1. ——————————
To what extent Turkey can
not join the European
Union ?
Public international law
Emre Fidan
Matriculation n° : 1532458
31 Bleichstrasse, 67061 Ludwigshafen Am Rhein
email : emrefidan.5@gmail.com
November 2015
!1

2. Table of contents
Introduction 3
I- Turkey’s main political obstacles in membership process 5
A- The Cyprus conflict…………………………………………………………..….5
B- The Kurdish question…………………………………………………..……..…6
C- Responsability in the Armenian genocide…………………………………….…8
II- Turkey and the human rights 10
III- Turkey and Europe : the blurred future 12
A- The European Union : the uncertain future……………………………………12
B- Turkey : between Orient and Occident…………………….…………………..13
Conclusion : Turkey in the EU : out of ordinary terms 15
Bibliography 17
!2

3. Introduction
On the first of November 2015, the ruling party in Turkey, the AKP ( party
for justice and development) won the parliamentary elections with nearly 50 per cent
of the votes. Consequently, the AKP, which is Turkey’s largest party led by the
current prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu and the president Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
can carry out their project of having a presidential system in Turkey, with significant
presidential powers, thanks to the majority in the parliament.
Just the day after these decisive elections, the well-known newspaper Telegraph, was
reporting that « election victory that will consolidate president Erdogan’s power and
raise fears the country will slide into authoritarianism. ».
In fact, Erdogan’s centre-right moderate islamist party is in power since 13 years in
Turkey. More and more people, either Turkish or the international community, are
worried about his growing authoritarianism. Furthermore, AKP’s slogan for the past
years was « Together, we will build a new Turkey ». How would this « new Turkey »
would influence Turkey’s relationship with Europe, and above all its access to the
European Union (EU) as a member state ?
Turkish accession to the European Union is controversial and undoubtedly one of the
Union’s most contested political issue. Turkey, is a country that is situated between
Asia and Europe, with 76,7 millions inhabitants. It is the current 17th economic
power in the world (1). An ambitious country, which according to the President
Erdogan, aspires to become the 10th economic power in the world by 2023.
Precisely 2023, which is the centenary of the creation of the turkish republic, by
Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. The latter, who erased all traces of the ottoman empire’s
past in the country, put secularism on a long-term footing, modernized the country,
and above all, turned Turkey to Europe and the occidental civilization. 92 years later,
it is interesting to ensure in which position is this country with regard to the
European Union.
Up to now, Turkey made a lot of progress but still does not satisfy the Copenhagen
Criteria which are the essential conditions all candidate countries must satisfy to
become a member state. The european council in 1993 in Copenhagen listed these
conditions. Firstly, there is the political criteria with stable institutions
—
(1) According to the French Ministry for economy and finance in 2015
www.tresor.economie.gouv.fr/pays/turquie
!3

4. guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for minorities.
Then the economic criteria with a functioning market economy. Eventually the legal
capacity to incorporate the Community acquis. Turkey’s biggest problem to satisfy
these criteria is the political one. Turkey always had a lot of problem to gather this
criteria. That will be the focus of our study.
To what extent Turkey can not join the European Union ?
Firstly, we will focus on Turkey’s main political obstacles, then we will observe
Turkey and the human rights, eventually, we will try to analyze the future of Europe
and we would like to explain why, or to what extent; Turkey’s accession in the EU
remains complicated.
!4

5. I- Turkey’s main political obstacles in membership process
Turkey’s official application to join the EU was on 14 April 1987 by the
prime minister Turgut Özal. Since then, Turkey constantly put efforts until the UE
decided to open accession negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005.
Nevertheless, the accession process remained a failure and the negotiations were
closed, because of many chapters. There are actually many reasons why many EU
member states are opposed to Turkey’s membership in the EU. We will study the
most relevant ones on a political scale.
A- The cyprus conflict
The accession of Cyprus in the EU in 2004 emphasized consequently the
Cyprus-Turkey issue, in the eyes of Europe. Obviously, how can a country can enter
the EU if he dot not even recognize the existence of one of the member state?
Indeed, Turkey, still did not recognized the Cyprus republic.
The Cyprus crisis began in 1954 when Greeks tried without success to annex
this island, who counts 80% greeks and 20% turks. In 1964, the island’s government.
became independent and took measures against Turkish minorities, which irritated
Ankara. In 15 July 1974, after a Greek-engineered coup d’état, the island is attached
to the Greeks. In the goal of protecting the Turkish community, on the day of 20 July
1974, Turkish army occupied the north of the island which lead to a division of the
country, with a Greek population exodus to the south of the country and a Turkish
populations to the north.In 1983, a Turkish Republic from Northern Cyprus (TRNC)
is created (only recognized by Turkey).
A lot of international institutions attempted to resolve the Cyprus
problem.For instance, in 2002, a reunification plan was orchestrated by Unesco but
the Greeks voted no. Once again, in 2003, the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan
suggested a reunification plan of the state by making a federation of two states.
Although this proposal was accepted by 65% of the north of the island, the southern
part rejected massively with 70% of the votes(1).The results of these elections
prevent the Cypriot
level, from becoming unified. It is in a nutshell a divided island that entered the EU
____
( 1 ) Les enjeux de l’adhésion de la Turquie à l’Union Européenne, p.91,. Chap. 4.1, François
Descheemaekere) .
!5

6. in 2004. On the one hand, there is the southern part who is a member of the EU de
jure and who benefits from the monetary, economic, tax, customs union and the
Republic, who is recognized de facto at the international Schengen area. On the other
hand, the northern part who is only recognized by Turkey and who does not benefit
from theses advantages.
However Cyprus joined EU in 2004, we can legitimacy admit that it would
the least the EU can do to demand a candidate state that he has to recognize firstly all
the member state in the EU. Indeed Turkey do not recognize the Cyprus republic,
who can only apply their sovereignty in the south part of the island. In many reports,
the European Commission deplores that no progress has been made by Turkey for
the normalization of the bilateral agreement with Cyprus republic. Since, contrary to
the agreement signed in 2005 called « Ankara protocol», Turkey still turn down the
access of its harbors to the Cypriot boats. According to the European Commission,
that constitutes a violation of the customs agreement between Turkey and the EU. In
2005, an ultimatum by the twenty five members of the EU was sent to Turkey in
order to fix the issue. Yet, for lack of results, the EU suspended the negotiation
process. Once again, we easily understand the firm position of the EU to freeze all
negotiations since it is hardly intelligible to access the EU if we violate customs
agreements and above all, if we do not recognize the existence of one of the member
state. Eventually, we notice that the European Commission’s recommendation to
suspend eight of the thirty five chapters in negotiations, was according to the
commission, a direct result of Turkey’s failure to normalize trade relation with
Cyprus. Therefore, the resolution of the Cyprus conflict represents one of the stated
barriers to Turkey’s achievement of EU membership.
B- The kurdish question
Kurds are the biggest nation without a state. Indeed, There are 30 millions
Kurdish, spread in four countries ( Turkey, Syria, Irak, Iran), and among them 15
millions are in Turkey. Turkey always feared the growing will of independent and
autonomy of the Kurdish people.
Kurds represent twenty per cent of the country, however, their rights of being
different and their culture and linguistic particularism are not recognized.
Democratically and historically the Turkish authorities always denied them linguistic
and cultural rights and political representation. Speaking Kurdish in public was
banned until the nighties, it was seen as a threat to national unity. Nonetheless, since
!6

7. Turkey was accepted as an EU candidate in 1999 the rights of Kurdish also improved
significantly. For example, newspapers and CD’s are now available in Kurdish, a
national public television channel was made for kurds. Yet, Kurds are still claiming
rights on democratic and political fields. Indeed, ethnic Kurdish politicians who use
their mother tongue are still prosecuted, indeed Kurdish is banned in Parliament
whereas kurdish population represent twenty per cent of the whole Turkish
population. Thus, we observe a significant lack of democracy and political
representation. Besides, we have to add that there is a 10% threshold to enter
parliament, which is substantially higher bar compared with other countries. For
example Germany have a 5% threshold. If a party has less than 10 per cent, their
seats are relocated to the parties above the threshold. We observe that Turkey
increased the threshold percentage on purpose, in order that making Kurdish
representation at the parliament an impossible mission( even if in the past elections
of November, the pro-kurds party reached 11% of the votes). Even if this is a legal
provision, it remains a clear measure to close the access of democratic representation
at the Parliament for Kurdish people. The EU also insisted on this very domain,
since it is a lack of democracy.
Then, as we said before, Kurdish population always claimed for an
independent state. After the Ottoman Empire’s collapse in 1918, the Sevres Treaty
would have foretold a creation of an independent Kurdistan. However, this treaty
was never respected and fallen into disuse after the ratification of the Lausanne
Treaty in 24 July 1923 which was only allowing protections towards religious
minorities in Turkey. Indeed, the international community rather bet on Ataturk, thus
they decided to ratify the Lausanne treaty. Since then, Kurdish rights got worse. We
underline a decree in 3 march 1924 which forbids the teaching of Kurdish language
and all Kurdish associations and publications. Turkish government over the years
always denied the existence of a « Kurdish problem ». What’s more, since 1989, in
support of the 423 and 424 decrees, Turkish government imposed in all the south
east Kurdish area of the country an exceptional political regime, which allow the
army extraordinary powers.
However, denial of Kurdish rights has sadly generated Kurdish terrorism.
Indeed, in 1977, a kurdish student from Ankara, Abdullah Öcalan, created and armed
organization called PKK (Kurdistan Workers’s Party). This group is conducting
guerrilla type operations in south east of Turkey since 1984. Populations, villages,
whatever kurds or Turks were massacred. The maintain of the security in this region
evaded the control of he turkish government, who declared state of emergency in
1987. At least, Öcalan’s arrest in 1999 appeased the conflict which caused over
!7

8. 40 000 deaths (1). This appeasement satisfied the European institutions who then
decided to open negotiations for a membership. Erdogan tried to negotiate with
Kurdish side for a long time to calm down the conflict but he is radically opposed to
improve Kurdish rights, which would enlarge Kurdish will of independency,
according to him. Yet, if we understand the Turkish side to not « give » a part of its
territory and sovereignty in order to create a sovereign Kurdish state, though the EU
claims for at least better advancements for Kurds in the human rights and democratic
area. But the EU also fears this issue because they simply do not want to have a
country that is involved in a war and who is at the edge of a civil war and have very
unstable regions.
Furthermore, an other big obstacle for Turkey remains the recognition of the
Armenian genocide.
C- Responsability in the Armenian genocide
The year of 2015 is a special year for Armenians who commemorate the
centenary of the Armenian genocide. Indeed, back in 1915, 1 million Armenians died
after ottomans attacks. Yet, Turkey do not want to recognize that there was a
genocide and do not want to take the responsibility for the death of this million of
Armenians. This refusal by Turkey could be explained by the historical, national and
above all financial dimension. In fact, a turkish recognition will lead to a huge
financial compensation for turks as Germany or Austria are paying compensations
towards Jewish community. Yet, Turkey maintains that it was not a genocide, but
rather a deportation following Armenian massacres of muslims. Sadly, this issue
became one of the toughest obstacle in negotiations. The European Parliament urged
Turkey to recognize the Armenians deaths in 1915 as a genocide, but Turkey denies
responsability, saying that events took place during the Ottoman’s empire reign and
therefore they do not have any responsibility in the death of Armenians. It is even
illegal in Turkey to refer to it as the « Armenian genocide ». Whatever it be, this
issue constitute one of the political issue that Turkey should solve in order to enter
the EU. Even if the EU does not require officially the recognition of this genocide by
Turkey as a condition to enter the EU, each time Turkey is trying to step closer to the
EU, Armenian associations remind to the European that it remains a condition.
___
(1). Fehmi Koru, Sabah newspaper, «Allah kahretsin teröre bulasanlar hiç mi akillanmayacak ?», 9
September 2015, p.10
!8

9. Indeed, Armenian associations are miffed of the « active denial » of the
Turkish government and demand the recognition of the Genocide by Turkey as a
condition to enter the EU. In this way, in 4 September 2006, Foreign Affaires
Committee of the European Parliament adopted the Dutch conservative deputy
Camiel Eurlings’s report on the progress made by Turkey in membership process. It
was a deliberation in which was voted an amendment making the recognition of the
Armenian genocide by Turkey a prerequisite condition of any kind of negotiation of
Turkey’s access in the EU. Yet, many Directorate-General for Neighborhood and
Enlargement Negotiations expressed that Turkey’s recognition was absolutely not a
prerequisite condition in accessing the EU, despite of the vote of the European
Parliament vote in 2006. Even if, many times, the European Commission regularly
underlined that reconciliation is a fundamental value in Europe and thus advised
Turkey to do its best to have the best diplomatic relation with Armenia.
These were the three official matters that Turkey should solve in a good way
according to the international community in order to advance in the negotiations
with the EU.
However, even if Turkey « solve » theses three issues and make it better
towards the international community and the international law, we do not think that
it would automatically make Turkey a member state. Indeed, an other fact is an
obstacle to Turkey’s access to the EU, human rights and its relationship with the
European Court of Human Rights ( ECHR).
!9

10. II- Turkey and the human rights
In order to satisfy the Copenhagen criteria, Turkey commits since 1999 in a
huge human rights reform process. For instance,the AKP has enacted some reforms
such as the abolition of death penalty in 2002, the prohibition of torture of prisoners,
a total reform of both penal and civil Codes, and so on.
Yet, the setting up of these reforms is still not enough and we notice that
Turkey has a long way to go to respect human rights before starting thinking of
becoming a member state in the EU.
The European Union insists on Common values. Article 49 of the former
version Treaty on the European union provided that every European state who
respects the principles guaranteed in article 6 can become a member state in the EU.
Precisely, this article 6 TEU referred to the principles of freedom, democracy,,
human rights and fundamental rights. The European union always showed
importance towards these values. For instance, the new treaty of Lisbon goes even
further. Firstly, in extends the list of principle values that were in Article 2 TUE, such
as equality, non-discrimination, pluralism, tolerance, justice, solidarity and so on.
Secondly, meanwhile the member states must respect these principles, the also have
to promote them. The respect for fundamental values has become more and more
important in the EU, who really brings the human rights and fundamental rights out.
Now, let’s focus on Turkey and how Turkey is concerned about these values.
We have to admit that Turkey has long way to go before entering the EU. In fact, the
European commission evaluates annually Turkey’s development by publishing a
report on the progresses made. We notice that these reports often contains a large
section on « Democracy and the rule of law », « Human rights and the protection of
minorities » or « judiciary and human rights ».
The main criticism of the EU has to do with human rights. Let’s for instance
begin with torture. According to the 2009 report of the European Commission,
Turkey has yet to ratify the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture
they signed in 2005, and also three additional Protocols to the European Convention
on Human Rights. We notice that in the nighties, 4000 cases of torture were
denounced. In practically every report, Amnesty International deplores that Turkey
resort to torture.
Moreover, freedom of expression and freedom of the press are also matters of
concern. The number of prosecutions of writers, academics, journalists and other
intellectuals has increased in the past years, for only expressing a critical opinion.
One of the most important EU demand in this very domain was the repeal of the
!10

11. article 301 of the turkish penal code, which limited freedom of expression by making
it an offense to « denigrate Turkishness ». Turkey resort to this article to legitimate
many censorship. In reaction to EU’s demand, turkish parliament in 2008 approved a
softening of the law restricting freedom of speech. The amendment was welcomed
by the EU as a step forward.Yet, the European Commission and Parliament is not
satisfied and claim for many changes of this kind, indeed, a lot of legal provisions
represent an illegitimate restriction on freedom of expression.
Concerning freedom of press, Turkey has a long way to go. In fact, we can
only observe the restrictions and the fine imposed in this country. The European
Commission in its reports often quotes fine that are imposed to media groups,
website bans and journalist imprisonments. Other sites such as YouTube or even
Twitter were banned in Turkey. This constitutes a complete lack of freedom that are
not compatible with European values and standards. Furthermore, we can also
mention the religious freedom in Turkey which is not respected in Turkey. For
instance, personal documents such as ID cards, still include information on religion,
which leaving potential for discriminatory practices. Besides, in the area of minority
rights, Turkey’s approach remains restrictive. The European Commission notice that
a few progress were made but there are still lot of discriminations. We notice many
discriminations towards ethnic minorities (Jews, Armenians, Greeks,), or religious
minorities (Christians, non-Sunni muslims, Alevis). For instance, the Greeks still
complain of their difficulty to have access to education, that school books contain
many discriminative passages, and so on. The nationalists believe that the
implementation of minority rights would result in Turkey’s dissolution.
Moreover, we also have to make a point about Turkey’s multiple
condemnations by the ECHR..Turkey is not a member of the European Union.
Nevertheless they are a member of the ECHR since 1954. Before thinking of
entering the EU, we must respect and be on the same page with the ECHR. We
notice that Turkey was condemned way too many times by the court. For example, in
2008, (1) Turkey was condemned for violations of the convention in 257 cases. To
compare, France was condemned 24 times and Germany 6 times, just to show that
Turkey has still a long way ahead with respect to human rights, although the EU is
very attached to these values. Furthermore, as we said before, the EU does not only
settle for only respecting these values, but they also insists on promoting theses
values. That is why we are saying Turkey has a long way to go before accessing the
EU. We firstly doubt that they will in the next years, not just just repeating these
values, but take it to the next level and promote them.
____
(1) European court of Human rights, Annual report 2008, p.132
!11

12. We can doubt about it legitimately, since the AKP is currently ruling the country and
they are not famous for making human rights respected a priority.
To put things in a nutshell, although Turkey made huge reforms in these
fields, the human rights argument against Turkish membership remains a major
stumbling block in negotiations. Furthermore, an other obstacle prevent Turkey from
becoming a member state, it is European’s blurred future.
III- Turkey and the EU : the blurred future
Turkey first applied for associate membership of the European Economic
Community (EEC) in 1959. Since then, a lot of water has gone under the bridge and
Turkey always adopted the strategic goal of rapprochement with European
institutions. Nevertheless, time flies and Turkey do not really know if its future is in
the European Union or not. Exactly the same for European member states who does
not know if their future would be the EU.
A- European Union : the uncertain future
Turkey has a wish to join the EU. Yet, we may wonder whether Turkey
should join the EU. Maybe Turkey would make the right choice to not join the EU
who is in crisis. Today the EU is facing many challenges and failure such as Lisbon
Treaty. Europe doesn’t know its finality and its borders.
Indeed, the Europe does not know exactly what is its legal nature, and above
all, its finality. Since, we know that Europe is not a federal state. Because a federal
state would mean that the member states would lose their sovereignty in favor of the
EU. Well, this is not the case. Even if member state gave the EU some sovereign
power, such as the currency which is Euro. We also know that the EU is not a
confederation of states, that would mean that the states are just here to cooperate but
they would not give any sovereign power to the EU, since, in a confederation of
states, the states keep their sovereignty. Yet, the EU can not be a confederation of
states since we notice that Europe is going further than simply cooperating, it is in an
integration dynamic. Eventually, we can say that Europe has a strange legal nature. It
is neither a confederation of states nor a federal state. Actually, the EU is a « Sui
generis » category. Which means, that it is a category that is created on his own, who
does not belong to any other type of legal structure and it is not fixed and rigid,
permanently in movement, in an evolution process. We can say Europe’s legal nature
is strange and does not look like anything else. Jacques Delors, the president of the
!12

13. European Commission in the nighties defined the EU as a « federation of nation
state ». In a nutshell, the EU is a group of sovereign states. Which brings us to the
finality of the EU. The fathers of the EU, Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet had a
dream that the EU would be one nation, in unity with several countries. Their goal
was to build one monetary, legal and above all, politic union. Their wishes was to
make one nation in which the member state, in a long term process, would give their
sovereignty to the EU in order to make one nation. However, nowadays, it looks
more like the EU is focusing more and more on the monetary union. Actually, in the
head of the EU fathers, the monetary union was only a lure to entice the candidate
states to join the EU, in order to make one nation. This lure actually became the
finality of the EU.
Therefore, we can observe that the EU is in crisis, it does not know its
borders and its finality. The Europe is wondering about its future. That is why, to an
extent, Turkey can not join the EU. We often blame Turkey for lack of respect of the
Copenhagen Criteria, but we also have to blame the EU for not knowing where they
are going. If it is just a monetary union, the future of the EU is in danger. If it is one
European nation with sovereignty, the future of the EU is yet not in danger. At the
opposite, the EU has a certain future. Because of this incertitude, and lassitude of
having not a precise goal, the EU is threaten. That is why to an extent, the future of
the EU is a problem for Turkey, in joining the EU because Europe does not have
borders, more precisely, does not see its borders, and above all does not see where it
is going.
Thus, for the vagueness of its legal nature, for the vagueness of its final goal,
Europe remained very vague also concerning Turkey. That is why the future of the
EU remains a brake for turkish membership in the EU.
Besides, waiting for Turkey in order to join the EU creates a lassitude,
Turkey is enough of waiting and start to think about their future in the EU in a
negative point of view. Furthermore Turkey is wondering wether its future is really
in the EU, since, it is culturally and religiously very different from the EU.
B - Turkey : Between Orient and Occident
The indeterminate position of Turkey also forms a serious obstacle in
Turkey’s EU bid. Indeed, Turkey is in majority a muslim country and has a lot of
differences in the way of life, in the culture, with the Europeans in general, even if
Ataturk in 1923 start to steer Turkey towards Europe. Nowadays’s Turkey does not
exactly look like like Ataturk’s time even if it has conserved firmly many principles.
Indeed, Turkey does not refuse their evolution and does not fear the future. Turkey is
rethinking the occidental model that Ataturk imposed, more attentive to religious and
morale values and national identity. As we explained before, the ruling party in
Turkey since 13 years is the AKP which is described as an islamist party and very
keen on religious values. The secular Constitution in Turkey is maybe in threat. We
!13

14. have to know that Turkey is a 99% muslim country and in everyday’s life, we notice
that Islam has an important place in Turks life. Even more and more with the AKP.
We wonder maybe Turkey’s body rejected the transplant of secularism over decades.
This is also a fact which proves that Turkey is still divided wether going to Orient or
Occident. Maybe Turkey does not want the model that Ataturk imposed to Turkey.
And it looks like, more and more, with AKP’s reelection over the years, that Turkey
is probably turning to Orient and start to choose Islam and Orient, over secularism
and Europe. And that is to an extent, important to see why Turkey can not join the
EU. Because Turkey is divided into going to Europe or going to the opposite way.
And as its position is not sure, in other words, not completely turned to Europe,
Europe does not want to have a country that does not feel and believe in the
European future and values. And we can say the same for Turkey, Turkey maybe
does not believe and above all does not fell itself in Europe. Furthermore, Turkey
start to look at Iran for example for treaties and economic partnerships. We know
that thirty per cent of gas and energy for Turkey is coming from Iran and Turkey has
a lot of interests in keeping these types of partnerships, especially for Turkey’s
unique geo-strategic place. For instance, in every votes involving sanctions towards
Iran and every votes whose goal is to isolate Iran in the United Nations, Turkey
always votes no, because of these types of economic partnerships. However, we
notice that Turkey is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
since 1952, and we have to emphasize that it is the only country from the middle east
that is a member of the NATO. Furthermore, Turkey and Israel have many treaties
and agreements, for example, Israeli military aircrafts can train in Turkey’s territory
as Israel is very small. In this way, we would think that Turkey is turned to Occident
rather than Orient.
But where is Turkey ? From 1963, turkish philosopher Nermi Uygur was
answering to all these questions and showing all the distance Turkey achieved since
Ataturk imposed occidental civilization as a role model : « We are neither Orientals
nor occidentals, in other words between Orient and Occident ». Therefore, this
indecisiveness whether looking at Orient or Occident, constitutes a real obstacle in
Turkey’s bid for joining the EU.
!14

15. Conclusion : Turkey in the EU : out of ordinary terms
To sum up with, we notice that the EU is imposing almost impossible terms
to Turkey, to join the EU. In fact, we have seen that, politically, Turkey has huge
political issues that will not be solved in a snap of a finger. Furthermore, in the very
area of human rights, Turkey has a long way to go in order to satisfy the
requirements of both the EU and the ECHR. Concerning the ECHR, it looks like
quite impossible that again, Turkey would one day in a snap of finger solve all the
critics and lack of human rights that Europe complains about in Turkey.
Furthermore, it looks like more plausible for Turkey that they will never satisfy the
requirements of the ECHR. Turkey is a total different country if we compare to the
EU member states. It has a total different culture, religion, and the country has a lot
of minorities. Thus, Turkey has to adapt its own law on order to rule the country
safely and rule the country taking in account islam, minorities and so on. This
means, it is normal for Turkey and totally understandable to not fit all the
requirements that EU claims for. We therefore doubt that Turkey will one day fit all
the requirements, for example, adapting its jurisprudence and legislation towards
minorities, especially towards Kurdish. It is understandable that Turkey think that
that would give a serious impetus to the Kurdish community to claim for their
independency. It is complicated to imagine a country that would put in danger its
sovereignty and integrity just for joining the EU. And we do not think that it would
happen one day in Turkey.
Moreover, we think that the problem is also that Europe fears Turkish
representation at the European Parliament. Indeed, with the Lisbon Treaty, the
European Parliament is represented more democratically, taking in account the
demographic factor. Germany has 96 seats (maximum seats), France has 74 and so
on. And this is a factor that triggered EU countries concerns about Turkey’s
accession in the EU. Indeed, they fear and can not imagine the European Parliament
with nearly 90 Turkish deputies.
Besides, sadly turkish access in the EU is also a question of Lobbying and
conflict of interests. We know that countries like Greece and Armenia also doing
their best to stop Turkey’s bid. Then, France always been resentful to that, because
that would probably mean that Germany would be at the very center of the EU.
Germany always been opposed also, because turkish big airport project in Istanbul
would be the biggest airport hub in the Europe zone and thus that would kill the
hegemony of Frankfurt Airport. Then, for example the United States make pressure
on Europe to accept Turkey. The United states want to ruin the Common Agricultural
Policy of the EU, since 30% of Turkish people work in this field, where as 10% in
!15

16. average in the EU. That would ruin a political union and would be a delicate issue
for the EU. And the interest of the United States is to kill the EU in order to keep
their economic hegemony. And there are a lot of examples of this type.
Unfortunately, Turkey’s access to EU is also a question of interest before being a
political question for many countries. In a nutshell, Turkey’s membership in the EU
is very complicated and Turkey has to fulfill many requirements in order to join the
EU.
To conclude with, sadly, it is plausible to say that, if we put aside political,
legal problems that Turkey has to face in his membership negotiations, it seems that
the most important factor that triggers the EU member state concerns is that Turkey
is a predominantly muslim country and its borders are very unstable. Islamophobia
and the fear of Daesh plays a big role in it. Likely, the most important part in
Turkey’s failure in joining the EU is that Europe does not want borders with Irak,
Syria and so on. With the terrorist attacks in Paris in 13 November 2015 claimed by
Daesh, no doubt that Europe will think twice before letting Turkey join the EU and
have direct borders with Irak and Syria….
!16

17. Bibliography
- Deniz Akagül, Semih Vaner, L’Europe avec ou sans la Turquie ?
- Kiymet Ant, L’adhésion de la Turquie à l’Union Européenne
- Mirela Bogdani, Turkey and the dilemma of EU accession when religion meets
politics
- Emre Cakir, Fifty years of EU-Turkey relations, a Sisyphean story, edited by
Aragon
- Bruno Cautrès, Nicolas Monceau, La Turquie en Europe
- Alexandre Del Valle, Emmanuel Razzavi, LE Dilemme turc ou les vrais enjeux de
la candidature d’Ankara
- François Descheemakere, Les Enjeux de l’adhésion de la Turquie à l’Europe
- Documentation française, Revue questions internationales, La Turquie et l’Europe,
27/09/2005
- Paul Dumont, Mustafa Kemal invente la Turquie moderne
- Edel Hugues, Turkey’s accession to the European Union The politics of exclusion?
- Ali Kazancigil, Turquie, d’une révolution à l’autre
- Manière de voir, le monde diplomatique, Turquie des ottomans aux islamistes,
Décembre 2013-janvier 2014
- Peter-Christian Müller, Turkey and the European Union
- Lucie Tunkrova and Pavel Sardine : The politics of EU accession, Turkish
challenges and Central European experiences
- Thierry Zarcone, La Turquie, de l’empire ottoman à la république d’Ataturk
!17

18. Declaration
"I hereby declare that the paper presented is my own work.I have employed no other
sources or means except the ones listed. I have clearly marked and acknowledged all
quotations or references that have been taken from the works of others.I understand
that my paper will be marked “insufficienter (0 points)” in case my statement is
untrue. Moreover,I consent to my paper being electronically stored and sent in order
to be checked for plagiarism.”
" Ich erkläre hiermit, dass das präsentierte Papier meine eigene Arbeit ist. Ich habe
keine anderen Quellen oder Mittel außer denjenigen verzeichnet beschäftigt. Ich
habe deutlich gekennzeichnet und alle Zitate oder Bezugnahmen anerkannt, die von
den Arbeiten von anderen genommen worden sind. Ich verstehe, dass mein Papier
unzulänglicher (0 Punkte) " gekennzeichnet wird, falls meine Erklärung untreu ist.
Außerdem stimme ich meinem Papier zu, elektronisch versorgt und gesandt zu
werden, um für Plagiat nachgeprüft zu werden. "
!18

19. !19