emphasizes Turkey's export abilities and energy transportation importance. Furthermore, as Togan illustrates, the economy of Turkey is much more stronger and has bigger potential than that of Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia and Lithuania, because Turkey is highly industrialized country, with developed factory facilities, large labour force and stable growth figures. The accelerating point author gives in the end of the chapter: "...taking into account Turkey's advantage over already accepted new member states, Europe's comments country's inability to meet the Copenhagen Criteria are not sufficient. Finally, from the geopolitical point of view, Turkey's position prevails." (Balasubramanyan and Togan, 2006)

Europe: prove or disruption of the "Clash of Civilizations"?

The term "Clash of Civilizations" was firstly presented by Samuel Huntignton and based on the idea that the old wars based on the search for territory and geopolitical issues are going to be replaced by the notion of the national wars. As Huntignton (1993) explains: "The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural". Therefore, it can be argued, taking the basis of possible clash of civilizations in Europe, one can find a support for the future complications in the possible Turkish membership. As some academic scholars emphasize, Europe is an entity with somewhat similar historic background, culture and potential for integration. (Aydin, 2007) Therefore, according to Deringil (2007) : "Turkish membership will create a number of particular policy difficulties for the EU and partly because Turkey as a country is looked on by many in the EU as being so 'different' from the European 'mainstream' as to endanger the very nature of the Union." (Onis, 2007)

So after analyzing all the negative aspects of the possible integration presented by authors, Turkish membership will mean "The end of Europe". (Onis, 2007) Vernes (2007) illustrates Turkey's difference from Europe. These differences lie in culture, religion, political system and econimic concerns. Turkish membership will bring additional problems to already complicated European system of governance and distribution of finances. (Vernes, 2007) With recent enlargement, as author explains, Europe has already put itslef under the threat of decreased integration and difficult control processes, because of the large territory, econimic differences and attraction of more finances to support newly accepted nation states.

At the same time, another aspect of the nature of Europe is given by Ifantis (2007) and lies in the nature of evolution and constant change. Thus: "The territorial and cultural features of contemporary Europe are different than those of Europe in the 1900s or in the 1980s for that matter. These features are dynamic; they will not be the same in 20 years for example." (Ifantis, 2007)

Furthermore, according to Kaloudis (2007), Europe is already a multinational entity, with an impressive record of integration of mani nations coming from various backgrounds and countries that are not entirely similar to each other. Thus, Turkey should not be represented as a threat to Europe's identity. Author adopts another line of approach: "the EU is a complex entity with supranational, transnational and intergovernmental traits, which suggests that it may be conducive to a wide range of identities and forms of belonging' . A European identity already exists and has been evolving and altering in constant relation with the historical, political, economic, and social developments that have occurred in the continent and in the world." (Kaloudis, 2007)

More importantly, author puts an attention on the nature of Turkish transformation and ambtions, he emphasizes that Turkey aims to become part of the European Union, not Europe.

To conclude, Europe's reaction on the Turkish membership can be tractated in the theory of clash of civilizations, which on the one side, can show the tolerance of nations, and their ability to coexist peacefully, or inacceptance of the vast differences brought in by the "new comer" - "...rejection by the EU would prove that the "clash of civilizations" concept is not only theoretical." (Eylemer, 2007)

Realism - Rationalist approach to the decision making

According to the realist thought in international relations, all states are the main actors in the international system and base their decision on their self interest in the anarchic nature of the world. (Oz, 1999) Therefore, taking into considertation the case of Turkey, European member states will only let the resolution to go through if there will be a sense of self interest for their nation state: "rationalist explanations suggest that the governments of the member states do not take decisions in the EU-wide interest but rather in the interests of their states, it may be assumed that each government would have followed the Commission's recommendation to open accession negotiations with Turkey only if it perceived it to be in its state's interest which it could perceive as being different from the EU-wide interest." (Arzu, 2008)

Arzu (2008) shows the example of Hungary, which firstly declared a strong opposition on Turkish membership, but after the European Commission declared the starting of negotiations with Croatia, Hungary took off its veto.

Therefore, according to author, European member states will act not only in the common interest of the whole European community but will follow their own policy goals. Therefore, Turkey must possess certain qualities which will guarantee some sort of benefits in the long term for the member states.

Bilgin (2007) represents aspects of the possible advantages from Turkish membership, which can be summarized as follows:

  • The size of the Turkish market and its potential
  • The young labour market
  • Oppurtunity to present to the "world" Islamic country with democracy
  • Turkey's geo-political position

Disadvantages include:

  • Turkey's struggle to create a "truly" democratic state
  • Economic criteria
  • Judical system and law enforcement
  • Large proportion of population willing to migrate

Finally, the main argument that author presents lies not in the Turkish eligibility to join the EU, but in the Union itself. Author poses the question on whether European Union will be able to absorb such populated nation state and continue to follow its policies and act as a unified body in the international arena. (Bilgin, 2007)

Research scope and objectives:

    To develop as much detailed review of the available academic literature regarding Turkey's reforms on the way to the EU

    To analyze the input of the social trends on the further EU enlargement and the case of Turkey in particular.

    To identify the gaps in the overall understanding and perception of the "European identity" in the minds of Turkish citizens and Europeans themselves. Furthermore, to establish whether Turkey will have destructing effect on this identity.

    To identify Turkey's strengths and weaknesses as an internal factors and opportunities and threats for the European Union as an external.

    To establish specific view points of the major influenced groups of individuals in Turkey such as business people, journalists and politicians in one-to-one interviews

    To analyze the outcomes of these interviews, establish patterns and find a supporting or opposition to the presented theories.

    Try and provide suitable recommendations for both involved parties: Turkey and the EU in the aspects of social acceptance, financial, economic; political and foreign policy aspects for both entities.

If this part is included, why the next chapter shows the completely opposite direction of work?

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

Turkey-EU relations: an overview

Turkey's close relations with the EU date back to the Association Agreement signed in Ankara in 1963 between Turkey and the European Economic Community (EEC). When the agreement was signed, Walter Hallstein, the President of the EEC Commission, declared "Turkey is part of Europe." There were no noticeable objections to Hallstein's statement; no one disputed his perception of where Turkey stood with respect to Europe and Europeanness. (Arnon et al., 2006 pp. 113-134) The common understanding at the time was that Turkey was an invaluable partner in Western security against the Soviet bloc and therefore must be integrated in the Western system as tightly as possible via, among others, the EEC mechanisms . Less than three decades later, as the Cold War came to an abrupt end in 2008, the EU authorities re-assessed and downgraded the relative 'value' of Turkey for Europe from central to secondary importance, relegating Turkey to the margins of the 'new,' 'united' Europe. Notwithstanding the culmination of the stipulations of the Ankara Agreement into a Customs Union between the EU and Turkey in 2007, Turkey's bid for full membership in 2006 fell on deaf ears in the EU and political relations were poisoned for a number of reasons, including the human rights predicament of Turkey, in the course of the following decade. (Arellano and Bond, 2005 pp. 277-297)

In the aftermath of the terrorist events on September 11, the EU felt an urgent need to reconsider its place in the new global security environment. As part of this re-evaluation, the EU began to view its state of affairs with Turkey in a new light. After plainly excluding Turkey from its future enlargement plans at the 1997 Luxembourg Summit, the EU leaders rather surprisingly welcomed the 12-year old Turkish bid to be accepted as a candidate for full membership at the Helsinki Summit in December 2006. The summit decision gave signals of European rediscovery of Turkey's indispensable role for the European securityjust as the Association Agreement did so in 1963. (Bergstrand, 2008 pp. 143-153) The decision stipulated that Turkey would start the membership negotiations with the EU once the former completed its domestic reforms to satisfy the political requirements of the Copenhagen Criteriastability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.

Despite this positive decision of the 2006 Helsinki Summit, however, the European debate on '(re)locating' Turkey with respect to Europegeographically, economically, politically, and civilisationallyhas not been finalized. The opposition to the Turkish entry has been quite noteworthy since the 2006 Helsinki Summit, especially for its fast evolving trajectory. The European objection initially focused on patchy human rights record of Turkey and the existence of death penalty. (Brenton and Manzocchi, 2005 pp. 10-37) As Turkey made major improvements in this important issue area, the opposition shifted towards Turkey's problematic democracy including cultural and minority rights, civilian control of the military, and lack of transparency of the state institutions. Again, Turkey responded with swift reforms to the satisfaction of the European demands. Various legislative packages containing sweeping reform measures were enacted into law. The focus of the European criticism then shifted to the issue of full implementation of the enacted laws. The Turkish government has shown its determination to improve the implementation. Yet, the opposition to Turkey has continued on the basis of the Cyprus issue. The recent referendum results and the Turkish Cypriots overwhelmingly accepting the UN-brokered Annan Plan in contrast to the Greek Cypriot rejection, boosted the position of the Turkish side in the eyes of the EU. (Cheng and Wall, 2006 )

Despite relentless Turkish efforts to conform to the EU's political standards since the 2006 Helsinki Summit, there are still influencial quarters in the EU that persistently keep alive the fundamental claim of 'civilisational incompatibility' between the EU and Turkey. It must be noted that the opposition to Turkish entry has stemmed from very diverse reasons and therefore as Turkey has moved towards the EU standards of democracy and foreign relations, a number of opponents switched their initial positions. However, strong opposition can be expected from those who are likely to stick to their position regardless of the changes in Turkey since their 'civilisational incompatibility' argument is not conducive to reaching a consensus. (Deardorff, 2008 pp. 7-32)

Amidst this public discourse, the EU will deliver a verdict, in December 2004, on the future shape of its relations with Turkey.1 On the basis of the European debate on Turkey, this paper discerns three alternative scenarios about the EU decision this coming December: 'privileged relationship offer,' 'wait and see attitude,' and 'start of full membership negotiations.' (de Nardis and Vicarelli, 2006 pp. 625-649) The paper then assesses each alternative path and argues that the most likely scenario is a decision to start the negotiations, followed by the scenario of 'wait and see,' whereas a rejection of the Turkish bid is the least likely option. Before analyzing the three different scenarios, Section 2 gives a brief sketch of the fundamentals of the EU's future vision.

A sketch of EU's civilisational project

The 2007 Laeken Summit's Declaration on the Future of the European Union (EU) states that Europe is at a crossroads. Based on this understanding, the EU leaders decided at the Summit to ask for a European Convention to draw up proposals on three subjects: how to bring citizens closer to the European design and European institutions; how to organise politics and the European political area in an enlarged Union; and how to develop Union into a stabilising factor and a model in the new world order. The Declaration further elaborated on the future vision of the EU: (Dervis et al., 2004)

The Union faces twin challenges, one within and the other beyond its borders. Within the Union, the European instutions must be brought closer to its citizens. ... Beyond its border, in turn, the EU is confronted with a fast-changing, globalised world. Following the fall of the Berlin wall, it looked briefly as though we would for a long while living in a stable world order, free from conflict, founded upon human rights. ... The eleventh of September has brought a rude awakening. ... Now that the Cold War is over and we are living in a globalised, yet also highly fragmented world, Europe needs to shoulder its responsibilities in the governance of globalisation. ... (Di Mauro, 2007 Di Mauro, F., 2007 ) The image of a democratic and globally engaged Europe admirably matches citizens' wishes. [Citizens] want to see Europe more involved in foreign affairs, security and defence, in other words, greater and better coordinated action to deal with trouble spots in and around Europe and in the rest of the world.

The ideas ingrained in the Laeken Declaration are not necessarily novel. Indeed, in important speeches before and after the Laeken Summit, the major statesmen of the EU offered opinions paralleling those of the Declaration on the Future of Europe , and . The Draft Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe, submitted to the European Council by the European Convention in 2006, also attest to the elements of Europe's future vision. It can be summarised that the EU efforts are underway to:

  1. create a European demos on the basis of common European values,
  2. work more assertively for a morality and rule-based global system of governance, and
  3. contribute to civilisational harmony. (Egger, 2007 pp. 25-31)

Clearly, the EU is searching for ways to develop a European demos that is expected to have a special European identity based upon shared European values and a common approach to universal issues [28:7]. The new European demos must be able to move beyond the national attachments of the member state citizens. Habermas identifies five attributes common to Europeans: "The neutrality of authority, embodied in the separation of church and state, trust in politics rather than the capitalist market, an ethos of solidarity in the fight for social justice, high esteem for international law and the rights of the individual and support for the organizational and leading role of the state" . (Frankel and Romer, 2006 pp. 379-399)

It is generally accepted that the EU wants to have a bigger and stronger say in global affairs. The EU aims to emerge as a global actor . (Flam, 2006) A global-power Europe needs on the one hand an optimal size and location in geography, population and resources, and on the other hand a relatively unified decision-making capacity to arrive at decisions as swiftly as the fast pace of global events require. (Flam, 2006) Additionally, as a response to the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2006, the EU has increasingly emphasised going beyond real politik and called for the development of a rule- and value-based, inclusive global society . A recent essay co-written by Habermas and Derrida, two leading philosophers of the continent, called upon the avant garde core of European states to design a common European foreign policy based on European enlightenment values. (Helpman, 2006 pp. 62-81)

Finally, the 'new' European project, at least in rhetoric, envisions a plural global community based on sharing experiences among different civilisations on the basis of mutual respect, tolerance and solidarity. Especially after the September 11 attacks, the global community has belaboured the issue of dialogue among different cultural traditions, between the East and West. The EU has played an important role in bringing together representatives of various cultures in a variety of forums to promote peaceful, enlightened visions of cooperation. Such a forum was convened in Istanbul on 12-13 February 2005 with the participation of representatives of 76 countries, including 51 Ministers of Foreign Affairs, from the EU and Islamic countries (Helpman and Krugman, 2008) . This was the first ever high-level meeting devoted to the need to intensify multicultural dialogue, with the goal of, in Jordanian Prince El Hassan Bin Talal's words, "providing the first opportunity to engage in conversation with each other, rather than talking at each other" (Lejour et al., 2004 56). Javier Solana, Secretary General of the European Council, stated "the developing culture in Europe encompasses all civilisations. We have, in the EU, millions of citizens or residents who recognise in themselves both the values of Europe and those of Islam" (Lejour et al., 2004 56). The joint forum discussed the issue of how to promote understanding and harmony among civilisations, and concluded that cultures, in their diversity, complement and enhance one another. The forum also confirmed its belief in the harmony among civilisations and its attainability" (Lejour et al., 2004 56).

Based upon these EU ambitions, the EU has been in the process of assessing what Turkey's entry into the Union may mean for its future scenario. Somewhat in simplified terms, this article suggests that there are several possible conclusions on the Turkish question coming out of such European assessments. It is suggested by some Europeans that the Turkish membership will harm much-needed common identity and solidarity among the peoples of Europe, while others argue that it will strengthen multicultural characteristics of the European demos and indicate its inclusiveness of people with different beliefs and persuasions. (Manzocchi and Ottaviano, 2007 pp. 229-249) While some insist that Turkish entry means more trouble than benefits for European foreign policy, many others argue in favour of integrating Turkey into the EU especially as Turkey will provide the EU with significant 'soft' and 'hard' powers to further evolve into a global player. Finally, there is a sharp division between those who believe that the Turkish membership will be just another case of Western powers trying to manipulate the Islamic World through Turkey, and those who claim it will mean that the EU is a union based upon common values and principles, not upon Christianity, and thus the Turkish entry will constitute a solid refutation of the clash of civilizations scenario. Indeed, Europeans seem to be quite 'torn' about the Turkish membership, to borrow Huntington's characterization of Turkey as a 'torn' country. The remainder of the paper analyses alternative views of how the Turkish membership may influence the realisation of the European vision of future in detail. (Micco et al., 2006 pp. 315-356) Turkey stuck between Europe and Asia: 'wait and see' model?

Huntington writes that Turkish leaders, "having rejected Mecca, and being rejected by Brussels," often describe Turkey as a 'bridge' between two cultures and civilisations, physically and philosophically. He further argues that "a bridge, however, is an artificial creation connecting two solid entities but is part of neither" (Rose, 2007 pp. 7-33). Indeed, many Europeans remain uncertain on where Turkey stands or should stand, and therefore demand more time to come to a conclusion on the issue. The proponents of this ambiguous view seem to entertain the logic described by Mattli:

If an outsider is not a desirable candidate in the sense of being able to make a net positive contribution to the union ... the union is unlikely to accept it, unless exclusion of such a candidate is costlier to the union than accepting it. ... A union may have an interest in accepting 'undesirable' candidates when negative externalities originating in outsider countries threaten to disrupt the union's prosperity, stability, and security" (Rose, 2007 pp. 7-33).

The supporters of this view are torn between the EU's need for Turkey to reach the Union's future aspirations and the possibility of its paralysis caused by the entry of Turkeya large, Muslim and undeveloped country located largely outside Europe. They would therefore prefer to delay a decision on Turkish accession. (Sen and Smith, 2007)

Although the proponents of this perspective have a lot in common with the special relationship approach in their antagonism against the idea of the Turkish membership, they are more forthcoming in recognising that Turkey does not occupy a marginal place in the future vision of the EU. Because of their vagueness on the balance of what Turkish entry may lead to, they prefer a 'wait and see' attitude towards Turkey to keep the country in the 'waiting room' while the EU can gain time to ascertain the issue in the future. (Tinbergen, 2004)

This view seems to be dominant among the political circles in France and in a few other European countries. For example, the new Foreign Minister of France, Michel Barnier, declared recently that "under the given circumstances," it is without a doubt that "Turkey does not comply with the EU criteria," which seems to be a thinly veiled demand to postpone a decision on Turkey. On a slightly better note, the French President Jacques Chirac argued that the EU may start the membership negotiations with Turkey, but it is clear that Turkey's actual membership would take "a long time" (Togan, 2005).

The wait and see approach also had strong following in Germany's Red-Green coalition government at least until the end of 2005. Indeed, it was reported by Danish media after the December 2005 Copenhagen European Council Summit that Joschka Fischer, the Foreign Minister of Germany, told the Danish Prime Minister on the decision to start negotiations with Turkey to "let it sleep first, then let it be forgotten." Yet, in the past year, the German government, along with the UK government, seems to be one of the most ardent supporters of Turkish membership in the EU, citing especially Turkey's importance for the inter-religious dialogue between Europe and the Islamic World. (lgen and Zahariadis, 2004)

Two academics, Teitelbaum and Martin also argue for a "wait and see" approach although for a different reason: "the overriding fact is that no one knows what the consequences of rapid admission would be. Given such crucial uncertainty, prudence and good sense support a more cautious process." The authors identify the main element of uncertainty as "the possibility that Turkey's military might once again take power, especially if it feels the country is threatened by resurgent Islamists." In this case, "EU leaders find themselves facing an impossible choice: between endorsing a military takeover or accepting an Islamist regime in their largest member state" (Utkulu and Ozdemir, 2006 3-5).

Conclusion

Considering that the future aspirations of the EU have evolved over the last decade in the direction of more global engagement, pressures to integrate Turkey into the EU are increasing. Indeed, repeatedly Turkish membership is seen as an invaluable asset for the EU in its future aspirations. It is expected to strengthen multiculturalism within the EU. It will prove that the EU is a union based upon common values and principles, not on Christianity. Thus, it will constitute a solid refutation of the clash of civilizations scenario.

While the support for the Turkish membership is increasing in Europe, at the same time many in Europe and Turkey have reacted strongly against the 'special relationship' and the 'wait and see' scenarios. Kemal Dervis, a prominent social democrat from Turkey and former Minister of Economy, flatly rejected the idea of a 'special relationship' with the EU because he argued that it implied a 'second class status' in Europe . Former German Federal President Richard von Weizsacker, a member of the Christian Democratic Union, also rejected his party's proposal to offer Turkey a special relationship with the EU. Instead, he urged the German government to intensify dialogue with Islamic countries where he considers Turkey's role as a bridge between Europe and the Orient in Europe's interest.

Today, more than ever, a growing number of Europeans and others welcome the inclusion of Turkey in the Union within a reasonable time frame. For instance, Walter Schwimmer, European Council Secretary, recently welcomed Turkey's membership in the EU. He suggested that

The European project should not be defined by narrow cultural, religious or ethnic criteria. A modern, democratic, open and tolerant Turkey will be an asset for us all. This will make us all more European. Turkey has been a member of the European Council since 1949 and made a decision in favour of Europe more than 50 years ago. Germany joined this international association promoting one year after Turkey.

In a similar spirit, former US President Bill Clinton cherished at various occasions the EU decision in 2006 to include Turkey among the countries for future membership: "The European Union ... obviously is in the process of ... what I consider to be a very hopeful and strategically important event, made a decision which I strongly supported to continue to increase its membership and to include Turkey for future membership".

When he states that "one gets out of the future what one puts into it," Sardar sums up the essence of future studies. Indeed, "in the final analysis, the future is dominated by world-views," in our particular case by the worldview of the EU. Given Turkey's historic insistence to fully integrate into the EU, the future shape of Turkey-EU discourse boils down to what kind of a future worldview the EU envisions for itself and where Turkish membership is located with respect to this worldview. In this context, recently the Turkish membership has been proposed as an invaluable asset for the EU to fulfil its future aspirations. The Turkish membership is expected to strengthen enlightened multiculturalism within the EU demos as well as to prove to the world that the EU is a union based upon common values and principles, not simply on religion. Thus, the Turkish entry would constitute a solid refutation of the clash of civilizations scenario.

Former French President Charles de Gaulle, in one of his famous press conferences in 1967, declared that full membership for Britain would lead to the destruction of the Community. One needs to wait patiently until December 2004 to see if there will be any EU member state that will rebuff Turkey's historic bid for full membership in the same spirit as de Gaulle did against the British entry during the 1960s.

It is 2009, it mentions the wait until 2004?

As I mentioned earlier I don't mind the work to be adjusted, but not just copy and paste my parts in it without even considering if they are appropriate. The litarure review is just a collection of quotes without a solid reference to academic work.

The SWOT analysis of Turkey - if it is mentioned it should be incorporated, othewise needs to be taken out.

References

Alexander, Y., Brenner, E., (2008), Turkey: Terrorism, Civil Rights and the European Union, London: Routledge pp. 259-285, 489-515, 593-659

Arellano and Bond, 2005 M. Arellano and S. Bond, Some tests of specifications for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations, Rev. Econ. Stud. 58 (2005), pp. 277-297.

Arnon et al., 2006 A. Arnon, A. Spivak and J. Weiblatt, The potential for trade between Israel, the Palestinians and Jordan, World Econ. 19 (2006), pp. 113-134.

Arzu, T., and Deniz, K., (2008), The Impact of Local Decision-Making in

Arzu, T., and Deniz, K., (2008), The Impact of Local Decision-Making in

Aybar, C., (2007), Analysis of Attitudes of Turkish Citizens towards the Effect of European Union Membership on the Economic, Political, and Cultural Environment, Turkish Studies, Issue 3, Vol. 8

Aybar, C., (2007), Analysis of Attitudes of Turkish Citizens towards the Effect of European Union Membership on the Economic, Political, and Cultural Environment, Turkish Studies, Issue 3, Vol. 8

Aydin, M., (2007), Europeanization through EU conditionality: understanding

Aydin, M., (2007), Europeanization through EU conditionality: understanding

Aydin, Z., (2005), The Political Economy of Turkey, Sidmouth: Chase Publishing pp. 57-134 and pp. 179-217

Balasurbramanyam V., and Togan, S., (2001), Turkey and Central and Eastern European Countries in Transition - Towards Membership of the EU, New York: Palgrave pp. 98-167

Basci, E., Hagen, J., and Togan, S., (2007), Macroeconomic Policies for EU Accession, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited pp. 123-174

Bergstrand, 2008 J.H. Bergstrand, The generalized gravity equation, monopolistic competition, and the factor-proportions theory in international trade, Rev. Econ. Stat. 71 (2008), pp. 143-153.

Berman, I., (2007), The end of the affair, The American Spectator, Issue 1, Vol 12

Berman, I., (2007), The end of the affair, The American Spectator, Issue 1, Vol 12

Bilgin, P., (2007), Making Turkey's Transformation Possible: Claiming 'Securityspeak' not Desecuritization! Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Issue 4, Vol. 7

Bilgin, P., (2007), Making Turkey's Transformation Possible: Claiming 'Securityspeak' not Desecuritization! Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Issue 4, Vol. 7

Brenton and Manzocchi, 2005 P. Brenton and S. Manzocchi, Enlargement, trade and investment: a review of economic impacts. In: P. Brenton and S. Manzocchi, Editors, Enlargement, Trade and Investment. The Impact of Barriers to Trade in Europe, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2005), pp. 10-37.

Capan, Z., and Onursal, O., (2007), Situating Turkey within the European Union, Perspectives on European Politics and Society, Issue 1, Vol. 8

Capan, Z., and Onursal, O., (2007), Situating Turkey within the European Union, Perspectives on European Politics and Society, Issue 1, Vol. 8

Cheng and Wall, 2006 Cheng, I.-H., Wall, H.J., 2006. Controlling for heterogeneity in gravity models of trade and integration. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Working Paper 2006-010D. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, St. Louis.

Couloumbis, T., and Kentikelenis, A., (2007), Greek-Turkish Relations and the Kantian Democratic Peace Theory, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Issue 4, Vol. 7

Couloumbis, T., and Kentikelenis, A., (2007), Greek-Turkish Relations and the Kantian Democratic Peace Theory, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Issue 4, Vol. 7

de Nardis and Vicarelli, 2006 S. de Nardis and C. Vicarelli, Currency unions and trade: the special case of EMU, Weltwirtschaftliches Arch. 139 (2006), pp. 625-649.

Deardorff, 2008 A.V. Deardorff, Determinants of bilateral trade: does gravity work in a neoclassical world?. In: J.A. Frankel, Editor, The Regionalization of the World Economy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London (2008), pp. 7-32.

Deringil, S., (2007), The Turks and 'Europe': The Argument from History, Middle Eastern Studies, Issue 5, Vol. 43

Deringil, S., (2007), The Turks and 'Europe': The Argument from History, Middle Eastern Studies, Issue 5, Vol. 43

Dervis et al., 2004 K. Dervis, M. Emerson, D. Gros and S. lgen, The European Transformation of Modern Turkey, Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels (2004).

Di Mauro, 2007 Di Mauro, F., 2007. The impact of economic integration on FDI and exports: a gravity approach. CEPS Working Document 156. Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels.

Dismorr, A., (2008), Turkey Decoded, London: Saqi pp.25-114

Egger, 2007 P. Egger, A note on the proper econometric specification of the gravity equation, Econ. Lett. 66 (2007), pp. 25-31.

Eylemer, S., and Tas, I., (2007), Pro-EU and Eurosceptic Circles in Turkey, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Issue 4 ,Vol. 23

Eylemer, S., and Tas, I., (2007), Pro-EU and Eurosceptic Circles in Turkey, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Issue 4 ,Vol. 23

Flam, 2006 Flam, H., 2006. Turkey and the EU: politics and economics of accession. CESifo Working Paper 893. CESifo, Munich.

Frankel and Romer, 2006 J.A. Frankel and D. Romer, Does trade cause growth?, Am. Econ. Rev. 89 (2006), pp. 379-399.

Helpman and Krugman, 2008 E. Helpman and P. Krugman, Market Structure and Foreign Trade: Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition and the International Economy, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2008).

Helpman, 2006 E. Helpman, Imperfect competition and international trade: evidence from fourteen industrial countries, J. Jpn. Int. Econ. 2 (2006), pp. 62-81.

Hockman, B., and Togan, S., (2005), Turkey Economic Reforms & Accession to the European Union, Washington: The World Bank and the Centre for Economic Policy Research pp.37-87Huntignton, S., (1993), The Clash of Civilizations?, Foreign Affairs Vol. 72, Issue 3

Ifantis, K., (2007), Turkey in transitionopportunities amidst peril? Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

Ifantis, K., (2007), Turkey in transitionopportunities amidst peril? Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

in comparative perspective, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol. 9

in comparative perspective, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol. 9

Kaloudis, S., (2007), Why Europe cannot ignore Turkey, International Journal on World Peace, Issue 2, Vol. 24

Kaloudis, S., (2007), Why Europe cannot ignore Turkey, International Journal on World Peace, Issue 2, Vol. 24

Lejour et al., 2004 Lejour, A.M., de Mooji, R.A., Capel, C.H., 2004. Assessing the economic implications of Turkish accession to the EU. CPB Document 56. CPB, Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, The Hague.

Manzocchi and Ottaviano, 2007 S. Manzocchi and G.I.P. Ottaviano, Outsiders in economic integration. The case of a transition economy, Econ. Transit. 9 (2007), pp. 229-249.

Micco et al., 2006 A. Micco, E. Stein and G. Ordonez, The currency union effect on trade: early evidence from the EU, Econ. Pol. 18 (2006), pp. 315-356.

Muftuler, M., (2008), The European Union's Accession Negotiations with Turkey from a Foreign Policy Perspective, European Integration, Issue 1, Vol. 30

Muftuler, M., (2008), The European Union's Accession Negotiations with Turkey from a Foreign Policy Perspective, European Integration, Issue 1, Vol. 30

Narbourne, L., (2007), Running around in circles? The cyclical relationship between Turkey and the European Union, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

Narbourne, L., (2007), Running around in circles? The cyclical relationship between Turkey and the European Union, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

Nash, M., (2007), The Mediterranean Union: Sarkozy's "Grand Design", Contemporary Review, Issue 3, Vol. 13

Nash, M., (2007), The Mediterranean Union: Sarkozy's "Grand Design", Contemporary Review, Issue 3, Vol. 13

Nugent, N., (2007), The EU's Response to Turkey's Membership Application: Not Just a Weighing of Costs and Benefits, European Integration, Issue 4, Vol. 29

Nugent, N., (2007), The EU's Response to Turkey's Membership Application: Not Just a Weighing of Costs and Benefits, European Integration, Issue 4, Vol. 29

of French and German oppositional discourses, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol. 9

of French and German oppositional discourses, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol. 9

Oguzlu, T., (2008), Middle Easternization of Turkey's Foreign Policy: Does Turkey Dissociate from the West? Turkish Studies, Issue 1, Vol. 9

Oguzlu, T., (2008), Middle Easternization of Turkey's Foreign Policy: Does Turkey Dissociate from the West? Turkish Studies, Issue 1, Vol. 9

Olmus, H., (2008), The effects of probable European Union Membership of Turkey on lives of individuals, Social Behaviour and Personality, Issue 6, Vol. 38

Olmus, H., (2008), The effects of probable European Union Membership of Turkey on lives of individuals, Social Behaviour and Personality, Issue 6, Vol. 38

Onder, N., (2007), The Turkish Political Economy: Globalization and Regionalism, Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, Issue 6, Vol. 10

Onder, N., (2007), The Turkish Political Economy: Globalization and Regionalism, Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, Issue 6, Vol. 10

Onder, N., (2008), The Turkish project of globalization and new regionalism, Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, Issue 2, Vol. 7

Onder, N., (2008), The Turkish project of globalization and new regionalism, Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, Issue 2, Vol. 7

Onis, Z., (2007), Conservative globalists versus defensive nationalists:

Onis, Z., (2007), Conservative globalists versus defensive nationalists:

Oz, O., (1999), The Competitive Advantage of Nations: The Case of Turkey, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd pp. 28-59

Podeh, E., (2007), "The Final Fall of the Ottoman Empire": Arab Discourse over Turkey's Accession to the European Union, Turkish Studies, Issue 3, Vol. 8

Podeh, E., (2007), "The Final Fall of the Ottoman Empire": Arab Discourse over Turkey's Accession to the European Union, Turkish Studies, Issue 3, Vol. 8

political parties and paradoxes of Europeanization in Turkey, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

political parties and paradoxes of Europeanization in Turkey, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

Regional Development Schemes on the Achievement of Efficiency in EU Funds, International Journal of Social Sciences, Issue 3, Vol. 3

Regional Development Schemes on the Achievement of Efficiency in EU Funds, International Journal of Social Sciences, Issue 3, Vol. 3

Rose, 2007 A. Rose, One money, one market: the effect of common currencies on trade, Econ. Pol. 15 (2007), pp. 7-33.

Sen and Smith, 2007 A. Sen and T.E. Smith, Gravity Models of Spatial Interaction Behavior, Springer, Berlin (2007).

Szymanski, A., (2007), The Position of Polish Political Elites on Future EU Enlargement, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Issue 4, Vol. 23

Szymanski, A., (2007), The Position of Polish Political Elites on Future EU Enlargement, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Issue 4, Vol. 23

Tekin, A., and Williams, P., (2009), Turkey and EU energy security: the pipeline connection, East European Quarterly, Issue6, Vol. 4

Tekin, A., and Williams, P., (2009), Turkey and EU energy security: the pipeline connection, East European Quarterly, Issue6, Vol. 4

the new era in Turkish foreign policy, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

the new era in Turkish foreign policy, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol 9

Tinbergen, 2004 J. Tinbergen, Shaping the World Economy: Suggestions for an International Economic Policy, Twentieth Century Fund, New York (2004).

to EU membership, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol. 9

to EU membership, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Issue 4, Vol. 9

Togan, 2005 Togan, S., 2005. Turkey towards EU accession. Economic Research Forum Working Paper 0202. Economic Research Forum, Cairo.

lgen and Zahariadis, 2004 lgen, S., Zahariadis, Y., 2004. The future of Turkish-EU trade relations: Deepening vs. widening. EU-Turkey Working Paper 5. Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels.

Utkulu and Ozdemir, 2006 U. Utkulu and D. Ozdemir, Does trade liberalization cause long run economic growth in Turkey?, The EcoMod Annual Conference Istanbul, July 3-5 (2006)http://www.ecomod.net/conferences/ecomod2006/ecomod2006_papers/Utkulu.pdf.

Verney, S., (2007), National identity and political change on Turkey's road

Verney, S., (2007), National identity and political change on Turkey's road

Verney, S., (2007), The dynamics of EU accession: Turkish travails

Verney, S., (2007), The dynamics of EU accession: Turkish travails

Yilmaz, H., (2007), Turkish identity on the road to the EU: basic elements

Yilmaz, H., (2007), Turkish identity on the road to the EU: basic elements

Please be aware that the free essay that you were just reading was not written by us. This essay, and all of the others available to view on the website, were provided to us by students in exchange for services that we offer. This relationship helps our students to get an even better deal while also contributing to the biggest free essay resource in the UK!