TITLE:
The impossibility of saying no
SOURCE:
The Economist, important weekly newspaper deals with international politics, business news and opinion, on 18th to the 24th September 2004
TOPIC DISCUSSED:
Turkey wants to join the European Union but many European governments dislike this idea even if they have accepted to open membership talks.
CONTENT:
This article can be considered an in-depth supplement of the previous article. Actually it deals with the same issue. This article is organized into four sections:
-
Many European governments dislike the idea of Turkey joining the European Union-but they are still likely to agree in December to open membership talks
-
Good marks and bad ones
-
Unwritten criteria
-
The naysayers
The first paragraph talks about the differences inside Turkey: as a matter of fact, on one side she has a flourishing democracy, a lively free press, a stable government and religious and young and growing population but on the other side she has an economy which has been defined "a basket-case for decades", her banks are ailing and she is one of the biggest debtors of IMF, her people is most of all Muslim and her shameful respect for human rights is famous. The journalist also says that many European commissions do not want her to enter EU; even if Turkish politicians insisted on the country's "European vocation", there are some recent events which have conditioned the opening of entry talks like Turkish war against Kurdish PKK terrorists but also several human-rights violations.
The second paragraph talks about the reforms which Turkey has applied on political, judicial, economical and social field. It underlines also some negative situations which have marked Turkey's contemporary history. So there is a discussion between positive elements ( which can help Turkey to enter in EU) and negative ones ( which hamper her final purpose).
In the third paragraph , the journalist talks about the “unwritten criteria”: these are not the Copenhagen criteria, the official criteria thanks to which EU can turn down some countries requests of entry, but those elements that European people considered when they talks about Turkey, that is size, Turkey’s will allow Turkey to overtake Germany as the largest country in Europe and as the biggest member in the voting in Brussels; poor economy, some countries are scared of Turks' migrations towards the west; geographical position, some people maintain that Turkey is not in Europe; and especially religion because they are scared of a so devoted Muslim country like her and few people considered EU a Christian club.
In the last paragraph, the journalist lists those countries which are in opposition to Turkey's membership (France, Germany, the Nederland and Austria) but he also mentioned Greece which is now a strong supporter of "Turkey's EU goal" after the earthquakes in Turkey and Greece in 1999. He concludes the article with the Turks' point of view about the possibility to enter the European Union. The journalist also highlights that the most relevant reassurance to naysayers is that Turkish negotiation will continue for many years and that there is a possibility, even if quite distant, of a referendum on Turkish membership.
PROBLEMS RAISED AND THEIR SOLUTIONS:
The biggest problem is the opposition of some of the Member States to Turkey's entry into EU but also those elements considered penalizing for the country like size, poor economy, geographical position and religion. The journalist also goes in depth into the internal differences of Turkey, for example she has a flourishing democracy but she is one of the biggest debtors of IMF and so on.
In spite of all the elements discussed in detail so far, the journalist does not provide any solution to the problem but he limits himself to explain them minutely and simply.
PERSONAL COMMENT:
I think that the journalist organized and write his article in a simple way: it is not complicated to understand and it is exhaustive in its topic even if I there were a lot of thing to be said about it. It is difficult to take a position in this debate because the journalist has personalised the article and, reading carefully, the reader can take notice of the writer's opinion: he is in favour of Turkey's membership in the European Union.