Turkey to the EU’s Rescue
Jean-Pierre Lehmann
LAUSANNE – The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference was an unmitigated disaster for the European Union. Instead of the EU claiming center stage, as its leaders assumed it would, the key actors were the United States, Brazil, South Africa, India, and China. Indeed, when the accord was reached, the EU was not even in the room. Copenhagen exposed the demise of Europe not only as a global power, but even as a global arbiter.
So what is the EU left with? As its “hard power” ebbs, its “soft power,” as illustrated by the Copenhagen summit, seems to be very weak. This in part arises from a failure to provide the EU with political power.
The Lisbon Treaty was a compromise constitutional arrangement that would nevertheless give the EU greater weight and authority precisely for occasions such as the Copenhagen summit, when global issues are addressed. Though multiple European actors on the world stage were more than justified in the old days, this is no longer the case. With China, India, the US, Indonesia, Brazil, and other major global players speaking with one voice, Europe could no longer afford a cacophony of voices.
But in Copenhagen, the structure established by the Lisbon Treaty failed.
Beyond the failure in Copenhagen, the EU has several other problems. It tends to be perceived globally as supercilious, petulant, and prim. Its know-it-all attitude grates almost everywhere. With only 7% of the world’s population (and rapidly dwindling) and composed mainly of post-industrial low-growth economies, the EU is increasingly seen as marginal. Europeans do not realize how little interest in “European affairs” there is in Seoul, Sydney, São Paolo, or San Francisco. There is a growing general global consensus that Europe is a pompous old has-been.
There are many causes for the decline of the EU’s global position and prestige, one of which has been the way in which the Union has evolved as an aloof and bureaucratic citadel. This is unfortunate, because, despite its problems, the EU does have much to offer. But there seems little prospect for a European revival. The EU will continue to decline and become increasingly marginalized as it fails to find the spirit or the structure to adjust to the profound transformations and challenges of the twenty-first century.
There is one thing, however, that could revive the EU, give it much enhanced global respectability, and make it an “interesting” place, as well as ensure a return to the international limelight: Turkey’s admission as a full member.
The debate about whether Turkey is European is absurd. It is impossible to airbrush Turkey out of European history. Apart from being an integral part of Europe, membership for Turkey, with its young and dynamic population, would provide a great fillip for Europe’s aging demographic profile.
In a highly complex and diverse world, the EU stands out for its homogeneity. While the EU flatters itself on diversity, it is in fact one of the least diverse regions of the world. There is more ethnic diversity in, say, Malaysia than in the entire EU. ASEAN as a whole, with a population of 580 million, is not significantly bigger than the EU (with 500 million), yet it encompasses an infinitely greater degree of ethnic, linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity.
With Turkey as a member, the EU would gain legitimacy as a more “normal” world region. By admitting Turkey, with the world’s fifth-largest Muslim population (after Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India), the EU would be in a position to establish close ties with the world’s 1.8 billion Muslims, and could become a credible voice on reform within the Islamic world. Turkish membership in the Union would also greatly ease the assimilation of the EU’s own Muslim minorities.
EU lethargy and growing irrelevance in global public affairs owes much to Eurocentric political atavism. One potential benefit of the Copenhagen debacle could be that it forces the Union to wake up to the new world of the twenty-first century.
An EU with Turkey as a member would be far better situated to meet today’s challenges than an EU without Turkey. But, unfortunately, Turkey, like much of the rest of the world, is rather turned off by the EU. Indeed, now it is the Union that will need to seduce the Turkish people, rather than the other way around.
That seduction should begin this year, with an agenda that sets the process and timeframe for accession, to be followed by an EU-Turkey Treaty that confirms the country’s accession by 2020.
Jean-Pierre Lehmann is Professor of International Political Economy and Founding Director of the Evian Group at IMD Business School.
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010.
www.project-syndicate.org
For a podcast of this commentary in English, please use this link: http://media.blubrry.com/ps/media.libsyn.com/media/ps/lehmann8.mp3
You might also like to read more from Jean-Pierre Lehmann or return to our home page.
|
|
ACEMAXXANALYTICS 11:43 05 Feb 10
interesting thouhgts...
TheGus 01:21 25 Feb 10
What a brilliant idea! Let's admit Turkey to the EU! I mean there's obviously no problem at all in sharing a border with Syria, Iran and Iraq and hey, Turkey might have a bit of a problem with an out of control military and rampant human rights abuses, but what does that matter? You know what, maybe we could also invite Morroco, Tunisia and Algeria to join at the same time? After all, they're kinda close to Europe as well. The EU may be struggling to cope with meltdowns in Greece and elsewhere, but obviously the solution to those problems is to invite a poor country of 72million people to join us. That will sort things out!Perhaps they could adopt the Euro immediately as well?
Jean-Pierre, I salute you. You are obviously a man of stunning insight.
ACEMAXXANALYTICS 05:26 26 Feb 10
The EU is the biggest peace process since the end of World War II.
Turkey has expressed a willingness of persuasion to participate.
The Turkish membership in the OECD (1948) and the Council of Europe (1949) and the accession of NATO (1952) is due to this attitude.
The EU is a project of future.
For Turkey there is therefore, in my opinion, no other project.
By the way Europe is not an addition of the old battles and borders.
Anyone who thinks into categories such as borders has not understood the idea of EU.
Alberta1978 11:27 13 Apr 10
I tend to agree with TheGus. I live in a country (Romania) that should NEVER have become a member of the EU... (sad, but true).
Nico 02:07 04 Feb 10
I do not see the connection between Turkey's ascension into the EU and the 'legitimacy' of the EU on the international stage. There is a contradiction in this article, on the one hand you state that "Europeans do not realize how little interest in “European affairs” there is in Seoul, Sydney, São Paolo, or San Francisco." So why would adding Turkey, which is not exactly on many people's radar screens, going to change that? I don't agree with you that the EU is a "pompous old has-been", because we know that to many on the left the EU represents a model to emulate, as a liberal-alternative to the Anglo-American notion of liberalism and capitalism. If anything the has-been is increasingly the United States, where the crisis started and where policy makers in "Seoul, Sydney, São Paolo" are looking to new roads to development away from the Anglo-American consensus.
www.perspectivos.blogspot.com