TURKEY: Turkey's proposed membership of the EU has sparked a debate never seen before, writes Judith Crosbie
Even before President Bush set foot on Turkish soil last month he was declaring where his feelings lay on the issue of the Muslim majority state's membership of the EU. Standing with Dromoland Castle in the background and hours before he set off for the NATO summit in Istanbul, the president said: "As Turkey meets the EU standards for membership, the European Union should begin talks that will lead to full membership for the republic of Turkey."
Mr Bush's haste in pressing the case for its NATO ally signalled the next big issue the EU faces under the the new Dutch presidency. EU leaders are to decide at a December summit if Turkey is to start negotiations to enter the union. Any of the 25 leaders can veto Turkish entry, but a report submitted by the European Commission in October assessing whether Turkey has met certain criteria set down will form the basis of the decision.
Turkey's proposed membership has sparked a debate never seen before when other countries joined the EU. The issue forces a focus on what defines the European Union, how far its borders should go and whether it can accommodate a big state whose religion and culture is different from that of the rest of Europe.
Some are in no doubt about what it would mean. "Turkey is neither geographically, historically nor culturally European. If we admit it into the Union, it would not be possible to stop there: can you imagine that the final border between Europe and Asia could reach into the middle of what is Kurdistan?" says Jean-Louis Bourlanges who was re-elected to the European Parliament last month for the French political party, the Union for French Democracy.
His views are similar to those of former French president and chairman of the Convention on the Future of Europe, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, who said Turkey joining the EU would mean "the end of Europe". Former German chancellor Helmet Kohl said the EU was a "Christian club" while the present head of Mr Kohl's party, the Christian Democrats, Angela Merkel said the party is opposed to Turkish membership and instead favours a "privileged partnership".
French President Jacques Chirac has remained ambivalent on Turkey's membership but could be the one EU leader to upset matters at the December summit. Mr Bourlanges warns him on taking a pro-Turkey stance. "Mr Chirac's own party supports our position. It is thus the whole of the \ parliamentary majority which is opposed to the accession of Turkey."
Others have come out robustly in defence of Turkey joining. "Turkey is on the right path . . . Turkey can definitely count on German support," German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder said in February during a visit to Ankara. Tony Blair pledged Britain's support during a visit to Turkey in May. Ireland has also pledged its support for negotiations to start.
Those in favour of Turkish membership see the country as a "bridge to the east" which would help overcome the dark prophecy of a "clash of civilisations" between Islam and the west. They see a democratic Muslim state joining the European bloc becoming an example to the Middle East states as to how they can develop and prosper. Turkey's ambassador to Ireland, Mr Ahmet Berki Dibek, also stresses this point: "It will be a terrible mistake to divide the world into hostile categories such as 'west and the rest'.
"There is no political or moral ground to do that. It is also not possible for the EU to hide itself behind high walls or reduce itself to a Christian club." He stresses Turkey's shared history with Europe going back to Greek and Roman times, the fact that Turkey is a member of various European institutions and recognises the European Court of Human Rights, and points to Turkey's initial association agreement with the EU going back as far as 1963.
While many in Europe have become alarmed at the growing strength of the Muslim population in countries such as France, the UK and Germany who want girls to be allowed to wear headscarves and full coverings in school, Mr Dibek says there is nothing to fear from Turkey's Muslims.
"What makes Islam fearsome? Is it religious Islam or is it political Islam? I would say it is political. There are no grounds to fear from Turkey's Muslim population . . . Democratic and secular values are well established and consolidated in Turkey."
Ironically much of Turkey's progress towards EU membership has happened in the last two years during the life of the present government, headed by the Justice and Development Party, a political party with Islamic roots. "We were all surprised by them," says Mr Seyfi Tashan, president of the Foreign Policy Institute, a Turkish think tank. "From time to time they make gestures to their popular base but they are behaving more progressively [than previous governments]."
There is no doubt Turkey has made great efforts to meet the EU's Copenhagen Criteria set down in 1993 to join the EU. The death penalty has been abolished, teaching and broadcasting in Kurdish languages started, high-profile Kurdish political opponents have been released from jail, the influence of the military on political life reduced and abuses by the state's police forces have decreased. Last month the human rights watchdog, the Council of Europe, announced it had decided to stop monitoring Turkey for democratic shortcomings given its "will and ability to fulfil its statutory obligations as a member of the Council of Europe".
But despite the great changes introduced and the arguments not to close the door on the world's only Muslim democratic state, Prof Brigid Laffan, of the Dublin European Institute, has some reservations. "What you have in Turkey is a westernised elite that see EU membership as the end of Ataturk's [founder of the modern Turkish state] vision but that is not underpinned by popular sentiment."
While a majority of Turks want to join the EU, Prof Laffan says she is concerned about the difference in values held in Turkey and the rest of Europe.
Those in favour of Turkey joining the EU say these issues can be resolved in the years between the start of negotiations and eventual entry.