On the Question of Turkey-EU Membership - Yes, No, and Everything in Between

Intro				into the public spotlight." In other words, questions
To ask the question of whether Turkey should or				of the role of religion in politics, previously
should not join the European Union is to				perceived to have been historically resolved, have
completely misunderstand the context in which				reappeared. However, as Hurd approximates
current negotiations are taking place. In other				Keyman when she says that the reasons why
words, when France adamantly and vociferously				such questions have been awoken from a
maintains that if and when Turkey will be "ready"				prolonged period of subdued dormancy, have
to join the EU, it will leave it up to its electorate				everything to do with the fact that approaches to
to decide by means of a referendum, it				religion and to religious minorities, are not "set in
completely misses the point. The primary				stone but must be constantly renegotiated."
objective of this paper is to briefly outline the				Hurd outlines the paradigms in which both
contextual backdrop onto which accession talks				European secularists and European exclusivists
have been, and continue to be made, by critically				(read: Judeo-Christian secularists) operate. The
engaging with a cross-section of the current				ethnocentric biases are beyond obvious. For
academic literature on this subject. Furthermore,				Judeo-Christians, "secularist separation of religion
the last section will offer a more pragmatic				from politics," is a unique "Western achievement
analysis of the possible directions in which				that is superior to its non-Western rivals."
Turkey-EU negotiations could be potentially taken.				Furthermore, the inability of "others," non
This will hopefully provide a coherent response to				Judeo-Christians to transcend these fixed
the reality that Turkey's political, cultural and				definitional presuppositions, disables Islamic
economical future, will not by any means, be less				societies to fully realize true secularism. Inclusive
successful or promising, without full EU				European laicists or secularists are equally biased
membership.				and ethnocentric. This line of argument maintains
Background				that Turkey only differs "from Europe solely in
There is nothing "organic" about the way in which				terms of acquired characteristics." Turkish
the modern Turkish republic came into existence.				accession to the EU will only be made possible
While it may be true that European modernity				when these "shortcomings," will be "overcome
was the product of a centuries long				through the importation of Western-style
industrialization process, a process influenced and				democracy and the secularization of politics and
fueled by revolutionary advancements in				society."
technological competence, the Turkish case is				When the introduction mentioned that France
distinctly different. With the Ottoman Empire				would completely miss the point, if it would leave
having suffered continued defeat "at the hands of				the question of whether Turkey should or should
the major European powers," modernity came to				not join the EU, to its electorate, it was not by
be seen as the best possible defensive strategy,				any means an attack on democratic principle of
offering renewed military competence and in				majoritarian politics. It was actually a criticism of
short, provide the solution to a				the lack-of democratic sensitivities in France, to
lack-of-competitiveness problem. Initially,				those cultural and religious minorities within their
modernity was not a ubiquitous and omnipresent				own borders. The shift currently taking place in
fact of life, but limited to the military.				Turkey, while framed as an erosion of secularism
It is not difficult to conceptualize why the				by some, is actually becoming more sensitive to
Ottoman Empire opted for modernity as a way				actual electoral and political realities. This is not to
of staying competitive among the other European				say that Turkey is a textbook example of how a
powers and empires, of the 18th and 19th				perfect democracy should be. To make such an
centuries. A modern army, however, also requires				argument would be a mistake. However, and as
modern institutions to "train military officers and				Hurd herself leaves open to interpretation,
to offer medical services to military men." Schools				secularism is a social construct that can be broken
were added for the purpose of training these				down, contested and reconstructed. Perhaps
officers. In addition, "capable administrators who				Hurd's most crucial contribution comes at the end
could, among other functions, develop reliable				of her article, when she makes it explicit that,
systems for drafting soldiers and collecting taxes,"				notwithstanding her main argument that Europe
soon followed, for the following reason. The				would have to revisit its own understanding of
Ottoman war-machine required a systematic				secularism (before Turkish integration into the EU
approach to the administration of public and				will be successful),
natural resources, as well as the human capital				If Europe cannot be articulated in terms of
required to make it all possible. One caveat				complex space and complex time that allow for
however, does exist. While new and modern				multiple ways of life (and not merely multiple
institutions that dealt with realizing the primary				identities) to flourish, it may be fated to be no
objective of increasing the overall effectiveness				more than the common market of an imperial
of the military were being erected, traditional				civilization, always anxious about (Muslim) exiles
institutions, such as the medreses (schools				within its gates and (Muslim) barbarians beyond.
charged with transmitting Islamic theology and				John Redmond makes it explicit that if Turkey is
religious law) were still in operation and often				to join, it must do so as a full member. Anything
stood in contradiction with their modern				less than full membership is worrisome for the
counterparts.				following reasons. First, Turkey would not have
It is at this point in the history of the Ottoman				access to the EU single market, thereby making
Empire, that a distinction can be made between a				the economic benefits of integration political (and
modern interpretation and a more traditional				for security purposes) only. Second, there would
understanding of state governance. Modernity in				be a lack of structural funds flowing from the
pre-republican Turkey benefited a select few and				European Union to Turkey. Third, the most
alienated many, unemployment being the major				important reason of all, Turkey would have "no
pathology of modernity in 19th century. Because				seat at the EU decision-making table." It is
of this exclusionary effect, the modern Ottoman				important to ask the question of why Turkey
Empire came to antagonize those individuals who				would even be considered as a second-class
entertained more traditional approaches. Those				member. The main argument for this however is
who had been brought up and schooled under				unfortunately one designed with populist politics in
modern institutions "became aware of the				mind and not something premised on a more
backwardness" of their society. With the end of				cogent line of reasoning.
the First World War and the defeat of the				To quote Redmond, Turkey is still "seen as an
Ottoman Empire, modernization reforms became				outsider to the European mainstream, condemned
possible. Justified by the inefficacy of the old				to irresolvable difference from its western
regime, the Republic People's Party (RPP), led by				neighbours on historical, religious and cultural
Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, institutionalized modernity				grounds." The general European public finds
in 1923, by establishing the Turkish republic.				Turkey to be "too big, too poor, too far away
Secular Kemalism has been a predominant feature				and too Islamic." In other words, Turkey does not
of Turkish politics, a point of constant contention				fit into the social construct that goes by the
that often found Turkey under great political				name of "Europeanness." Redmond himself points
turmoil, instability and uncertainty. Between 1923				out that this is but "a ludicrous concept," a
and 1946, Turkey operated under a single party				distraction from factual reality that speaks of the
system. The RPP was "the original tutelary single				purpose of EU integration as still being
party that was associated with the founding of				"predominantly economic." However, Turkish
the republic and the westernizing reforms of				economics and the success of organizations such
Ataturk." RPP reforms were particularly intrusive,				as MUSIAD (Independent Industrialists' and
repressive and designed by the Kemalist state				Businessmen's Association) have proved that
elites to "keep society under control and realize				Islam is compatible with market-based economies
change through state action." As already				and the democratic tendencies that follow as
mentioned, these state elites, having been brought				by-products of such markets.
up and trained under modern institutions and				Economics
schools, felt justified in being the ones to guide a				Mousseau presents his argument in a rather
backward society. The only way this was possible				straightforward way. Corruption and little respect
in their view, was to adopt a doctrine of "security				for law are both cushioned between "collective,
maximization," using as many top-down				traditional and social associations for income" and
authoritarian measures as deemed necessary.				"state-led, feudal or command economies."
Turkey held elections in 1946 and in 1950, "power				Contracts bind individuals and create "cooperation,
changed hands peacefully." Celal Bayar, a private				compromise and tolerance of different interests."
banker, became Turkey's president. This is often				Individuals have an interest in maintaining the rule
referred to as the inflection point in Turkish				of law so as to protect these agreements or
politics, as with the end of one-party rule "came a				contracts between them. When disagreements
distinction between the state elites of military				surface, the state intervenes and acts as a
leaders and bureaucrats and the political elites				dispute resolution mechanism. Limiting the role of
represented by elected officers." As it was the				the state in this sense would therefore require a
case in the past, the tension between those state				thin understanding of a liberal democracy.
elites who subscribed to secularism and nationalism				However, a duality exists between maintaining
as a way of reinforcing Turkey's interest to				state neutrality both in politics and economic
remain internationally competitive, and the political				endeavors on one hand, and the establishing of
elites who were more sensitive to electoral				electorally sensitive political parties. The rise of the
impulses, reemerged from a period of dormancy.				Turkish private sector during the 1980s and
However, more important was Turkey's shift				1990s, has replaced "Turkey's clientalist politics
from the previous paradigm of "security				with the market and rule of law." If one is to
maximization," to one of "prosperity maximization."				entertain Mousseau's argument, that market
Democracy, for the newly elected political elites in				economies and the opportunities attached to
power, was seen as the only legitimate way of				them, will eventually and naturally lead Turkey to
catering to the "wishes of the people."				adopt Western-style civil-rights and democracy,
However, the prospect of democratic				then the reality that culturally and traditionally
consolidation was cut short in 1960 when the				loaded Islamic capitalism can succeed and has
military intervened by means of a coup d'etat. In				succeeded, fails to be recognized as an alternative
1980, the military intervened once again, this time				mean to a similar end.
imposing the dissolution of all political parties. To fill				Analysis
in the newly created void, the military tried to				Part I
impose a two-party system that although was				There are a few scenarios that could unfold. The
favoured by military commanders, failed to				first is that Turkey will not end up joining the
materialize. The 1971 forced change in				European Union. However, this would offer more
government by the military, acts as a further				costs than benefits for a few reasons. One such
example of the instability of Turkish politics in the				reason is that the current public antagonism
past.				towards Turkey and Islam will only become more
Ilter Turan argues that there needs to be a				acrimonious. The dehumanization and disconnection
reassessment of the extent to which politics in				between the EU (read: the West) and Turkey
Turkey has really been a stable undertaking. While				(read: the East) cannot possibly have any positive
the current Turkish President, Ahmet Necdet				consequences. Turkey is not Europe's or the
Sezer is himself a state elite and staunch				West's enemy. Islam is not incompatible with
advocate of "strict secularism and absolute				democracy and it certainly isn't incompatible with
national sovereignty," the Turkish Prime Minister is				market-based liberal economies.
less divorced from electoral politics. Recep Tayyip				The duality that is found in the EU's acquis
Erdogan is Turkey's PM and while his party, the				communitaire is indicative of the double standards
Justice and Development Party (or AKP) are				of such institution. While the EU's Copenhagen
comfortable in power, with a majority of seats in				criteria may push turkey towards maintaining the
parliament under their control, it is doubtful				current secularist status-quo, this is simply
whether the up and coming presidential elections,				unacceptable if Turkey is also to develop an
in May of 2007, will see Erdogan succeed Sezer.				electorally sensitive democracy. Religion, and more
Turkey-EU Relations Background				importantly, Islam, has and will continue to
Turkey signed an Association Agreement with the				dominate both private and increasingly as of late,
EU in 1963. In 1987 Turkey applied for EU				public life. As it has been pointed out before,
membership but was rejected in 1987 due to a				secularism is a construct that is constantly being
lack of economic development, a political and civil				reinterpreted to keep in-sync with the dynamic
rights deficit, and a chronic unemployment rate				complexities of change. In other words, the
that was considered to destabilize EU markets. In				ethnocentric features of EU's integration process
1995, a Customs Agreement was negotiated and				is borderline imperialistic, failing to address local and
signed, followed by the EU Commission's decision				regional uniqueness and even more worryingly, as
in 1997, at the Luxembourg summit, to not grant				is the case in Turkey, inadvertently preventing
candidate status to Turkey. However, new				democracy fundamentals from taking root. It is
membership talks started once again in 1999.				precisely because of this, that Turkey's future
While Turkey was invited in 1999 by the				cannot be said to be less certain or more bleak
European Council in Helsinki to join the CEEC				as a result of not having been made a full
(Central and Eastern European Countries)				member of the European Union.
candidates, the European Commission refused to				However, if Turkey is to join the European Union,
"set up a timetable for starting accession talks."				this will need to be more than just a mechanical
Once again, the lack of political and economic				and technical process. Europe, as was the point of
reform was cited as having been the impetus				some of the authors discussed, must engage in
driving the decision to refrain from taking the				redefining for themselves the role of religion in
revolutionary step of accepting Turkey into the				society and the extent to which secularism is but
European club.				a superficial and ignorant misunderstanding of the
While Turkey reopened negations with the EU,				more bona fide realities of pragmatic politics. Sure
after significant political, civil and legal reforms had				Turkey will have access to structural funds, the
been implemented, the EU had once again made				promising EU single-market and a seat at the
its position clear: that "Turkey would have to be in				decision-making table. This unfortunately does not
full formal compliance with the Copenhagen				suffice. Market-oriented economics and the
criteria," as adopted at the EU summit in Denmark				contracts that provides the glue that holds it all
in 1993, if it is to be considered. The primary				together simply cannot function if the European
features of this Copenhagen criteria ask that				courts put in charge of arbitrating contract
Turkey "(i) be a stable democracy, respecting				disputes, cloak their bias towards EU parties in
human rights, the rule of law and the protection				rhetoric that dehumanizes Islam by maintaining the
of minorities, have (ii) a functioning market				"us" (read: the West, the good) versus "them"
economy and the capacity to cope with the				(read: the East, the bad, the enemies) paradigm.
competitive pressures and market forces within				Part II
the Union and (iii) adopt the common rules,				Seeing Islam as a problem in need of a solution is
standards and policies that make up the body of				also particularly problematic. The questions of
EU law," (also known as the acquis communitaire).				whether the European Union is engaged in an
As it currently stands, Turkey will have to wait				economic integration exercise, or in a political and
until 2014 (at the earliest), before being given the				ideological one, is arguable. There is a sense that
green light to accede.				Islam belongs to a crude, unjust and barbaric past,
Secularism Unpacked				incompatible with a more modern understanding
It could be argued that multiculturalism is no longer				of secular democracy and rationally founded and
an example of successful policy in some European				sound public policy. However, the sophisticated
countries. While violence has nonetheless been a				present, with all its modern bells and whistles, has
prominent feature of events in France, Germany				not yet been fully successful at creating
and the Netherlands, violence alone says little				electorally sensitive political parties, nor has it yet
about the underlying tensions causing it. What				been entirely successful at completely eschewing
may perhaps help bridge the gap between cause				religion from the subjective life of private
and effect is a discussion of the role of religion in				individuals. This is true for both Europe and
the public affairs of the state. Reality in Europe				Turkey.
dictates that "ambiguity and ambivalence				Although not entirely part of the scope of this
embedded in the connection between religion and				paper, racial and cultural discrimination and
secular European modernity," is actually indicative				distinctions are arguably corollaries of a wider
of the "far from settled" interconnections				accepted gamut of scientifically derived, and
between "religion, secularism and multiculturalism."				culturally based, evaluations of what is and isn't
Fuat Keyman asks us to revisit Turkey's secular				rational. In addition to this, public awareness and
past and be conscious of the challenge Islam "and				public scrutiny of social and cultural constructs
its powerful symbolic and cultural role," has				may not be sufficient to safeguard from the
constantly posed to Turkish Kemalist secularism.				potential pathologies of the imperialist nature of
Keyman is a proponent of Turkish-EU integration.				Western rationality. A further dimension is
However, this is not what matters. His analysis of				required, one that asks the electorate in both
secularism leads him to observe that while				Turkey and Europe to critically engage, debate
authoritarian secularism in Turkey was				and discuss the possible effects of a Turkey-EU
successfully institutionalized so as to maintain an				integration, or the lack thereof.
objective "social-structural process," this was only				Conclusion
half the battle. An assumption that secularism is				Turkey's democracy is moving towards becoming
an inherent corollary of modernity, and that				more electorally responsive and, contrary to the
private individuals will proportionally adopt rational				more ominous suspicions of some of its critics,
interpretations of their surroundings, the more				not relapsing into a tyrannical display of Islamic
acute modernity becomes, failed. In fact, the				authoritarianism. A wider recognition of human
opposite of this has happened. Islam in Turkey,				rights as they apply both to minorities as well as
never having fully been discarded by private				dominant cultural and religious groups, will naturally
citizens, acted as the paradigm in which				follow as a result of this. However, the key
uncertainty was made more certain. Although				catalyst providing the impetus for the
Turkish history is dominated by laicist repression				aforementioned, as argued by Mousseau, is the
of religious manifestations, both in public and				introduction of a liberal market economy and the
private life, it also speaks of the "inability to				possibility for economic opportunities that, albeit
respond to the various Islamic identity claims to				loaded with Islamic traditional values of community
recognition and cultural-group rights."				and reciprocal trust, produce beneficial results and
The tension between Turkish state elites,				allows for the further development and
committed to maintaining secularism, and political				subsequent consolidation Turkey's democracy.
elites, more sensitive to the identity claims and				Future relations between the West and East, the
cultural-group rights of their respective electorate,				European Union and Turkey, will depend on both
has recently become more apparent. The				European reevaluations of the role of religion and
European Union's hesitant response to Turkish-EU				secularist constructs, as well as on future Turkish
accession negotiations however, has actually more				advancements towards a more open society,
to do with Europe than Turkey. This irony is				sensitive to unique regional cultural minorities and
made clear by Elizabeth Hurd when she argues				majorities. However, if the EU persists on applying
that the latest strand of Turkish secularism,				its conditions for membership through a top-down
neither traditional laicism (or Kemalism, a version				approach, as if to say that only Western
of laicism), nor "Judeo-Christian" secularism,				modernity and rationality is democratic, Turkey
"threatens not only the Kemalist establishment in				will simply end up with having swapped the
Turkey but European secularists as well."				Kemalist state elites, one hegemon, for another,
Furthermore, the implications of this phenomenon				the EU technocrats. This dilemma forms a
are such that "Turkey's potential accession to the				paradox that is missing from current debates on
EU has propelled the controversial question of				Turkish-EU affairs; one that needs to be further
what it means to be both 'secular' and 'European'				studied, discussed and appreciated.

Democracy

On the Question of Turkey-EU Membership - Yes, No, and Everything in Between