EU Enlargement - Analysis about magazine and newspaper articles [5A]
M. Pastoricchio - from The Economist - Special Report: Turkey and the EU - Article 1: "Why Europe must say yes to Turkey
The article is taken from the The Economist's issue of 18th September 2004 and its title is Why Europe Must Say Yes To Turkey.
The topic discussed is the possible entry of Turkey into the European Union and it is organized into three sequences, each one signalled by a subheading:
  • The EU Faces A Momentous Decision
  • Risk And Reward
  • Islamophobia.
Right from the start, the layout may suggest the journalist will tackle the problem from different levels of analysis. As a matter of fact, the first sequence introduces the problem and singles out the points of discussion which are analysed in detail in the following sequence. The last one provides satisfactory conclusions to what previously examined.
In the first sequence the journalist poses the question concerning the European Union's eventual decision to accept or not the talks with Turkey. as a matter of fact Turkey has been trying to fulfil the Union’s “Copenaghen Criteria” that govern eligibility to join the EU for over two years. The problem raised is disparity between Turkey and the existing members and it is synthesized into some key kinds points and namely geographical questions (size and physical boundaries), poverty, Muslim.
The present points are analysed more in detail in the second sequence which seems to suggest that some of the previously quoted problems are marginal such as the debates on whether Turkey is entirely in Europe. It adds that some of the issues could be solved, such as Turkey’s political issue or poverty, whereas other ones are mostly eradicated in the same culture of the country, although it is impossible to say if they couldn’t have solutiona priori .
The problems that are suppposed to be solved in a near future are those concerning geography and poverty: according to the former, there is no reason to debate longer on whether Turkey is in Europe, since Brussels established in 1963 that it is sufficiently European, while concerning to the latter point the writer argues that Turkey will increase its economy, even if it needs at least ten years.
As a result of its big size Turkey’s political weight is a further problem the EU must to face because its size implies the heaviest voting of Turkey in respect to the other member will weight in Brussels and will thus dominate decision-making.
On the other hand, real problems are strictly connected to Islam: firstly it is not compatible with the secular democracy promoted by the EU, secondly Islamic fundamentalism seems to be on the rise.
In the third and last sequence the conclusions drawn keep into consideration the possible consequences of saying no to Turkey as a result of the EU leaders’ disagreement over such important matters.
The problem raised, just anticipated by the previous sequence, is whether the Muslim code is coherent or not with that of liberal, secular democracy shared by the EU members. The Union’s refusal to accept entry talks with Turkey could have a catastrophic effects on the Muslim world since it could be interpreted as a blow against all Islam, whereas a possibility should be given to Turkey and providing it joins the EU may be a way to encourage the Turks to accept liberal democracy as true.
The journalist provides a positive opinion on the subject as you can see from the very choice of the title. Looking at the cons suggested, the journalist singles out mostly cons connected to religious differences and economical difficulties, but at the same time he analyses them from a different point of view, showing its positive aspects as well. In addition, the journalist underlines also with the reference to France, that some of the problems raised exist both in Turkey and in some other EU members and can be satisfactory solved. Hence, the possibility to have a better future should be given to Turkey as well.
In my opinion, I don’t think that with joining the EU Turkey will change many aspects of its social and cultural system, such as the Turks’ possible belief in liberal democracy, however I share agree the ournalist's opinion when he says that Turkey should obtain the entry because I think it could be a great occasion for a deeper interaction between the Western world and the Middle-East, even if at the beginning Turkey is not as rich as the Member States, it may improve in time and successfully integrate into the EU.

Teacher: the work is satidsfactory!