EU Enlargement and the Perception of the Young - Classtests [5A]
Rossetti Gaia - 3rd Classtest
In my work I am going to discuss the problems posed by the opening of the Accession negotiations with Turkey in October 2005. I am going to proceed with references from two articles from the Economist and to conclude expressing some personal opinion.
Turkey is a Parliamentary Republic and its present government is formed by the Justice and Development Party that took up office following the November 2002 general elections. But this doesn’t mean that Turkey has a government similar to the ones of the EU Member States: one of the main issues in the perspective of EU accession is the continuation of political reforms in light of the Copenhagen political criteria. Another problem is Turkey’s economy: Turkey has significantly improved the functioning of its market economy: its improvements (such as healthy growth, falling inflation and a tight fiscal policy) made its economy stronger and state interference has been reduced as well as important markets have been liberalised. Turkey is even undergoing a period of transition from an agriculture-based economy to a service oriented one. But this is not enough: imbalances remain and Turkey still has a relevant government debt. Turkey is already member of different unions: in February 1952 she became full member of the NATO, in September 1959 she applied for associate membership of the European Economic Community, in September 1963 she signed the Ankara Agreement and in November 1995 she became member of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership.
All of these aspects make Turkey very similar to the other states of Central-eastern Europe that joined the EU in 2004. But there are other aspects to consider: first of all the respect of human rights: death penalty has been practiced until some years ago and the Kurdish matter and the Cyprus’s division are still hot issues. But we don’t have to consider only the Copenhagen criteria, as it has been intelligently written in the article “the impossibility of saying no” from the Economist, there are unwritten criteria to consider. First of all the geographical problem: where does Europe territory end? If we admit Turkey, why not other states from the further east? Size is a problem for states like Germany that now have the majority of seats in the Parliament and fear the loss of power. But the aspect that scares everybody more than anything else is Islam.
In my opinion if we consider cultural aspects we forget the basis of EU: an economic community. As a matter of fact many states of the “New Europe” have different traditions and cultural roots from “Old Europe” but have anyway been admitted in the Union.
To conclude I can say that the only aspects to consider are the Copenhagen criteria.