INTRODUCTION
Turkey
is the only pluralist secular democracy in the Moslem world and has always
attached great importance to developing its relations with other European
countries. Historically, Turkish culture has had a profound impact over much of
Eastern and
Southern
Europe.
Turkey
began westernizing its economic, political and social structures in the 19th
century. Following the First World War and the proclamation of the Republic in
1923, it chose
Western Europe
as the model for its new secular structure.
Turkey
has ever since closely aligned itself with the West and has become a founding
member of the United Nations, a member of NATO, the Council of Europe, the OECD
and an associate member of the Western European Union. During the Cold War
Turkey was part of the Western alliance, defending freedom, democracy and human
rights. In this respect,
Turkey
has played and continues to play a vital role in the defense of the European
continent and the principal elements of its foreign policy have converged with
those of its European partners.
THE
ANKARA
AGREEMENT
In
July 1959, shortly after the creation of the European Economic Community in
1958,
Turkey
made its first application to join. The EEC s response to
Turkey
s application in 1959 was to suggest the establishment of an association until
Turkey
s circumstances permitted its accession. The ensuing negotiations resulted in
the signature of the Agreement Creating an Association between the
Republic
of
Turkey
and the
European Economic Community
(the Ankara Agreement) on 12 September 1963. This agreement, which entered into
force on 1 December 1964, aimed at securing
Turkey
s full membership in the EEC through the establishment in three phases of a
customs union which would serve as an instrument to bring about integration
between the EEC and
Turkey
.
The
Ankara Agreement envisaged the progressive establishment of a Customs Union
which would bring the Parties closer together in economic and trade matters. In
the meantime, the EEC would offer financial assistance to
Turkey
. Under the First Financial Protocol which covered the
period 1963-1970, the EEC provided
Turkey
with loans worth 175 million ECU. The trade concessions which the EEC granted
to
Turkey
under the form of tariff quotas proved, however, not to be as effective as
expected. Yet, the EEC s share in Turkish imports rose from 29% in 1963 to 42%
in 1972.
Although
the Ankara Agreement envisaged the free circulation not only of goods, but of
natural persons, services and capital between the Parties, it excluded
Turkey
from the EEC decision-making mechanisms and precluded
Turkey
from recourse to the ECJ for dispute settlement. The Customs Union that was to
be established between the Parties went much further than the abolition of
tariff and quantitative barriers to trade between the Parties and the
application of a Common External Tariff to imports from third countries, and
envisaged harmonization with EEC policies in virtually every field relating to
the internal market.
The
Ankara Agreement still constitutes the legal basis of the Association between
Turkey
and the EU.
THE
ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL
The
Additional Protocol of 13 November 1970 set out in a detailed fashion how the
Customs Union would be established. It provided that the EEC would abolish
tariff and quantitative barriers to its imports from Turkey (with some
exceptions including fabrics) upon the entry into force of the Protocol,
whereas Turkey would do the same in accordance with a timetable containing two
calendars set for 12 and 22 years, and called for the harmonization of Turkish
legislation with that of the EU in economic matters. Furthermore, the
Additional Protocol envisaged the free circulation of natural persons between
the Parties in the next 12 to 22 years.
The
Additional Protocol brought significant advantages for
Turkey
s agricultural exports to the EEC. 92% of our agricultural exports in 1971
benefited from this regime. Despite other agricultural producers such as
Greece,
Portugal
and
Spain
later becoming member states, and the EEC s conclusion of preferential trade
agreements with certain Mediterranean countries,
Turkey
preserves even today its position as one of the EEC s most privileged trading
partners.
Had
the Additional Protocol been implemented in full, the free circulation of goods
and services and the harmonization of Turkish legislation with that of the EEC
in a multitude of areas would have been achieved at the end of the 22 year
timetable.
TURKEY
’S
APPLICATION FOR FULL MEMBERSHIP IN 1987
On
24 January 1980
Turkey
shifted its economic policy from an autarchic import-substitution model and
opened its economy to the operation of market forces. Following this
development in the economic area and the multiparty elections in 1983, the
relations between
Turkey
and the Community, which had come to a virtual freeze following the military
intervention of 12 September
1980 in
Turkey
, began returning to normality. In the light of these
positive developments,
Turkey
applied for full membership in 1987, on the basis of the EEC Treaty s article
237 which gave any European country the right to do so.
Turkey
s request for accession, filed not under the relevant provisions of the Ankara
Agreement, but those of the Treaty of Rome, underwent the normal procedures.
The Council forwarded
Turkey
s application to the Commission for the preparation of an Opinion. This has
reconfirmed
Turkey
s eligibility, given that a similar application by
Morocco
was turned down by the Council on the grounds that
Morocco
is not a European country. The Commission s Opinion was completed on 18
December 1989 and endorsed by the Council on 5 February 1990. It basically
underlined
Turkey
s eligibility for membership, yet deferred the in-depth analysis of
Turkey
s application until the emergence of a more favorable environment. It also
mentioned that
Turkey
s accession was prevented equally by the EC s own situation on the eve of the
Single Market s completion which prevented the consideration of further
enlargement. It went on to underpin the need for a comprehensive cooperation
program aiming at facilitating the integration of the two sides and added that
the Customs Union should be completed in 1995 as envisaged.
Although
it did not attain its basic objective,
Turkey
s application revived Turkey-EC relations: efforts to develop relations
intensified on both sides, the Association's political and technical mechanisms
started meeting again and measures to complete the Customs Union in time were
resumed. Meanwhile, the Commission s promised cooperation package, known as the
Matutes Package , was unveiled in 1990, but could not be adopted by the Council
due to
Greece
's objection.
THE
CUSTOMS UNION
a.The
Technical Aspects of the Customs Union
Under
these circumstances,
Turkey
chose to complete the envisaged Customs Union with the Community. Talks began
in 1994 and were finalized on 6 March 1995 at the Turkey-EU Association
Council. The Association Council is the highest ranking organ of the
association and is composed of the Foreign Ministers of Turkey and the 15 EU
Member States. On that day the Association Council adopted its decision 1/95 on
the completion of the Customs Union between
Turkey
and the EU in industrial and processed agricultural goods by 31 December 1995.
At the same meeting, another Resolution on accompanying measures was adopted
and the EU made a declaration on financial cooperation with
Turkey
as part of the customs union package.
With
the entry into force of the Customs Union,
Turkey
abolished all duties and equivalent charges on imports of industrial goods from
the EU. Furthermore,
Turkey
has been harmonizing its tariffs and equivalent charges on the importation of
industrial goods from third countries with the EU s Common External Tariff and
progressively adapting itself to the EU ns commercial policy and preferential
trade arrangements with specific third countries. This process is to be
completed in 5 years.
As
a result of these measures,
Turkey
s weighted rates of protection for imports of industrial products originating
in EU and EFTA member states have fallen from 5.9% to 0%, and from 10.8% to 6%
for similar goods originating in third countries. The latter rates will further
drop to 3.5% when the EU fulfills its obligations under the WTO negotiations.
Although
basic agricultural products have been excluded from the initial package, a
preferential trade regime for these products has been adopted on 1 January
1998. Further efforts are expected to be made in the same direction. Moreover,
Turkey
is progressively adopting many aspects of the Common Agricultural Policy. On
the other hand, under the Customs Union Decision, the EU is expected to take as
much account as possible of
Turkey
s agricultural interests when developing its agricultural policy.
Turkey
s efforts towards harmonizing its legislation with that of the EU are under
way. These efforts include, in commercial matters, monitoring and safeguarding
measures on imports from both the EU and third countries, the management of
quantitative restrictions and tariff quotas and the prevention of dumped and
subsidized imports. As to competition rules, subsidies through State resources
in any form whatsoever which distort or threaten to distort competition will be
banned. A special Competition Authority has been set up for this purpose.
Assistance to promote economic development in Turkey's less developed regions
and assistance intended to promote cultural heritage conservation and which
does not adversely affect competition will however be allowed. Furthermore,
Turkey
is progressively adjusting its legislation regarding state monopolies of a
commercial nature so as to ensure that no discrimination exists in the
conditions under which goods are produced and marketed between nationals of
Turkey
and EU Member States.
Turkey
is also in the process of harmonizing its laws with EU legislation eliminating
technical barriers to trade during a transitional period which is expected to
last five years, as foreseen in the Customs Union Decision. Effective
cooperation between
Turkey
and the EU in the fields of standardization, calibration, quality,
accreditation, testing and certification will be achieved as part of this
process. Harmonization of Turkish legislation to that of the EU on
intellectual, industrial and commercial property has been realized and laws for
consumer protection are now being put in place. It is also noteworthy that both
Parties are banned from using internal taxes as indirect protection mechanisms
and from using tax rebates as export subsidies.
THE
RESOLUTION ON ACCOMPANYING MEASURES
Apart
from these rather technical provisions related to the establishment and the
proper functioning of the Customs Union, the package also comprised an
Association Council Resolution providing for the intensification of cooperation
between Turkey and the EU in such areas not covered by the Customs Union as
industrial cooperation, Trans-European networks, energy, transport,
telecommunications, agriculture, environment, science, statistics, as well as
matters relating to justice and home affairs, consumer protection, cultural
cooperation, information etc. These provisions also aimed at ensuring that the
higher degree of integration achieved between
Turkey
and the EU through the Customs Union was not limited solely to economic/trade
matters and that the Customs Union did serve its purpose under the Ankara
Agreement: constituting an important cornerstone towards
Turkey
s accession to the EU.
FINANCIAL
COOPERATION
The
third element of the Customs Union package was the statement on financial
cooperation which the EU delivered at the Association Council meeting where
Decision 1/95 was adopted. This financial cooperation, which amounted to 2.22
billion ECU over a five-year period, aimed at alleviating the burden which the
opening up of the economy to EU competition would bring to Turkish economic
operators on the one hand, and improving
Turkey
s infrastructure and reducing the economic disparities between the parties on
the other hand. Yet, the transfers envisaged within this framework have so far
failed to materialize due to the lack of political will on the part of the EU.
THE
FIRST RESULTS OF THE CUSTOMS UNION
Trade
figures after the completion of the Customs Union reveal that, in 1996, our
imports from the EU rose by 34.7% compared to 1995 and reached 22.7 billion
dollars, while our exports, amounting to 11.477 billion dollars, rose by only
3.6%. The EU preserved its place as our biggest trading partner with a 52.9%
share in our imports and 49.5% in our exports. This trend continued in 1997 and
1998.
Turkey
s exports to the EU rose from 12.2 billion dollars in 1997 to 13.4 billion
dollars in 1998 and imports from the EU increased from 24 billion dollars in
1997 to 24.8 billion dollars in
1998.
In
1997, the share of Turkish imports from EU in total imports increased further
reaching 51.1% and in 1998 52.5%, also the share of EU exports in total exports
increased from 46.6% in 1997 to 50% in 1998. According to 1997 figures,
Turkey
s share in total EU exports is 3.1% representing the significance of
Turkey
s potential as a growing market for the EU while
Turkey
s share in total EU imports is 1.8%.
Since
the EU had already abolished its tariffs for imports from
Turkey
before the Customs Union, the only trade barriers being quotas for textiles
that could not be filled by
Turkey
, the Customs Union did not bring about a significant
liberalization for our exports to the EU. Since 66% of our exports to the EU
consist of consumer goods, they are sensitive to changes in European demand.
The slow growth rate recorded in
Germany
, our biggest trading partner within the EU, impeded the
growth of our exports to that country in 1996. Our exports to the EU are
expected to rise with a return to higher growth rates in the
Union. Our industry has also adapted itself
very well to the new competitive environment, and not a single sector suffered
from important problems.
Turkey
s efforts to align itself to the EU s commercial policy towards third countries
produced the Free Trade Agreements with EFTA, Israel, Romania, the Czech and
Slovak Republics, Hungary, Slovenia, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Bulgaria.
Negotiations with
Poland
have been successfully completed and the agreement will be signed in the near
future. The Agreement with
Macedonia
has been initialed, and the negotiation processes have been launched with
Tunisia,
Morocco,
Egypt
and the Palestinian National Authority. Preparations for alignment to the EU s
GSP are also underway. Agreement has been reached with the EU to further
liberalize trade in agricultural products and a Free Trade Agreement with the
ECSC (European Coal and Steel Community) entered into force on 1 August 1996.
The Customs Union constitutes a very important step towards
Turkey
s full integration with the EU. It has also demonstrated that, despite
predictions to the contrary, the Turkish economy was able to withstand EU
competition.
THE
EUROPEAN UNION ENLARGEMENT PROCESS AND
TURKEY
Turkey
attached particular importance to the EU s current enlargement process for two
main reasons. Firstly, having played an active role in the demise of the Soviet
bloc, it was only natural for
Turkey
to aspire for inclusion in the new European architecture which it helped to
build. Second, the Association between
Turkey
and the EU aims at
Turkey
s full membership in the EU, as underlined once again with the Customs Union
whose dynamics aim at bringing about further integration between the two
Parties. This is why
Turkey
kept the question of inclusion in the EU's enlargement process on the agenda of
Turkey-EU relations. At the last Association Council of 29 April 1997, the EU
reconfirmed
Turkey
s eligibility for membership and asked the Commission to prepare
recommendations to deepen Turkey-EU relations, while claiming that the
development of this relationship depended on a number of factors relating to
Greece,
Cyprus
and human rights.
The
Commission, however, excluded
Turkey
from the enlargement process in its report entitled "Agenda 2000" which it
disclosed on 16 July 1997. While the report conceded that the Customs Union was
functioning satisfactorily and that it had demonstrated
Turkey's ability to adapt to
the EU norms in many areas, it repeated the same political and economic
arguments against
Turkey
and made no reference to
Turkey
s full membership objective. The Commission unveiled on the same day as Agenda
2000 , the Communication to enhance relations with Turkey, where it reconfirmed
Turkey s eligibility and brought a number of recommendations ranging from
liberalization of trade in services to consumer protection, that aim at taking
Turkey-EU relations beyond the Customs Union, but cited a number of political
issues as pre-conditions for moving our relations forward.
The
fact that the EU confirmed
Turkey
s eligibility for membership but excluded it from the enlargement process has
been seen as a contradiction. The Commission opted to propose measures that
would reinforce the relationship within their current framework and
complemented these measures with the idea of inviting
Turkey
to the European Conference. In the light of the EU s claims that all candidates
would be judged according to the same objective criteria and that there would
be no prejudice in their evaluation,
Turkey
found the Commission's approach unjust and discriminatory.
As
a result, even though the Commission argued that the same criteria were applied
to
Turkey
and the other candidates, they produced logically diverging conclusions.
THE
LUXEMBOURG
EUROPEAN COUNCIL AND THE FOLLOWING PERIOD
Although
the decisions of the Luxembourg Summit reflected by and large the contents of
the Commission's "Agenda 2000", the following points related to
Turkey
need to be highlighted:
·
Turkey
's eligibility was reconfirmed.
·
The EU decided to set up a strategy to prepare
Turkey
for accession and to create a special procedure to review the developments to
be made.
·
Turkey
was invited to the European Conference, but a number of unacceptable
pre-conditions were put forward.
·
The development of Turkey-EU relations was made conditional on certain
economic, political and foreign policy questions.
·
The Commission was asked to submit suitable proposals to enhance Turkey-EU
relations.
In
a statement issued the day after the Summit, the Turkish Government criticized
the EU's attitude, stated that Turkey's goal of full membership and Association
would nevertheless be maintained, but that the development of bilateral
relations depended on the EU's honoring its commitments, and that it would not
discuss with the EU issues remaining outside the contractual context of the
bilateral relations as long as the EU did not change its attitude. In line with
this statement
Turkey
did not participate in the inaugural meeting of the European Conference held in
London
on 12 March 1998.
Turkey
has thus made it clear that the way out of this difficult situation in the
bilateral relations depended on the political will to be displayed by the EU.
The
Commission published its recommendations for a "European Strategy" on 4 March
1998. Its contents were more-or-less similar to former packages which the EU
promised but failed to deliver in the past. Moreover, the ambiguity over how
this package would be financed prevented
Turkey
from being optimistic about its chances of being put into effect soon. The
Commission itself conceded that the implementation of this package would
require considerable financial resources.
The
summit meeting held in
Cardiff
on 15-16 June 1998 offered a good opportunity to rectify the unwarranted
difficult period which Turkey-EU relations entered into following the
Luxembourg Summit. Although certain positive developments were achieved with
regard to the language used for
Turkey
in the Presidency Conclusions of the
Summit, they were not sufficient for
Turkey
to modify its policy outlined after the Luxembourg Summit. An important result
of the Cardiff Summit for Turkey-EU relations was the EU leaders' endorsement
of the Commission s European Strategy for
Turkey
and the request made to the Commission to find solutions with a view to making
available the financial resources required for the implementation of the
"European Strategy".
In
the Statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs following the Cardiff
Summit, the positive developments mentioned above were noted and the EU's quest
for finding the financial resources required by the "European Strategy" was
interpreted as an indication of the EU's awareness of the need for fulfilling
its obligations towards Turkey with due emphasis on the importance of concrete
steps in this area. The Statement nevertheless underlined the contrast between
the pre-accession strategy devised for the other candidates and the "European
Strategy" for
Turkey
, which consisted simply of a set of ideas whose financing remained
uncertain. It also stressed the fact that Turkey would not accept the
subjection of its candidacy to additional political pre-conditions, that the
parameters put forward in the Government Statement of 14 December 1997 remained
valid, and that Greece's persistent obstructions would continue to have
negative effects on Turkish-Greek relations.
In
fact, the Strategy does not contain new elements. Most of the proposals made in
it reiterate commitments contained in earlier agreements which have not been
fulfilled over the years. Although four rounds of talks were completed, there
has not been sufficient progress in the implementation of the Strategy which
was proposed by the EU as a basis for the development of
Turkey
s relations with the EU. The lack of financial resources and a proper
perspective for
Turkey
's accession are, in fact, the main obstacles which impede
the proper implementation of the Strategy. Consequently, the Strategy has been
insufficient in bringing
Turkey
's relations to the desired level.
At
the Cologne European Council held on 3-4 June 1999, the initiative was taken by
the German Presidency with a view to ensuring the recognition of
Turkey
s candidate status on an equal footing with the others. Compared to the
previous Government in
Germany, the new Coalition
Government which came to power in October 1998 seemed to have taken a more
positive line regarding
Turkey
s quest for EU membership. However, the objections of some EU Member States
prevented this initiative from being realized. Consequently, the EU refrained
from taking a decision to include
Turkey
in the accession process. This constituted yet another failure of the EU to
recognize
Turkey
's candidate status clearly and unambiguously. Therefore,
in the statement made by the Deputy-Spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs on 4 June 1999, Turkey's appreciation of the initiative taken by the
German Presidency was expressed, but it was also declared that since the
discriminatory approach towards Turkey remained unchanged at the Cologne Summit
concerning the recognition of its candidate status, the decision adopted by the
Turkish Government on 14 December 1997 following the Luxembourg Summit,
pertaining to the conduct of its relations with the EU would remain valid.
The
EU Foreign Ministers, at their Gymnich-type meeting on 4 and 5 September in
Saariselka, in
Finland, had discussions on
aid to
Turkey
following the earthquake in northwestern part of
Turkey
in August 1999 and on future relations between
Turkey
and the
Union.
However,
no agreement was reached at the meeting on
Turkey
's candidate status.
On
the other hand, EU Council President, Finnish Foreign Minister Tarja Halonen
invited Turkish Foreign Minister İsmail Cem to attend a working lunch after the
General Affairs Council meeting 13 September
1999
in
Brussels. This provided an opportunity to express the Turkish views concerning
the need for reconstruction after the earthquake, as well as the current
Turkish-EU relations.
Additionally,
the two emergency humanitarian aid packages of 2 million euros each granted to
Turkey
in the week preceding the earthquake, the consensus has been reached at the
meeting for another humanitarian aid package of 30 million Euros for the
reconstruction.
It
was understood that 150 million Euros foreseen for the 3-year period may now be
released. In fact, this amount which is divided into 15 and 135 million Euros,
has already been foreseen within the framework of the "European Strategy for
Turkey
". "Unanimity rule" is required only for the 15 million Euro part,
whereas the other part of the said amount is subject to consensus.
The
European Investment Bank has decided to launch a loan of 500-600 million Euro
to help
Turkey
tackle the consequences of the earthquake. The allocation to
Turkey
of a "substantial part" of the resources of the MEDA II programme for 2000-2007
period has also been foreseen.
However,
Greece
has not lifted its veto on the 375 million Euro from budgetary resource or from
the 750 million Euro of the European Investment Bank for
Turkey
as envisaged in 1995 when the Customs Union between
Turkey
and EU was realized.
In
preparation for the European Council to be held in
Helsinki
in 10-11 December 1999, the Commission issued its second regular Report on the
progress which
Turkey
makes towards accession on 13 October
1999. In
the Composite Paper which was also presented together with the Progress Report,
the Commission took important steps by proposing that
Turkey
be considered as a candidate and backed this with concrete actions similar to
those provided for the other candidates.
Turkey
welcomed these proposals that would prepare her for full membership to the EU.
In the Statement made by the Foreign Ministry of Turkey, it was stated that the
endorsement of all these EU Commission proposals at the Helsinki European
Council, in other words,
Turkey
's recognition as an official candidate with all its
inherent modalities, would initiate a new phase in Turkey-EU relations.
After
the OSCE Summit held in İstanbul, Foreign Minister Cem gave a lunch to his EU
counterparts. At this meeting, Turkish candidacy at the European Council in
Helsinki
was discussed at length and
Turkey
was able to present the latest developments.
The
Helsinki European Council held on 10-11 December 1999 produced a breakthrough
in Turkey-EU relations. At
Helsinki,
Turkey
was officially recognized without any precondition as a candidate state on an
equal footing with the other candidate states. While recognizing
Turkey
's candidate status, the Presidency Conclusions of the
Helsinki European Council endorsed the proposals of the Commission made on 13
October 1999. Thus,
Turkey
, like other candidate states, will reap the benefits form
a pre-accession strategy to stimulate and support its reforms. This will also
include an Accession Partnership, which will be dawn up accordingly, combined
with a National Program for the adoption of the acquis.
Turkey
will participate in Community programs open to other candidate countries and
agencies.
Turkey
will be invited to the meetings between candidate states and the
Union
in the context of the accession process. A single framework for coordinating
all sources of EU financial assistance for pre-accession will also be created.
TURKEY-EU
RELATIONS
POST-HELSINKI
PHASE
The
recognition of
Turkey
as a candidate for accession at the Helsinki European Council in December 1999
ushered a new era in the relations between
Turkey
and the EU. For both parties,
Helsinki
marks a qualitatively new beginning and a process of strategic mutual
transformation.
ACCESSION
PARTNERSHIP, THE NATIONAL PROGRAM AND RECENT PROGRESS TOWARDS ACCESSION
As
foreseen in the Helsinki European Council finalizations, the EU Commission
started to prepare an Accession Partnership for
Turkey
, which was declared on March 8th, 2001. On the other
hand, the framework regulation designed to furnish the legal basis for the
Accession Partnership was adopted by the General Affairs Council on February
26th, 2001. The regulation aims at combining all EU financial assistance under
a single program. The Accession Partnership was formally approved by the
Council on February 26th, 2001. With the adoption of these two documents, an
important legal procedure concerning
Turkey
's accession strategy was finalized.
After
the approval of the Accession Partnership by the Council and the adoption of
the Framework Regulation, the Turkish Government announced its own National
Program for the Adoption of the EU acquis on March 19th, 2001. The National
Program was submitted to the EU Commission on March 26th, 2001. The National
Program has been produced with a careful appreciation of the short and medium
term priorities as spelled out in the Accession Partnership.
Following
these important developments, the 40th Turkey-EU Association Council meeting
was held in
Luxembourg
on June 26th,
2001. In
this second Association Council meeting after Helsinki, progress achieved
within the framework of Turkey's pre-accession strategy was evaluated and a
number of decisions were taken, concerning Turkey's participation in Community
programs, providing Turkey with full access to TAIEX offices and the
establishment of joint consultation mechanisms that will convene regularly in
order to discuss trade matters related to the Customs Union. The next meeting
is envisaged for 16 April 2002.
Progress
towards accession continues along the path set by the National Program. The
most pressing aim here is the opening of accession negotiations, which depends
on the fulfillment of the
Copenhagen
political criteria. Within the last year,
Turkey
took a number of important steps towards this end. The most important among
these is the major review of the Constitution. Thirty-four Articles of the
Turkish Constitution have recently been amended and many of these amendments
(22) actually coincide with the provisions of our National Program. The package
of constitutional amendments covers a wide range of issues, such as improving
human rights, strengthening the rule of law and restructuring of democratic
institutions. These form only a part of the deep political reform process that
Turkey
has initiated. They are being followed by complementary legislative and
administrative measures to ensure their implementation.
On
the economic front, in line with the National Program and in response to the
serious economic crisis that
Turkey
has been going through, numerous reform measures have been adopted. Therefore,
considerable progress has been made in meeting the priorities envisaged in our
National Program. Work on the harmonization of Turkish legislation with the
acquis also continues unabated.
During
the whole year, the EU on its side, worked to finalize its internal procedures
on
Turkey's participation to
the Community programs and the adoption of the single framework for financial
assistance to
Turkey
. The related decisions were finally adopted by the
Council on 17 December 2001. With the single framework, from now on PHARE
procedures will be applied in EU-Turkey financial cooperation. As far as
Community programs is concerned,
Turkey
will be able to participate in them as of 2002, with the completion of the
Framework Agreement.
LAEKEN
EUROPEAN COUNCIL
The
Laeken European Council of 14-15 December 2001 had important implications for
EU-Turkey relations in general and the accession process in particular.
Foremost among these is the possibility of opening accession negotiations with
Turkey
, which for the first time has been explicitly mentioned
at the highest levels.
Turkey's recent concrete
steps as regards European Security and Defense Policy, together with the recent
developments in
Cyprus
also had a positive impact on this conclusion. Another important decision taken
at Laeken is that
Turkey
will be taking part in the Convention on the future of
Europe
on an equal basis with the other candidates. This can be considered as a
progressive step, in the sense that the EU considers
Turkey
to be part of a common future. Thus, a clear membership perspective along the
lines of the other candidates has been given to
Turkey
.
CONVENTION
ON THE FUTURE OF
EUROPE
Having
established the institutional framework necessary for an enlarged EU, the Nice
European Council of December 2000 also called for a deeper and wider debate
about the future development of the EU. To this end, a declaration on the
“Future of the
Union” was annexed to the Nice Treaty and the
debate was formally launched in
2001. In
2004, an Intergovernmental Conference will be convened to finalize the debate.
In
order to structuralize this debate and prepare the groundwork for the
forthcoming IGC, a “Convention” was set up at the Ghent Informal European
Council meeting of 19 October 2001 and its rules of procedure were agreed upon.
The Convention will consist of government representatives, members of national
parliaments, members of the European Parliament, Commissioners and NGOs.
Candidate countries will also be represented in the Convention on an equal
footing with member states. In its preparatory work, the Convention will mainly
focus on four themes: the status of the Fundamental Rights Charter, the role of
national parliaments within the European architecture, sharing of
responsibilities between the
Union
and member countries, the simplification of EU's founding Treaties.
The
status of the Convention was stipulated by a specific declaration adopted at
the Laeken European Council. According to this declaration, the Convention will
hold its first meeting in 1 March 2002 and at the end of its preparatory work,
will submit a report to the Council as a recommendation. Candidate countries
will take part in the Convention on equal basis as the member states;
nevertheless they will not have the right to prevent a consensus.
In
accordance with the Laeken European Council Conclusions,
Turkey
will participate in the Convention on an equal status with the other candidate
countries and will join the Convention's work with two parliamentarians and a
government representative.
SCREENING
PROCESS
At
the Association Council meeting of April 11th, 2000, 8 sub-committees were set
up with the task of monitoring the process of analytical examination of the
acquis. The sub-committees completed their second round meetings within July
2001.
Substantial
progress has been made during these meetings. The acquis has become more
tangible and meaningful for the Turkish bureaucracy. Yet in this process, the
need for a more detailed evaluation of the acquis became apparent. Therefore,
Turkey
suggested initiating a formal screening exercise. The request was especially
pronounced during meetings with the Commission officials, before the
announcement of this year's Progress Report.
The
fact that the Progress Report for 2001 did not propose the initiation of a
screening process for
Turkey
is its most negative aspect. Initiating the screening process with
Turkey
would have been important in two aspects. Firstly, it would indeed provide a
further technical capacity of developing the integration process. Secondly,
beginning the screening process would give added impetus to the implementation
of the reform measures undertaken by the government in the political and
economic spheres.
It
is an unfortunate development that a number of EU Member States have made the
initiation of the screening process a political issue and identified it with
accession negotiations. The fact that there is a linkage between screening and
membership negotiations is not challenged. However, there are no conditions to
start a screening process, while to begin accession negotiations, political
criteria must be fulfilled. Moreover, as the experiences of other candidate
countries reveal, there are no uniform procedures for the initiation of the
screening process. As the Helsinki European Council Conclusions pointed out,
there should be no discrimination between the candidate countries and future
steps for
Turkey
should also be similar to those of the other candidates.
Nevertheless,
in the Progress Report, the Commission recommended starting a new phase in the
pre-accession strategy by involving a detailed scrutiny of
Turkey
's legislation and its timetable for alignment with the
acquis. While unsatisfactory in responding to her requests,
Turkey
will assess the Commission's proposal positively. The sub-committees will
continue to monitor the progress. We envisage that the 3rd round will complete
its work during the Spanish Presidency.
2001
REGULAR REPORT AND STRATEGY PAPER
This
year the European Commission prepared its fourth annual Progress Report for
candidate countries. As all other reports, 2001 Progress Report for
Turkey
was announced on 13 November 2001. On the same day, the Commission also
declared its Strategy Paper, introducing proposals on methods to be applied in
the future, within the framework of the enlargement process.
Progress
Reports evaluate the candidate states' progress towards membership only for
that specific year. Compared to previous ones, there is a notable difference in
this year's Report for
Turkey
. It was drawn up in a more careful manner in view of the
momentum created by the recent constitutional amendments. Those matters that
were found wanting were also enumerated in the same way.
It
is evident that some of the weaknesses pointed out in the Report concerning
fundamental rights and freedoms will disappear as our National Program comes
to life with all its aspects. In fact, this assumption finds its place in the
Report, which states that as the constitutional changes are reflected into the
secondary legislation, these weaknesses will gradually disappear.
On
the other hand, the steps taken in
Turkey
concerning improvements in the economic, social and cultural rights areas,
training carried out in the human rights field and the modernization in the
prison system were found to be positive by the EU Commission. This assessment
is constructive and an encouragement for
Turkey
's ongoing reform process carried out in these fields.
Turkey
has lately made some real progress deserving attention and it is believed that
individual cases ought not shadow these developments.