EU gives Turkey a cautious 'yes'

As expected, the European Commission's report on Turkey has recommended that EU membership negotiations with this country should start. The date for the opening of these negotiations will be up to the EU's leaders to decide at their December summit, that is, as long as Europe's heads of governments back the Commission report at this meeting.

The report on the whole is both sensible and cautious and it is made very clear that the accession negotiations are an open-ended process. In other words, while the objective of EU membership for Turkey is clear, the report emphasises that accession cannot be guaranteed beforehand. So Turkey's EU entry date will depend entirely on its pace of political and economic reform and its strict adherence to European values.

I have always believed that this is the correct approach to take, one that uses accession negotiations as a catalyst for Turkey to bring about reforms. If the reform process is somehow stalled, then the negotiations can be suspended.

The Commission report states that Turkey has substantially progressed in its political reform process but that legislation and implementation needs to be further consolidated and broadened. This applies specifically to the fight against torture and ill-treatment, and the implementation of provisions relating to freedom of expression, freedom of religion, women's rights, trade union rights and minority rights. In view of the overall progress of reforms, however, and provided that Turkey brings into force these pending laws, the Commission said that Turkey sufficiently fulfils the necessary political criteria needed to join the EU.

The Commission report points out that the whole accession process will be long, complicated and tough. The EU will strictly monitor the political reforms in Turkey and will suspend any talks in the case of a serious breach of the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. Furthermore, it states that "accession negotiations will take place in the framework of an Intergovernmental Conference where decisions need unanimity and full participation of all EU members."

In some areas, such as structural policies and agriculture the report points out that "specific arrangements may be needed and for the free movement of workers, permanent safeguards can be considered". This latter point may indicate that Turks will not have the automatic right to live and work in other EU countries from the first day of accession.

Needless to say the financial cost of Turkey joining the EU was highlighted in the report. "The financial and institutional impact of Turkey's accession will be important. The EU will need to define its financial perspective for the period from 2014 before negotiations can be concluded," it says. The point here is whether the EU can really afford to pay for Turkey's membership. Turkey is, after all, far poorer than any of the 10 new EU member states.

There is no doubt that Turkey's EU bid is presenting Europe with its greatest challenge since the European Community was set up over 50 years ago. The Turkish question has aroused many passions throughout Europe and public opinion is sharply divided over this issue. I have always believed that on balance, and in the long term, Turkey's membership of the EU will be beneficial for both sides, but that this will not be an easy process and that it is Turkey, and not Europe, which will have to change in order to integrate itself into a largely Christian, but secular, bloc of states which believes in the free market, the rule of law, political pluralism and the complete respect of human rights.

The arguments in favour of Turkey's EU membership are both clear and strategic: Turkey has been a loyal member of NATO for 50 years, it is a secular country in spite of its overwhelmingly Muslim population, its annual GDP growth has been impressive and as an EU member it could serve as a bridge to and a model for the Muslim world.

The arguments against are equally forceful: Turkey is geographically in Asia (except for a very small part, including Istanbul), it borders countries such as Iraq, Iran and Syria, it has a history of military coups, it is very poor and would be a huge financial burden on the EU's coffers and its Muslim identity would make it difficult to integrate into and to come to terms with a Europe which is largely Christian and which is greatly influenced by Christian values.

I understand those who are wary about Turkey joining the EU even though I think that such arguments are often over done. Hans-Gert Poettering, the leader of the European People's Party in the European Parliament said after the Commission report on Turkey: "If Turkey becomes a member of the EU, it will be a different Union."

Mr Poettering pointed out that Turkey's population was set to rise to 90 million by 2020 and that geographically, the EU would stretch far into Asia by accepting Turkey as a member.

Recently, French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin was quoted in The Wall Street Journal, when interviewed about Turkey and the EU, as asking: "Do we want the river of Islam to enter the riverbed of secularism?" President Chirac, in fact, has promised a referendum on the question of Turkey's EU membership, which could be one way of having to avoid taking a decision at this point in time over Turkey.

So the two main obstacles for Turkey are its religion and its poverty compared to the EU 25, but these criteria alone cannot be used to exclude Turkey from the bloc. Its political situation has certainly improved, political reforms have come about and I am sure will continue, accompanied by strict EU monitoring.

Turkey has been waiting to join the European family of nations for over 40 years, over 70 per cent of the population are in favour of EU membership and Turks have long considered themselves European. I believe they have a right to enjoy the full benefits of EU membership while at the same time adhering fully to European values, norms and regulations such as freedom, pluralism, respect for minorities, secularism, the market economy and the rule of law.

Although I can understand Mr Poettering's concern that Turkey's EU membership will change the Union, in actual fact it will have to be Turkey that adapts to the EU, and not the other way around.