Müftüler-Baç began by tracing Turkey’s engagement with the EU, which dates back to its 1959 application for associate membership in the European Economic Community and the 1963 Ankara Agreement. These milestones provided a legal basis for Turkey’s eligibility for membership, though not a guarantee. While Turkey officially opened accession negotiations in 2005, progress has stagnated due to political and economic concerns, including opposition from France and Germany. In 2019, the European Parliament formally called for suspending negotiations, citing democratic backsliding and concerns over the rule of law. Despite these challenges, Müftüler-Baç highlighted alternative pathways for Turkey to maintain strong ties with the EU, such as adopting frameworks akin to those of Norway, Iceland, or the United Kingdom. These models allow for economic integration without full political membership. Turkey’s foreign ministry described its ties with the EU as a "strategic partnership" in 2016-2017. However, this concept remains vaguely defined and lacks institutional clarity.Müftüler-Baç emphasized that any alternative integration model could only succeed in a favorable political context. Turkey’s democratic backsliding and weakening rule of law pose significant barriers to aligning with the EU’s internal market and broader institutional frameworks. Strengthening high-level policy dialogues on shared interests—such as energy, transportation, counterterrorism, and economic cooperation—could improve relations, but greater alignment would require Turkey to rebuild its connections with individual member states.
Economically, Turkey remains deeply integrated with the EU. The 1995 Customs Union has facilitated strong trade relations, with Germany as Turkey’s largest trading partner, followed by Italy, the United Kingdom, and France. Turkey’s trade practices, particularly in industrial goods, are already closely aligned with EU standards. However, further institutional agreements are necessary for sustainable integration. While Müftüler-Baç acknowledged that Turkey’s economic institutions are well-positioned for rapid integration if accession were possible, she argued that full membership remains unlikely in the current political climate. Nonetheless, the “EU anchor effect” continues to influence Turkey’s democratization and institutional alignment.
Dalay shifted the focus to Turkey’s strategic role in European security and its evolving geopolitical relationships. He highlighted Turkey’s pivotal role in migration management, counterterrorism, and regional stability, particularly in the Eastern Mediterranean. Its strategic location and NATO membership underline its importance in European security, alongside other key actors like the United Kingdom and Ukraine. Dalay noted increasing rivalries in shared neighborhoods, such as the Eastern Mediterranean, where tensions with EU and non-EU states complicate Turkey’s position.
Turkey’s relationship with the West has been shaped less by democratization and more by geopolitical imperatives. Dalay argued that Turkey balances its ties with the EU, US, Russia, and China, leveraging its strategic position in great power competition. Despite moments of anti-Western rhetoric, Turkey remains economically and institutionally connected to the West. Its pragmatic foreign policy reflects both integration with and independence from Western institutions, allowing it to navigate competing interests effectively. Dalay also addressed the ambiguity surrounding the term “strategic partnership,” noting that it captures Turkey’s functional yet flexible relationship with the EU but lacks concrete institutional backing.
During the Q&A session, participants explored how Turkey’s domestic and geopolitical strategies affect its relationship with the EU. One question centered on Turkey’s domestic policies and their impact on EU engagement, particularly in areas like public procurement and energy agreements. Müftüler-Baç noted Turkey’s reluctance to fully align with EU frameworks, driven by domestic political concerns and a desire to retain economic flexibility. On the topic of energy diplomacy, audience members raised questions about Turkey’s refusal to sign key EU energy treaties and its stance on Iranian sanctions. Müftüler-Baç explained that Turkey prioritized diplomatic maneuverability over deeper integration in these instances. Dalay elaborated on Turkey’s geopolitical strategy, emphasizing its ability to balance competing interests between the EU, US, and China while maintaining pragmatic ties.
The seminar provided a thorough examination of Turkey-EU relations, emphasizing their historical depth, economic interdependence, geopolitical complexities, and collaborative efforts in energy transition, migration management, and counter-terrorism. While full EU membership remains unlikely, alternative integration models and strategic partnerships offer practical avenues for continued engagement. As Turkey and the EU navigate these challenges, the seminar underscored the need for innovative frameworks to sustain their partnership in an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape. Turkey’s pivotal role in European security, coupled with its economic alignment with the EU, secures its significance in shaping the region’s future. However, political uncertainties and competing interests are likely to challenge the evolution of this multifaceted relationship, steering it toward a more distinct and nuanced form.
by Yangyang Zhao (ESC Research Assistant)
No comments:
Post a Comment