The source of the article is "The Economist"; September 18th 2004.
The topic discussed is the controversy over the Turkey joining the European Union.
The article is organized into four sequences:
- Ankara and Istanbul: 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
- Unwritten criteria
- The naysayers.
The article is made up of four parts. In the first one, the journalist recognizeds the contradictions inside Turkey which make its entry in the European Union a difficult and problematical question. In addition to this, he speaks about the evasiveness the European club uses towards the question of Turkish membership, explaining also its causes and, last but not least, the criteria Turkey had to satisfy to join the European Union,which is called Copenhagen criteria.
In the second paragraph the writer speaks about the reforms Turkey adopted from a political, economical, , social and judicial point of view, remembering, nevertheless, also the “failings”, the wants Turkey still have in the same fields.
In the third part the journalist speaks about the “unwritten criteria” meaning, therefore, not the Copenhagen criteria, but the negative factors the Europeans consider when they speak about Turkey. These are the same of the article analyzed previously(Why Europe must say yes to Turkey): Turkey’s geographical location, its size, its poverty and its Islamic religion.
In the last part of the article (“The naysayers”), the journalist explains the positions of France, Germany, the Netherlands and Austria ,who will say not to Turkey. He concludes the article with the Turks' point of view about the possibility to enter the European Union.
The problem the journalist recognizes as the principle one is coexistence in Turkey of two different realities: in addition to this he even speaks about two different countries. As a matter of fact, since the former is the reality of a developing country, the latter is that of a country in which there are still economical and social problems to face(for exempla Turkey’s huge debt, precarious protection of human rights ).
Other problems posed by the journalist are Turkey's negative factors like its location, size, poverty and religion.
The last problem is the obstacles to the accomplishment of an unanimous approvation of Turkey’s entry by the Member States.
The journalist does not find solutions to the existing problems but he rather tries to deconstruct the worries about Turkey showing their groundlessness and underlining the positive effect of a “yes” to Turkey could have on its development and in the relationships with the other Muslim countries.