The European Commission report shows that neither the European Union nor Türkiye expect much from this relationship.
On October 30th, the European Commission published its annual report assessing the candidate countries’ progress over the last year. Türkiye is still among them. At the very beginning of the report, it is stated that Türkiye is a candidate for membership. However, Türkiye is not seen as such. Every time Commission President Ursula von der Linden makes a statement on enlargement, she mentions only nine countries and Türkiye is always left out. Six of these nine countries are located in the Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Kosovo, North Macedonia and Serbia) and three are either occupied or under the influence of Russia (Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine).
The EU’s enlargement policy has also stopped. No more members have been admitted after the last accession with Croatia in 2013. Despite promises and meetings with candidates, none of them have been given even a possible date for membership. This has led to exasperation, especially in Serbia. Montenegro, the country most ready for membership, is being deliberately kept waiting. On the other hand, in the recent elections in Georgia, the anti-EU and pro-Russian party won. In Moldova’s referendum, the pro-EU party narrowly beat the opposition.
Reports from Brussels suggest that any enlargement will not occur during the new Commission’s mandate, which starts next month. For the Commission, which will serve for five years, this means no new members until 2030. This also means that the enlargement process, the EU’s most important strength of influence, will lose its appeal.
Background to the CEPS Report
In October, the Brussels-based Center for European Policy (CEPS) published a study entitled “The EU’s Road to 2030”. There is a chapter on “How the EU can and should improve its security and global competitiveness”. It argues that without a revival of the accession process, the consequences are likely to be politically destabilizing and extremely damaging, with Russia and China certainly gaining ground and European values being lost. Türkiye is not seen as a candidate, moreover, it is treated as a competitor. For example, “China and Türkiye’s recent pivots towards Africa are undermining the EU’s role”. Elsewhere, “While the EU has been swinging between economic and security concerns, China, Russia, and Türkiye were all able to swoop in and actively undermine the EU’s influence in MENA and sub-Saharan Africa, as well as challenge the EU’s narrative. And ‘losing’ MENA partnerships to antagonistic China, Russia, and Türkiye would have a spillover effect in regions where similar power plays are currently taking place, such as in sub-Saharan Africa.” The table attached to the report lists the extent to which EU members and candidates meet the criteria for fundamental rights. However, Türkiye is not on the list.
If you want to know why I have given so much space to this report, I learned that CEPS prepared it, which also covers many other areas related to the future of the EU, in line with the guidance it received from the European Commission. On another occasion, when I was in Brussels, I was informed by the authors of the text that the Commission no longer sees Türkiye as a candidate but, to put it mildly, as a competitor or rival.
Criteria in the report
Going back to the Commission’s report, there have been five high-level contacts between Türkiye and the EU in the last year. These were on Migration and Security; Agriculture; Health; Science, Research, Technology and Innovation; and Trade. Looking at their content, it is clear that these are topics that are in line with the EU’s agenda rather than matters of interest to Ankara. Only the trade issue seems to be an exception. Recently, it has been heard that there are efforts to revitalize the updating of the Customs Union. The EU had previously put forward two conditions for this: Türkiye taking steps on the Cyprus question and progress on issues such as the rule of law and freedom of expression. Perhaps it has now decided to leave these conditions for the end of the negotiations rather than the start of them. Firstly, the roadmap for updating the Customs Union set out in 2015 (agriculture, services, and public procurement) will have to be revised and new sectors added. Even if negotiations were to start, they would take years and then there is the ratification process.
The Commission’s report sets out the criteria for progress in the negotiation chapters necessary for membership. These ranged from “backsliding” to “very good progress”. There is no mention of backsliding, there is no progress in 53 chapters, limited progress in 12 chapters, some progress in 22 chapters, and good progress in 4 chapters, but not very good progress in any chapter. Probably because in some areas it is not possible to go back any further, and there is no backsliding.
When the migration crisis broke out in 2015, the EU needed Türkiye and promised Türkiye progress in accession negotiations, updating the customs union, visa exemption, increased dialogue, and financial support, but the only thing Ankara asked for was that the annual report be published after the early elections on 1 November and that negative statements be minimized. When I was a Permanent Delegate in Brussels at the time, I remember that we both changed and minimized many of the statements, which showed how the EU can bend the criteria when it is in its interest.
Reaction to the report
Moreover, as soon as the reports were published, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs would immediately make a statement. Since we learned the content of the reports beforehand, the reports have not changed substantially. This time, the Ministry responded with a one-day delay and put out the usual criticisms. It seems that there is an air of indifference to the report. The report was not mentioned much in the press either; a big change from years past. Whereas before, drafts and early versions of the report would have been featured in the newspapers and made headlines.
Can relations be revived?
In short, neither the EU nor Türkiye expect much from this relationship. The accession process has stalled and there is no effort to revive it from either side. This reflects reality, as the EU has no intention of having Türkiye a member. The future of the Customs Union is uncertain. Yet Türkiye is the EU’s fifth largest trading partner. On the most important concrete issue for our citizens, visa exemption, Ankara is not taking any steps. Recently there was news that only six criteria remained, although these have not been met since 2016. The dialogue, as mentioned above, takes place in limited areas. Even on foreign policy issues where the EU needs Türkiye, only years later, our Foreign Minister met with his EU counterparts in an informal meeting.
We are almost at the stage of saying “rest in peace” to the relationship, but at the end of the day, we need a properly functioning and sustainable relationship. Is there hope with the new Commission that will soon take office? Not likely, given the known attitude of the Commission President. In my opinion, relations with EU countries will continue on a bilateral basis and there will be some contacts on the surface. It seems that the parties are not very uncomfortable with this situation. However, the world is undergoing a rapid change and Türkiye is also trying to find its footing. The EU aims to become a global power, but there is no consensus among its members. If former President Trump wins the presidential elections in the US next week, the EU will have to evaluate its future more seriously. As long as the EU and Türkiye are neighbors, they will need each other. The time to act for common interests is long overdue.
