Home / Press review / Archive / Magazine / Politics / Europe and Turkey / Debate

How Europeans see Turkey

Should Turkey become a member of the EU? Can it even be considered European? Few questions are the source of such intense debate between Europe's politicians and intellectuals as these. The different positions in this discussion seem irreconcilable, yet they are accelerating the pace of change and contributing to the formation of a European identity.

The EU has been conducting official membership talks with Turkey since October 2005. Unlike previous membership talks, the negotiations with Turkey are "open-ended", meaning that they may not necessarily conclude with full EU membership for Turkey. So despite the ongoing negotiations, the positions within Europe still vary considerably.

Between the Orient and the Occident. Where does Turkey belong?
Photo: AP

For example in May 2007 France's new president, Nicolas Sarkozy, spoke out unequivocally against EU membership for Turkey, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel also has joined the ranks of those who oppose Turkey's accession. Great Britain and Sweden, on the other hand, point to the primarily economic and strategic advantages of allowing Turkey to join.

The debate about EU membership for Turkey is taking place at various levels: at a geo-historical level, at the level of security policy, at the level of economic strategy and at an ideological level.

Geography and history

With each of six rounds of enlargement, the EU's borders have expanded. Nonetheless, both opponents and proponents of Turkish membership have used geographic arguments to support their views. Sarkozy justified his stance by arguing that Turkey was part of Asia Minor rather than Europe. And in an interview published in France's L'Express of 3 May 2007, Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk also used geography - albeit to argue the opposite. "If you ask me if Istanbul is in Europe, my answer is that you need only look at a map of the world to see it's so."

"Europe's borders, particularly to the east, were never clearly defined," wrote Greek journalist Machalis N. Katsigeras on 5 May 2007 in I kathimerini, summing up the dilemma. He adds: "Geography may provide some answers, but historical, cultural and anthropological factors complicate matters." Katsigeras also stresses that there are different historical interpretations of where Europe's geographical boundaries lie: "So there is de Gaulle's vision of Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals, the Crusaders' idea of a Catholic Europe, the Christian Europe of the Holy Alliance, Hitler's New Europe, and the New Europe of the enlargement-planners in Brussels."

Strategic Interests

The most important argument put forward by those who support EU membership for Turkey is the strategic one. They claim that despite the differences between Turkey and the EU's current members, cooperation would bring economic, political, military and geo-political advantages for both sides.

In the Austrian Standard of 6 September 2006 journalist Michael Moravec points out that Turkey could contribute to solving the EU's demographical problems: "It's a country with nearly 80 million people and a population with an average age of which the EU can only dream. Turkey offers a market and a good location for production, and plenty of workers for the time when labour power will be a scarce commodity in the EU."

Daniel Vigneron, editor-in-chief of the French daily La Tribune, contended on 12 December 2006 that the EU needed Turkey not only from an economic point of view but also to boost its geopolitical strategy: "Strengthened by an incontrovertibly Muslim Turkey in the region and NATO's No. 2 military power, endowed with human and economic potential without equal on the continent, the EU can find the means to exercise its power on this terrain." And in the Italian daily La Republicca of 29 June 2006 British sociologist Anthony Giddens also argues along these lines: "[Europe] cannot aspire to be a world-class geopolitical player if it turns its back on Turkey."

Even those who are sceptical about Turkish membership admit that Europe needs Turkey for strategic reasons. However, they argue that Turkey doesn't necessarily have to join the EU; good neighbourly relations would suffice. Angela Merkel, for instance, has proposed a "privileged partnership" with Turkey as an alternative to its accession to the EU.

Democratic progress

Those who wish to have Turkey as a partner but not as an EU member often argue that the country doesn't fulfil the criteria for membership. They point to the fact that Turkey doesn't officially recognise EU member Cyprus, that the minority rights of the Kurds and Christians are not guaranteed by law and that freedom of speech is restricted. A paragraph in the Turkish constitution which makes the denigration of Turkishness a punishable offence has been a particular source of concern in Europe: the novelist Orhan Pamuk was put on trial because he made open reference to the Armenian genocide. And charges were also brought against author Elif Shafak because a character in one of her novels violated that law. On the basis of these arguments those who oppose Turkish membership say the country does not comply with EU standards.

Even proponents of Turkish membership concede that there are deficits in these areas, but emphasise that - with Europe's help - important changes have taken place in the course of the country's transition to democracy and towards full observance of human rights. "Turkey has made great strides in recent years, thanks largely to the prospect of EU membership," Anthony Giddens concluded.

"Turkey has come a long way," announced British historian Norman Davis in an interview with the German newspaper Die Welt published on 9 May 2006, adding: "The best comparison is with Russia. Just consider where Russia was in 1922 and what Turkey's situation was back then. Where would you rather live today? I would certainly choose Turkey." Commenting on the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink in Istanbul in the 22 January 2007 edition of Postimees, Estonian journalist Erkkis Bahovski drew the same comparison. "The murders of Anna Politkovskaya and Hrant Dink, or actually the reactions to these deeds, have shown who belongs to Europe and who not... But as opposed to Russia, Turkey is on the right track."

Scepticism among the people

However, as far as the opinion of Europe's citizens regarding Turkish membership is concerned,geographic and strategic considerations play only a minor role. The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) arrived at this conclusion after assessing the results of a Eurobarometer survey. According to the survey, scepticism about Turkey is on the rise, mainly because Europeans feel that Turkey's becoming a member would threaten their identity.

The most contentious point is religion. The current EU member states are predominantly Christian. Turkey, on the other hand, is predominantly Muslim. While some reflect on how Christians and Muslims can coexist, others fear militant Islamism.

The fear of Islamism

Portuguese sociologist André Freire warns in the 23 April 2007 edition of Pùblico that "the full European integration of Turkey, which would not really serve the interests of either the EU or Turkey, poses the risk of bringing Islamism to Europe. This would weaken and endanger the Union."

Luxembourgian writer Jean Portante also applies the Islamist argument on 8 March 2007 in Le Jeudi, but instead uses it to justify his positive attitude towards Turkish membership: "And yet it is because Turks do not want to fall prey to the radical Islamism looming large on their doorstep that they are dreaming of our Europe and our European values. We are for Turkey what we were previously for Poland and Hungary: the means of escaping an undesired domination."

Islam and Europe

In Turkey there is intense debate about the relationship between the secular Turkish state, Islamic politicians and radical Islamists. But as Turkish author Elif Shafak notes in the German weekly Die Zeit of 10 May 2007, there are some surprising similarities between the standpoints of the different sides regarding potential EU membership: "Interestingly, the anti-Western hard-liners in Turkey and the anti-Turkish hard-liners in Europe have a lot in common. Both think Islam and Western democracy are incompatible. And both are against EU membership for Turkey."

German sociologist and journalist Wolf Lepenies, who adopts a very critical view of Turkey's democratic deficits, does not consider that the distinctly Christian identity of the EU is in jeopardy. In a speech printed in the Süddeutsche Zeitung of 9 October 2006 he asserted: "It is not the danger of losing its Christian soul that Europe must fear if Turkey becomes a member state. Europe never had a pure soul; this is one of its strengths."

The EU's process of self-discovery

Ultimately, the debate about Turkish membership could also help the EU to find a new identity. In an article written shortly before his death and published in the tageszeitung of 24 January 2007, the aforementioned Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink stated: "For those who are seeking answers, Turkey acts as a mirror. Their quest for self-discovery has led them on a detour through Turkey. Because they haven't got very far with their own observations, they are reflecting on what they learn from us. This is why for them we are like a talking mirror. Naturally, they are also our mirror. And the way we see ourselves, our 'internal affairs', is often conveyed to us through them."

Meike Dülffer

Meike Dülffer was an editor for euro|topics. She studied Slavic studies, Eastern European History and Politics. She trained as a journalist at Berliner Zeitung before ...
» to author index

Further articles on the subject » EU Policy, » EU enlargement, » International Relations, » Europe, » Turkey
More from the press review on the subject » EU Policy, » EU enlargement, » International Relations, » Europe, » Turkey