Turkey's Long March Towards the European Union

Turkey has officially submitted its application for membership in the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1987. In 1999 it was granted official candidate status, and accession negotiations began in 2005. However, these negotiations were marked by slow progress and periods of stagnation.

For more than half a century, Turkey has aspired to join the European club. Despite considerable efforts and undeniable progress, its accession to the European Union (EU) seems more uncertain than ever today. Between strict membership criteria, cultural reluctance and geopolitical considerations, Ankara's path to Brussels is fraught with pitfalls. A look back at a complex process that illustrates the challenges of European enlargement and the limits of the continental integration project.

The Copenhagen criteria: the key to entry into the EU

To join the European Union, any candidate country must meet a set of conditions known as the "Copenhagen criteria". Adopted in 1993 at a European summit in the Danish capital, these criteria define the political, economic and administrative prerequisites that states wishing to join the EU must meet.

The Copenhagen criteria fall into three broad categories:

1. Political criteria : The candidate country must have stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for minorities.
2. Economic criteria : The country must have a viable market economy capable of competing within the European single market.
3. Legal criteria : The country must be able to assume the obligations arising from membership, in particular by adopting and implementing all European legislation (the acquis communautaire).

These criteria aim to ensure that new Member States will be able to integrate smoothly into the EU and contribute to its smooth functioning. They therefore constitute an essential frame of reference for assessing Turkey's application.

Turkey's Journey: A Story of Ups and Downs

The history of Turkey-EU relations dates back to 1959, when Ankara first applied for association with the European Economic Community (EEC), the predecessor of the EU. Since then, the process has seen many twists and turns:

• 1963: Signing of the Association Agreement between Turkey and the EEC, paving the way for future membership.
• 1987: Turkey officially submits its application for membership of the EEC.
• 1999: At the Helsinki summit, the EU recognizes Turkey's candidate country status.
• 2002: Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Justice and Development Party (AKP) comes to power and launches a vast reform programme aimed at meeting the Copenhagen criteria.
• 2005: Official opening of accession negotiations between Turkey and the EU.
• 2016: Attempted coup in Türkiye, followed by a crackdown that raises EU concerns.
• 2018: EU freezes accession negotiations due to concerns over the rule of law in Türkiye.

This journey illustrates the complexity and duration of the accession process, as well as the political and diplomatic obstacles that can arise.

Turkish reforms: considerable but insufficient efforts

Since the early 2000s, Turkey has undertaken significant reforms to comply with the Copenhagen criteria and move closer to European standards. These efforts have been particularly marked under the AKP governments:

Economic reforms:

• Macroeconomic stabilization and inflation control
• Liberalization of the economy and privatizations
• Improving the business climate and attracting foreign investment
• Infrastructure development and industrial modernization

These measures have enabled Turkey to experience impressive economic growth, with GDP per capita tripling between 2001 and 2010.

Political and legal reforms:

• Reduction of the role of the army in political life
• Strengthening the rights of minorities, particularly Kurds
• Abolition of the death penalty
• Improving freedom of expression and association
• Reform of the judicial system

These reforms have helped to modernise the Turkish institutional and legal framework, bringing it closer to European standards in terms of democracy and the rule of law.

However, despite these advances, the EU continues to point out certain shortcomings, notably regarding the independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press and respect for human rights. The events following the 2016 coup attempt have in particular raised serious concerns about democratic backsliding in Türkiye.

Barriers to membership: beyond formal criteria

While the Copenhagen criteria constitute the official framework for evaluating applications, other, less tangible but equally important factors influence Turkey's accession process:

1. Size and demographics With its 84 million inhabitants, Turkey would be the second most populous country in the EU after Germany if it joined. This prospect raises concerns about the balance of power within the European institutions and the EU's absorption capacity.
2. Geography :Situated between Europe and Asia, Turkey would pose the question of the EU's borders. Its membership would considerably extend the Union's borders, putting it in direct contact with conflict zones such as the Middle East.
3. Religion and culture : Turkey is a predominantly Muslim country, raising questions about its compatibility with the Judeo-Christian values often associated with European identity. Some European leaders, such as former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, have explicitly mentioned this as an obstacle to membership.
4. The story : The complex historical relations between Turkey (heir to the Ottoman Empire) and Europe still weigh on mutual perceptions. Past conflicts and current tensions, particularly with Greece and Cyprus, complicate the accession process.
5. Migration issues : Turkey's geographical position makes it a major transit country for migratory flows towards Europe. This situation has given rise to tense negotiations between Ankara and Brussels, particularly during the 2015-2016 migration crisis.

These factors, although not officially recognised as membership criteria, play a crucial role in the reluctance of some Member States towards Turkey's candidacy.

The European double standard: an unequal application of criteria?

One of the main arguments put forward by supporters of Turkish membership is that the EU applies a "double standard" in assessing applications. Several elements support this criticism:

1. Comparison with other candidate countries: Some Central and Eastern European countries have been admitted to the EU despite economic and democratic indicators that are sometimes less favourable than those of Turkey. This is particularly the case for Bulgaria and Romania, whose accession in 2007 raised questions.
2. Economic situation of some Member States: Countries such as Greece, Portugal or Spain are experiencing recurring economic difficulties and are heavily dependent on European solidarity mechanisms. However, their membership of the EU is not called into question.
3. Democratic issues within the EU: Some Member States, such as Hungary or Poland, are subject to criticism regarding their respect for the rule of law. However, sanctions against them remain limited compared to the blockages imposed on Turkey.
4. Differential treatment of minorities: While the EU insists on respecting the rights of minorities in Turkey, some Member States themselves experience tensions with their own minorities (Basques in Spain, Roma in Central Europe, etc.).

These elements fuel the feeling, on the Turkish side, of unfair and discriminatory treatment. They also highlight the difficulty for the EU to maintain consistency in the application of its accession criteria.

The positions of the Member States: an impossible consensus?

The accession of a new country to the EU requires unanimity of the member states. However, regarding Turkey, positions are very divided:

Favorable countries:

• United Kingdom (before Brexit): Historically pro-Turkish, London saw Turkish membership as a way to dilute Franco-German influence within the EU.
• Poland, Hungary: These countries consider that Turkish membership would strengthen the weight of the "new" member states in the face of the Western "hard core".
• Spain, Italy: In favour of an enlargement towards the south of the Mediterranean.

Reluctant countries:

• France: Under the presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy and then Emmanuel Macron, Paris was openly opposed to Turkish membership, instead proposing a "privileged partnership".
• Germany: Although more nuanced, Germany remains cautious, particularly because of its large community of Turkish origin.
• Austria: Firmly opposed to Turkish membership, Austria has even proposed holding a referendum on the issue.
• Greece, Cyprus: Due to historical tensions and territorial disputes with Turkey, these two countries regularly veto the progress of negotiations.

This division within the EU makes any significant progress in Turkey's accession process extremely difficult.

The evolution of EU-Türkiye relations: between cooperation and tensions

Despite the obstacles to accession, EU-Turkey relations remain close and complex:

Economic cooperation:

• The EU is Turkey's main trading partner, accounting for around 40% of its trade.
• Turkey has been part of the European Customs Union since 1995.
• Many European companies are established in Türkiye, taking advantage of its skilled workforce and strategic position.

Security cooperation:

• Turkey is a key member of NATO and plays a crucial role in the security of Europe's southeastern flank.
• Ankara is an important partner in the fight against terrorism and the control of migration flows.

Recurring tensions:

• Disagreements over the management of the migration crisis and compliance with the 2016 EU-Türkiye agreement.
• European concerns about the authoritarian excesses of the Erdogan regime.
• Conflicts in the Eastern Mediterranean, particularly over the exploitation of gas resources.
• Divergences over regional policy, particularly regarding Syria and Libya.

These ambivalent relations illustrate both the interdependence between the EU and Turkey and the difficulties in finding lasting common ground.

Future prospects: what alternatives to membership?

Faced with the deadlock in the accession process, several options are being considered for the future of EU-Türkiye relations:

1. The "privileged partnership": Proposed in particular by France and Germany, this status would offer Turkey enhanced cooperation with the EU without granting it full membership. This option is however rejected by Ankara, which considers it an unacceptable consolation prize.
2. Deepening the Customs Union: A modernisation and extension of the existing customs agreement could strengthen economic integration without raising the political issues associated with membership.
3. Enhanced sectoral cooperation: The EU and Turkey could develop targeted partnerships in areas of mutual interest such as energy, security or innovation.
4. The "Norwegian model": Turkey could, like Norway, join the European Economic Area, thus benefiting from access to the single market without being a full member of the EU.
5. The status quo: Maintaining the current situation, with accession negotiations formally open but de facto frozen, could continue, allowing each party to keep its options open.

A process at an impasse

After more than 60 years of tumultuous relations, Turkey's accession to the European Union now seems more unlikely than ever. Ankara's considerable efforts to comply with the Copenhagen criteria have not been enough to overcome the political, cultural and geostrategic obstacles that stand in its way.

The accession process, initially conceived as a powerful lever for transformation and modernisation for Turkey, has paradoxically contributed to accentuating the divergences between the two parties. The frustrations