Speech by Mr Olli Rehn
Member of the European Commission, responsible for Enlargement

"EU and Turkey on the treshold of a new phase"

European Parliament Plenary Session, Turkey debate
Strasbourg, 13 December 2004

It is a great pleasure to be here today for your debate on Turkey as the next meeting of the European Council approaches. In a few days time the Council will decide whether to open accession negotiations with Turkey. Few decisions in the EU context have attracted so much attention and speculation in recent months and years. Turkey has been the subject of an intense and sometimes passionate debate in the media and public opinion. It is re-assuring that wide-ranging analysis and debate are carried out in all our European institutions.

I have been following the work of the Parliament on Turkey very closely and would like to commend the members of this House for your commitment in this respect. In particular I would like to thank the rapporteur Mr Eurlings for his efforts and for the balanced report he has prepared in co-operation with the different political groups.

It is in the interest not only of the European Parliament but of the European Union as a whole to achieve a large consensus on such an important issue. In my view the revised version of the report, incorporating several compromise amendments, demonstrates the will of the House to obtain such a consensus. I would also conclude that, in so doing, the report in most respects follows the line of the Commission's Recommendation. Of course I welcome very much this support.

Turkey is making progress in bringing into force the outstanding legislation identified by the Commission as needed in order to meet sufficiently the political criteria. We trust that the European Council will endorse our recommendation and take the historic step of announcing the opening of accession negotiations with Turkey, as long as this conditionality is met.

The Commission will actively support the next phase of EU-Turkey relations. We have proposed a strategy articulated around three pillars.

The first pillar consists of continued support for the reform process in Turkey. Political reforms must be broadened and their implementation must be consolidated, so that they become irreversible. Many of the issues mentioned in the report presented by Mr Eurlings will require further attention. I refer in particular the further consolidation of cultural rights, improving the situation of the religious communities, strengthening the fight against torture and ensuring full civilian control on the military.

Since 6 October there have been further encouraging developments. With the appointment of a civilian secretary general, the National Security Council is being transformed into an advisory body, and its activities are becoming more transparent. A large number of people previously sentenced for non violent expression of opinion have been set free. The new law on associations and the code of criminal procedure have been adopted. Of the outstanding measures identified by the Commission in October, only the law on execution of sentences remains to be adopted, and this is in the pipeline.

I can assure the Members of this House that the Commission remains committed to monitoring Turkey's compliance with the Copenhagen political criteria. These criteria, the fundamental values on which the European Union is based, are not subject to negotiation.

The second pillar relates to the framework for accession negotiations with Turkey, taking into account the specific characteristics of the country. This does not mean discrimination. Turkey's accession would be different from previous enlargements because of the combined impact of Turkey's population, size, geographical location, economic, security and military potential. For example, I would remind you that Turkey's population is close to the size of the ten new Member States as a whole.

Furthermore, the European Union can benefit from lessons learnt during the previous enlargement. Although this was a very successful process, we intend to propose some fine tuning to the negotiating framework, also for other potential new members. In line with equivalent provisions in the EU Treaty and the Constitution, we would also propose for future negotiations a suspension mechanism in case of serious and persistent breach of democratic principles.

The prospect of Turkey's EU accession raises many legitimate questions. This subject gives rise to differing views, and the open public debate which has developed, both in the European Union and in Turkey, reflects a healthy democratic environment. For some citizens, it generates fears and concerns. It is therefore our duty to address these concerns among public opinion by facilitating a dialogue with the different partners in civil society. The third pillar of our approach to Turkey will be geared towards strengthening the political and cultural dialogue between EU and Turkish citizens. It is clear that your Parliament can play an important role in pursuing this project.

I would like to turn briefly to Cyprus, where I largely share the language in your report. The European Council in June welcomed the positive contribution of the Turkish government to the efforts of the UN Secretary General to achieve a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem. Efforts to find a settlement must be renewed. It is clear that accession negotiations would be held in the framework of an inter-governmental conference comprising 25 Member States. We expect Turkey to sign a protocol extending the association agreement to all 25 Member States.

EU-Turkey relations have a long history. Turkey's membership perspective dates back to the Association Agreement in 1963. In spite of the ups and downs witnessed in the last 40 years, Turkey's vocation to join the European Union has been reaffirmed many times by the European Council, especially since Helsinki in 1999. The steady position adopted by the European Council over the years is that "Turkey is a candidate country destined to join the Union on the basis of the same criteria as applied to other candidate states".

Turkey is at present going through a process of radical change, including a rapid evolution of mentalities. The prospect of accession has proved to be a catalyst for Turkey to embark upon far-reaching constitutional and legislative reforms. Political reforms have introduced changes ranging from improved civil liberties and human rights to enhanced civilian control of the military. Civil society has grown stronger.

I am convinced that the negotiation process will help to guide further reforms in Turkey. By its very nature, this is an open-ended process whose outcome cannot be guaranteed beforehand. Of course the ultimate objective of accession negotiations is accession. The idea of an alternative to accession is not on our agenda.

In its study done at a request of this Parliament, the Commission presented issues raised by Turkey's EU membership perspective. Accession of Turkey to the Union would be challenging both for the EU and Turkey. If well managed, it would offer important opportunities for both. The necessary preparations for accession would last well into the next decade. The EU will evolve over this period, and Turkey should change even more radically. The acquis will develop further and respond to the needs of an EU of 27 or more. Its development may also anticipate the challenges and opportunities of Turkey's accession. In any event, as set out in our Recommendation, this accession needs to be thoroughly prepared in order to allow for a smooth integration which enhances the achievements of fifty years of European integration.

This is our shared goal and I trust that we will succeed.