Turkey ended 2013 in the shadow of a massive corruption scandal that led to the resignation of four government Ministers. Consequently, the government reacted by declaring it a “conspiracy operation” carried out by external forces, and launched a large-scale purge of thousands of police, and hundreds of prosecutors and bureaucrats claiming they all were part of a “parallel state”. The rule of law and the independence of the judiciary have been violated, with the government also trying to push through a number of controversial reforms, which would undo several key reforms that have been implemented over the last few decades, violate the constitution and bring the judiciary back under the control of the executive. The situation, which is still unfolding, has had a negative impact on the Turkish economy, as well as tarnishing the country’s image. This Policy Dialogue analysed the current situation in the country, its impact, possible future scenarios, including how it may affect relations with Turkey’s allies, including the EU. According to the panellists, the EU needs to continue to engage with Turkey if it wants to bring about essential reforms.
Amanda Paul, EPC Policy Analyst and Dialogue Chairperson, said thatthe revelations of a massive corruption scandal in the heart of the Turkish state on 17 December 2013 had marked a watershed moment for the country, following a decade of EU accession negotiations which had seen the country implement a wide range of reforms. Recent legislation threatened the independence of the judiciary and appeared to “throw the rule of law out of the window”. A recent survey showed that Turkey has more journalists in jail than any other country in the world per capita. During a visit in January 2014 to Brussels, Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, had been asked by the EU to ensure the separation of powers in Turkey, but it remains to be seen whether he had really been “listening to the message”.
Selçuk Gültasli, Brussels Correspondent of the Zaman Gazetesi newspaper, recalled that what had started out as a peaceful demonstration in Istanbul’s Taksim Gezi Park in late May / early June 2013 had sparked a widespread protest throughout the country. It is striking that the government’s hard line reaction to the corruption scandal was similar to the way it had reacted to last summer’s protests. It was the AKP government that called people who were protesting for Gezi Park as traitor and the hands of international conspiracy against the government. Now, Gulen movement is called by government in the same manner as domestic collaborator of the international conspiracy and even “hashashin” that is trying to overthrow the government. In the years leading up to 2011 Turkey had been making steady progress in implementing reforms, but the pace of reform had slowed down markedly from 2011 onwards. As a matter of fact, AKP was the first to leave the table in Conciliation Committee for drafting a new constitution that was once promised by the government while MHP, BDP, and CHP stayed there for reaching a consensus. So that, CHP now becomes the motor behind EU reforms even though I criticize it for many things. This was shame, as when the Arab Spring protests got underway [from December 2010 onwards], Turkey had been held up as a democratic model for other countries in the region.
In the case of the corruption scandal, the Turkish government’s explanation is that it was part of an international conspiracy against Turkey carried out by people who do not want to see Turkey succeed as a global player. The government had subsequently removed around 200 judges and prosecutors from their posts and investigations into the alleged corruption had been halted. Good work to reform the courts in the years prior to 2011 has now, disappointingly, ground to a halt. Turkey is now in a confused state and it will be interesting to see how forthcoming local, presidential and general elections play out. The recent bill proposed by government to change the structure of High Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) created deep concerns regarding the separation of powers in Turkey. In fact, it was the Prime Minister Erdogan who worked so hard to democratize the HSYK in 2011, which was supported then by Venice Commission of the Council of Europe and European Commission. Now, the very same government is trying to change what it already changed as a response to the corruption scandal of 17th December. The major fear is that judiciary will be subordinated to executive.
The EU should accept some of the blame for the current situation in Turkey. If the accession process were more dynamic it would give Brussels more leverage over Ankara. At the moment, that leverage has almost disappeared.
Amanda Paul said she agreed with Gültasli’s comments about the role of the EU. The situation in Turkey would not be as dire as it is today if the accession process had not been delayed.
Bahadir Kaleagasi, International Co-ordinatorof the Turkish Industry and Business Association (TUSIAD), said that Turkey needs to be more “open to the world” on a number of levels, including culturally, economically and technologically. More investment in education is also needed. Turkish democracy is currently going through a down period in its evolution. Negotiations over accession to the EU had ground to a halt in recent years, but the transformational potential of the enlargement process through the carrot and stick approach is still powerful. “The EU can play a role to transform countries and be a catalyst for reforms,” he said. In the case of Turkey, this leverage has come to an end for a variety of reasons but this could be reversed. Hopefully, Turkey will emerge from the current turmoil and “resume its journey towards improved democracy”. Action is particularly needed on the Kurdish question, the rule of law, judicial independence, the separation of powers as well as other areas. Turkey’s motivation for reforms could be re-energised by Brussels if a better-engineered integration process was implemented. The Turkish business community is realistic about the future. “We say what we think is good for the future of the country,” he said. “What matters is accountability and freedoms and ever more freedoms.”
Amanda Paul agreed that the carrot and stick approach that the EU had used with Turkey had gone by the wayside. Nevertheless, Turkey remains important for the EU. The building of the Southern Gas Corridor, for example, would give Turkey real political clout and would reinforce the interdependence of Turkey and the EU – which is currently experiencing problems in all its neighbourhood areas.
Alexandra Cas Granje, Director for Montenegro, Iceland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey in DG Enlargement of the European Commission, said that implementing the EU acquis for enlargement was often a slow-moving process. The EU-Turkey relationship was in good shape after last year’s events in Istanbul’s Taksim Gezi Park and November had seen the opening of a new chapter in negotiations: chapter 22, which covers regional policy [and the co-ordination of structural instruments]. Nevertheless, “the events of Gezi Park are still strong in our memories” and these events “showed the need for the EU to be the benchmark for reform”. Turkey needs to invest more in open dialogue that is inclusive of civil society. Turkey had introduced a large number of reforms. Proper implantation is needed, though, and the EU continues to monitor developments in the country. Turkey needs to investigate the allegations of corruption impartially and address difficult issues within the rule of law as no one in a democracy is above the law. These issues include: the separation of powers, proposed changes to the police and the fact that police officers, judges and prosecutors have been removed from their posts. “There have been many reforms in Turkey in the last 10 years and we would want to have confidence in the resilience of Turkey to deal with these issues,” she said. The European Commission is engaged in an open dialogue with its Turkish counterparts and is ready to co-operate with Turkey.
Thomas Grunert, Head of Unit for Europe: Enlargement and European Economic Area, European Parliament, said that the appearance of the Turkish prime minister in the European Parliament had been very interesting and instructive. Grunert said he was fully in agreement with Cas Grange’s comments as the European Parliament shares the same policy on Turkey as the Commission. Grunert said he was in favour of Turkey’s accession to the EU “so long as all the criteria are fully respected”. But, “we are far away from this point”.
For the EU to be a global player it needs Turkey, because of Turkey’s youth, its economic dynamism and its strong army. Erdoğan’s recent appearance in the European Parliament had been a bout of shadow boxing: he had responded as expected to all criticisms made by MEPs. Among other things, Erdoğan told parliamentarians that the EU should play a greater role in global affairs. Turkey’s accession to the EU is likely to take a long time and will be difficult to achieve. A new brand of nationalism in many EU countries is likely to lengthen the process still further. Recent polls had showed popular approval for Turkey joining the EU to be below 20% in France, below 40% in Germany and below 50% in Italy.
The EU does not accept the Turkish government’s theory of a parallel state being responsible for recent unrest in the country. Erdoğan had impressed Turkish colleagues during his visit to Brussels, but he had not convinced them.
The Cyprus issue is a key element of Turkey’s EU aspirations and progress on this issue would be needed to further the accession process. UN negotiations on the Cyprus issue would be more successful with more input from the EU. Erdoğan had underlined his commitment to finding a resolution to the Cyprus issue. Greece now needs to show a similar commitment. “I am hopeful that we can this year make big progress on the Cyprus issue, then the accession process will gain momentum,” he said. This could lead, during the course of 2014, to the opening of negotiations on chapters 23 [judiciary and fundamental rights] and 24 [justice, freedom and security] and possibly the energy chapter [chapter 15]. “I think that the future of Turkey is unpredictable and I think that the future of the EU is unpredictable, but nothing is hopeless,” he said. The EU needs to acknowledge that Turkey has made attempts at progress in the right direction. It should also be acknowledged that Turkey’s accommodating 700,000 refugees as a result of the Syrian crisis was impressive. Progress on the visa road map would be good.
Numerous good things had happened and Grunert said he hopes that these positive developments “will not be counterbalanced by recent events”.
Amanda Paul said that the fact that the Cyprus issue had remained unresolved for 40 years does not bode particularly well for the future. “Hopefully we will have a solution to the Cyprus problem, but I don’t think we can take that for granted,” she said.
Dries Lesage, Professor of Political Science, University of Ghent, said he regretted the fact that he disagreed with a lot of what had been said by other panellists. Erdoğan’s rule was problematic. Judges and prosecutors in Turkey were instruments of Erdoğan’s rule. A serious cause for concern is the jailing of 60 journalists. People need to be very critical about everything that they hear and read about Turkey. Lesage said he was a harsh critic of Erdoğan, and had previously compared him in Belgian newspaper articles to Putin and Berlusconi. The fundamental problem with Turkey is not the rule of Erdoğan but that democracy and state institutions are weak and not fully developed. The country is currently a political jungle where the strongest survive. All political parties had made violations against EU norm and politicians are free to abuse their power. Extreme left wing elements in Turkey had been present at Taksim Square and had been instrumental in escalating violence. Over the course of the last few decades political parties in the country had developed their own media and this means that degrees of propaganda and disinformation appear in Turkish media. In conclusion, the wars between political parties cannot continue for ever. There is now no alternative for Turkey than to stop jailing political opponents of the regime and to start the process of reconciliation by recognising that mistakes against democracy have been made. Building blocks for the future should include elementary respect for electoral results and respect for Erdoğan’s legitimacy as a result of the landslide votes in his favour. Erdoğan should reach out to other parties and take into account the views of minorities within Turkey. Another good idea would be an amnesty for all political prisoners: even for those who have done something wrong. “Wounds have to heal because everybody has made mistakes,” he said. Turkey should also invest in democratic institutions, reform regulations on government procurement and implement a media law to break up conglomerates. The EU could be an important partner for Turkey in making these necessary reforms by providing not only a mediating role but also by sending out its own signals and listening to what Erdoğan himself has to say.
Discussion
Alexandra Cas Granje said that more progress would be made in Turkey if the EU engaged with the country, rather than disengaged. Since Erdoğan came to power in 2002 there had been marked progress in Turkey. “We have to engage with everybody,” she said.
Thomas Grunert agreed “that the solution can only be through engagement and not disengagement”. If Turkey made too many infringements, the Enlargement Commissioner Štefan Füle would no doubt support an end to accession negotiations. If the independence of the judiciary is not ensured, the EU “would have to send a message that this is too much”.
Selçuk Gültasli said that the period since 2002 had witnessed the strongest government in Turkish history and Erdoğan is the strongest prime minister in Turkish history. The Kurdish issue needs to be sorted out as soon as possible and the media needs to be freer of state control. Turkey’s constitution needs to be changed to take account of the Kurdish issue. The EU provides a good framework for dealing with the Kurdish issue. As long as Turkey presses ahead with EU reforms it will be easier to find a solution to the Kurdish issue.
Dries Lesage said that western media needs to understand Turkey better and cover issues more accurately. Coverage of Turkey tends to be very one-sided, as had been shown by misleading coverage on the issue of the use of veils.
Thomas Grunert said that accession negotiations on the public procurement chapter [chapter 5] should be opened. There is no open competition in Turkey when it comes to public procurement at the moment, but Turkey is not the only country in the world where this is the case. Erdoğan should receive credit from the EU for his courageous stand on the Kurdish issue and the fact that he had met with a representative of the Kurdish community even thought this meeting had not been popular with many in Turkey. Grunert said he hoped that the relationship between Iran and Turkey would improve, as this would allow Iran to have some influence on the situation in Syria.
