After the elections and the formation of a new government, the Copenhagen Summit of the European Union of 12 December 2002 stood at the center of public attention.

As is generally known, the Turkish Republic that insists so much on membership of the EU was informed at the Helsinki Summit in 1999 that she was among the “candidate” countries for accession, and would be given a date for accession negotiations when she makes her “homework” as the EU likes it beforehand.

This “homework” consists in the adaptation to the Copenhagen Criteria that provide for overcoming the differences in the political structures of the EU countries.

For that the Turkish Republic had to carry out a series of changes in its Constitution and laws.

The expectation of the EU at that time was that Turkey would not be able to make these changes in her laws in harmony with the Copenhagen Criteria before the second enlargement of the EU with the 10 East European countries, the Republic of Cyprus (Southern Cyprus) and Malta is realized. In economic respect the EU had already received the “maximum of what it can get” as the “customs union” treaty with Turkey came into force on 1 January 1996 any way. As this happened, all barriers before the free flow of capital, goods and services fell for the EU countries, and Turkey had to cancel all measures protecting her economy. With this treaty, Turkey was put on an equal footing with other EU countries concerning the export of capital, goods and services. That means, however, that the dependent economy of Turkey, having a lot fewer resources for economic competition particularly in relation to the imperialist great powers in the EU, becomes even more dependent. For the imperialists, it means a huge increase in their opportunities for exploitation.

The ruling classes of Turkey understood this customs union treaty as a ticket and indispensable condition for later admission into the EU. The EU was able to move Turkey into the customs union by attracting her with the carrot of “full membership” in the EU. On January 1, 1996, as the customs union came into force, Turkey made a big fuss about it, saying “At last we are becoming Europeans”, and greeted it with pomp and circumstance.

For the EU countries, and among them particularly for Germany and France, as the customs union came into force, full membership of Turkey in the EU with the same rights as other EU members was economically not interesting any more and not wanted.

However, to openly say: “We do not want you as a member, because through the customs union we already got all we wanted anyway. Your membership brings us in the short and medium term economically only expenses”, is against the very nature of imperialism.

Pronounced so openly, even the majority of the most eager EU supporters in the bourgeoisie of Turkey would have turned away from the EU and questioned the customs union treaty.

Last but not least, the EU membership of Turkey has not only an economic, but also a political-military dimension. For imperialist great powers, that is a very important aspect in their fight for world hegemony.

The EU is an imperialist alliance, through which primarily German and French imperialisms (with German imperialism on top) want to compete with other imperialist great powers, particularly with the US imperialism. The goal of this imperialist alliance is to carve out the biggest share from the exploitation cake in the world, and, if possible, rule the whole world. Turkey is not only a big market today with a continuous and rapid growth rate, a source of raw materials and a cheap labor force market, but she also has a decisive role to play regarding the question of hegemony in the Middle East. And not only that. At the same time Turkey is a bridgehead for reaching the Turkic markets in Asia. From the point of view of domestic policy, she offers the potential of serving as a model of a “secular, democratic Islamic state” for the Islamic countries. She has a strong army. In the quest for world domination, it is not an unimportant factor to which imperialist alliance Turkey belongs. For this reason the EU does not want to pursue a policy of pushing Turkey, already one of the closest allies of US imperialism in the Middle East today, totally towards the USA and leaving Turkey to her. Since an attitude like “We will not admit you as an EU member” might open the way for such a development, the EU adopts the tactic of holding Turkey off, without refusing a membership openly, and postponing accession talks to a date as late as possible. This procedure corresponds most with the EU interests. Therefore the EU held Turkey off in 1999 with the empty promise of “We will admit you as a member, but”....

Their first goal was to postpone the question of Turkey’s membership at least until after the “second enlargement wave”. This second enlargement of the EU with former Eastern-Bloc countries situated between Russia and Germany (plus Malta and the Republic of Cyprus) is supposed to be concluded by the end of 2004. Consisting of 15 states after the first enlargement, the European Union would then grow to 25 states. At the same time as this enlargement, relations between central organs of the EU and those of the national states are to be rearranged. Some obsolete principles in the relations within Europe are to be thoroughly reformed. Even though this second enlargement will in the long term mean total conquering of Eastern Europe by Germany and France, it will nevertheless bring an additional short-term financial burden on Germany and France. (These two countries set themselves up as helpful “uncles”! who “help the poor out” financially, what they are doing in reality, however, is nothing else but investing capital, which they amassed by exploitation, in order to exploit still more in the future. Sometimes it is worth to use a sprat to catch a mackerel!) The economies of these two countries are in a recession as well. On top of all that, therefore, holding negotiations with Turkey for accession, which would require high short-term expenditure, is unacceptable to and unwanted by the EU and its bosses, Germany and France.

Therefore it was absolutely necessary for the EU to postpone the beginning of accession talks with Turkey until after the completion of this second enlargement at the earliest, if at all.

That’s why they did not name any concrete date to Turkey for beginning the negotiations in 1999, but adopted the attitude of “You make your homework first, and then we’ll see”.

As we stressed above, the expectation was that it would take a long time for Turkey to do her “homework”.

After 2004, together with the 25 member states, the situation might then be evaluated and decisions made according to the current situation. That was the meaning of the Helsinki decision for the EU.

The Turkish ruling classes are divided on the question of EU membership.

A very big section is in favor of full membership of Turkey in the EU. They expect advantages from such a membership. For this section, one thing is clear: When all the disadvantages ensuing from an EU membership already exist with the customs union, a membership can bring them only advantages. They do not approach the question from the political-ideological viewpoint of “nation-state”, the “sovereignty of the nation-state”, but from a pragmatic ideology of a merchant.

At their head stands the dependent class of big capital collaborating with imperialist states and monopolies. Interestingly enough, even the biggest America supporters among them are most passionate advocates of Turkey’s EU membership. Not only America supporters, but also their masters in America are the biggest lobbyists in the world today for Turkey’s membership. At first glance this might appear paradoxical. The EU is the most important rival of the USA in the contention for world hegemony. Why should the USA strengthen its own rival? The answer to this question lies in the appraisal of whether Turkey’s membership really strengthens the EU or not. The USA starts from the correct assumption that, regardless of whether Turkey is an EU member or not, she will maintain her close ties with the USA and continue being one of its closest allies in the Middle East. The USA reckons correctly that Turkey’s EU membership would not essentially change anything for US capital and its dominance in Turkey. It is not bad at all for the US imperialism if Turkey becomes an EU member and beside England can also stall the anti-US tendencies within the EU. Moreover, considering the short-term financial burden the membership of Turkey would place on the shoulders of the EU, it is clear why the USA stands up so passionately for Turkey’s EU membership. The big capitalists of Turkey collaborating with imperialism expect from an EU membership that hindrances are lifted for their entry into the EU markets. In return, they expect the removal of bureaucratic obstacles in Turkey, freeing real “market economy” from all braking influences. The TÜSIAD (Association of Industrialists and Businessmen in Turkey), the largest lobby of these capital groups, is in favor of EU membership! They advocate offensively: Whatever may come and whatever concessions are demanded, the future of Turkey and “our children” lies in the membership of the EU.

Not only big capital collaborating with imperialism is in favor of EU membership. Also, many medium and small capitalists reckon with advantages from an EU membership and therefore stand up for EU membership, even though this calculation will not work out. The Association of the Chambers of Commerce and Industry and Stock Exchanges (TOBB) also is an EU lobbyist.

Under the influence of the EU lobbyists’ propaganda, also the rich and middle farmers, dreaming of the “agricultural subsidies”, stand up for EU accession.

And not only the exploiting classes and their organizations are in favor of EU accession. Also a big majority of the mass organizations of workers and toilers in Turkey expect and see a guarantee in the EU for the development of democratic rights and rights of workers and toilers. That’s why they also stand up for EU accession.

On the other hand, the section that can be designated as “bureaucratic bourgeoisie”, i.e., the bureaucrats who hold leading positions in the civil service, and the army command, which is a very big employer/capitalist in Turkey, disfavor joining the EU. Knowing fully well that EU membership would mean the delegation of an important part of the sovereignty rights onto Brussels, therefore the end of “sovereignty” of the “nation-state”, and thus their own power, they take advantage of all opportunities to put the brake on every real step towards EU membership.

Besides that, also a section of the middle bourgeoisie, of the petty bourgeoisie and an important section of the traders are against EU membership, since they recognize that EU membership would mean monopolization and their end.

The proponents of EU accession favor a fundamental modification in the republic, in the Kemalist state set up in 1923. They stand up for founding a “Second Republic”, a “Democratic Republic” etc., asserting the necessity of EU membership for this “fundamental modification”.

What are the characteristic features of this state they want to “modify fundamentally”?

– One of the most characteristic features of this state is the existence of a military dictatorship under the label of democracy. The military are the real rulers in this state. The military set themselves the task of “caring for and protecting Ataturk’s republic”. And they carry out this task, when necessary, by overt or sometimes covert, as one former Chief of Staff put it: “post-modern”, coups d’état. Today the army as an institution on its own is one of the biggest capital groups and at the same time the biggest employer in Turkey!

The protagonists of the Second Republic are of the opinion that the time has come for “civilian” rule now. They think the army should not decide on politics, on the contrary, elected politicians should carry out these tasks.

– Another characteristic feature of this state consists in the state itself having a direct share in the economy. A great deal of the economy is public sector.

The protagonists of the Second Republic are of the opinion that the state should get its hands out of the economy.

– The bourgeois-democratic rights in this state are very restricted. This state is extremely rigid and despotic. Only in words has right supreme priority. Force is the main means in the exercise of power.

In this connection the protagonists of the Second Republic demand “democracy after the fashion of European standards”. They see EU membership as the way to achieve it.

– This state is not only dominated by the military, but also by a deep-rooted state bureaucracy appointed from above. This bureaucracy stands above the elected representatives.

The protagonists of the Second Republic want that, just as in the EU countries, the elected representatives stand above the state bureaucracy.

– This state embodies an official ideology anchored in its Constitution. The state doctrine designated as “Ataturkism” is Turkish chauvinism. The principle of the “indivisibility of the state, country and nation” is an unalterable foundation of this state. In this multinational state, attempts are made to bring peoples of various nationalities under the “Turkish” identity. For all those who accept this identity, same bourgeois rights exist on paper. To those who do not accept this identity and lay claim to another national identity, this state promises only death.

– In the name of laicism, Islam is linked up with an official State interpretation, a State religion. The spheres of religion and state are not separated from each other. Religion is not a private affair of individuals in which the state does not interfere. No, the state controls the religion. Religious currents outside the official state religion are crushed in the name of the secular principle.

– This state practices an unimaginable personality cult. From the nursery school onwards the state educates children and adolescents in the spirit of cult of the personality of Ataturk glorified as “The Savior”. There is not even one official institution without a picture of him hanging or his bust being displayed.

The spokesmen of the Second Republic want to break with this official ideology enslaving the individual in all questions and abolishing his personal freedom. They proceed from the assumption that EU membership and introduction of EU laws will put an end to this state ideology.

On the other hand, the firmly rooted Kemalist state bureaucracy literally holding power in its hands wants to maintain the present status quo.

To avoid any misunderstanding, it is important to know:

Neither the proponents of the Second Republic advocating modification nor the defenders of the Kemalist republic have a fundamental contradiction with the system of exploitation, with capitalism and imperialism.

On the contrary, both defend the rule of capital, exploitation and imperialism.

That the representatives of the “Second Republic” are pro-imperialist and have no objection to the system of exploitation, is already self-evident from the fact that they expect everything good from and through the imperialist EU alliance.

The fact that Kemalists also speak out here and there against imperialism in words does not make them anti-imperialist. That is nothing but demagogy for the purpose of winning the peoples’ support in the power struggle in the country, and standing on a better negotiation position with the imperialists.

I.e., in the ideological-political positioning among the ruling classes, while the EU defenders stand for modification, transformation, and reforms, their opponents are conservatives seeking to maintain the status quo.

Interestingly, legal organizations of the political Islam in Turkey are also in favor of EU accession (although the Islamists usually consider the EU a “Christian club”). That is unusual, indeed, but nevertheless understandable. Legal organizations of the political Islam are persecuted by the Kemalist state under the banner of laicism. Their parties are forbidden, bans on occupation with politics are imposed on their leaders etc. For the power struggle of the legal parties of the political Islam, forcing the Kemalist state into retreat is an urgent necessity. They need the bourgeois democracy to come to power through democratic ways and means. In this respect, the EU membership is indispensable. Conversely, a political Islam that lives in peace with the West and accepts to operate within “democratic” rules has a model function for all Islamic countries. Kemalist Turkey has no attraction for these countries, for their Muslim populations. Hence the EU may also prefer a political Islam in the shape of Tayyip Erdoğan to a Kemalist Turkey.

Another interesting point is that also the movement of the Kurdish nation is in favor of EU membership. Here, too, it is an unusual, but understandable situation. In their program and propaganda today, the Kurdish nationalists represent a position contenting themselves with some national minority rights within a “unified Turkey”. They want to put their forces at the disposal of the state in return for some crumbs of national rights. But vindictive as it is, the state is not ready to take this step today. This problem can be solved through recognition of the EU criteria and at best on condition of the EU membership.

Not only are they interesting EU supporters. There are also groupings that stand up for EU membership in the name of freedom, democracy, and socialism. Their horizon of freedom and democracy is limited to the reactionary democracy and fake freedom of imperialism. Those of them that contend to be socialist, represent that there must first be democracy before socialism, and for democracy the EU membership were absolutely necessary. They are at best Buddhas who believe they can achieve socialism by running after the lesser evil each time.

For the working class and toilers it is neither correct to hang themselves at the tail of those standing up for EU accession in the hope of achieving “Democracy”, “Freedom” and “Human rights” through it, nor at the tail of those defending the present Turkish Republic against the EU.

Workers and toilers must intensify their own independent class struggle against any power of the dependent ruling classes in Turkey, against every form of imperialism, against exploitation, and fight for their own State power. That is the only correct and real way to win and extend the democratic rights in Turkey.

Immediately after the elections, Erdoğan, chief of the victorious AKP who was placed with a ban on political activity, declared that accession to the EU is their “highest priority objective”. Baykal, who talks in the parliament as the mouthpiece of the “only” opposition party, did not fall behind Erdoğan, either. The President, the organizations of the bourgeoisie, the media also joined in this chorus. And the bourgeoisie set out from all four sides into the European Union.

Turkey demanded from the Copenhagen Summit of 12 December 2002 to be given a date for beginning the accession negotiations. And they wanted this date to be absolutely before May 2004. We explained the reasons for that above. If the date for accession negotiations would not lie before May 2004, they would then be forced to hold negotiations for a date, not, as up to now, with 15, but 25 states.

There was also logic and some reasons for Turkey’s demand for a date:

Against the expectations of the European Union, Turkey had gotten her “homework” of bringing Turkish law into agreement with the “Copenhagen Criteria” passed through the parliament at high speed in August 2002. For the regulation of these laws and the decrees for their realization, implementation laws must yet be passed, but that could be solved also after beginning the accession negotiations. After all, compared with the ten countries holding accession negotiations, and are at the stage of admission, particularly with Romania and Bulgaria, the law situation in Turkey was not any different.

Problems like the “Cyprus question” and territorial disputes with Greece in the Aegean could be solved more easily between two member states of the EU within the EU framework etc.

For the AKP that won the elections and came to power alone, the election was a good opportunity to lay stress on the topic of EU accession and stage a broad campaign to this end.

In their power struggle in Turkey against the firmly rooted state bureaucracy, leaning themselves on the Copenhagen Criteria and putting on the air of speaker of all those who expect democracy from Europe (various inquiries showed that 70% of the people support that), they were able to secure the support of these sectors. Furthermore, they were able to show to Western imperialists that distrusted the coming into power of political Islamists what intelligent, moderate, Islamic Western secular democrats they were “serving as a model”.

As a matter of fact, heavy diplomatic traffic began.

Turkey maintained that with her “sound arguments” she would persuade the EU into giving a date for accession negotiations. The USA intervened directly also to persuade. The EU was divided into proponents and opponents of giving a date for accession negotiations.

The proponents knew that naming a date for accession negotiations would only be naming a date for beginning the negotiations, and the negotiations themselves would still last at least 10 years. In this respect it would not have been too great a price to name a date. In return, they hoped to raise new demands on Turkey.

One section of the accession opponents demanded that, since membership of Turkey would not come into consideration in any case, the policy of procrastination in this question was not correct and the negative answer should be told openly. The majority of the opponents were of the opinion that it was too early to give a date today. Some EU members like Chirac, for example, the French president, suddenly discovered before the Copenhagen Summit that the biggest part of Turkey does not lie in Europe, Turkey’s capital, Ankara, does not belong to Europe geographically, and therefore Turkey was not European, either. Others like Austria, for example, found it incompatible to affiliate Turkey in the EU, “because she belongs to another culture” etc. That was the anti-lobbyists against the lobbyists in favor of accession negotiations.

At the end, representatives of the two chief countries, Schroeder and Chirac, found a so-called solution of the “golden mean” before the Summit: No fixed date will be given to Turkey at the Copenhagen Summit for beginning accession negotiations. At the end of 2004 Turkey’s situation will be assessed on the basis of “progress reports”, and if the appraisal is positive, if it is established that the criteria were translated into action, then a date can be given to begin the negotiations.

In that case the negotiations might begin in the second half of 2005.

As this stand was made public before the Summit began, the mobilization of Turkish emissaries for the EU was intensified. Gül and Erdoğan “warned” that they would not accept any date attached to conditions.

However, neither their “This will end up bad”, nor Bush’s telephone calls were taken seriously. What counts, is what the bosses of the EU say.

According to this decision, assessed by the majority of the bourgeois media as “nonetheless positive”, Turkey’s situation will be reassessed on the basis of the progress report to be submitted in September/October 2004. Depending on which result they are going to come to, accession negotiations will begin or not. If accession negotiations are to begin, a concrete date will then be fixed.

The result is therefore: At the Copenhagen Summit not only no date was named for accession negotiations, but no date was named for the announcement of such a date, either.

This decision provides for a conditional date to name a date to begin the negotiations.

Furthermore the accession of the Republic of Cyprus (Southern Cyprus) was approved. It was decided that as long as there is a Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and Turkey is present in Northern Cyprus, only the southern part of Cyprus will be admitted to the EU.

For Northern Cyprus the option was kept open of being able to join the EU in 2004 together with Southern Cyprus when a result is reached within the framework of the Annan solution plan till the end of 2003.

That plunges the Turkish ruling classes as well as those holding power in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus into a dilemma.

The EU proponents among the Turkish ruling classes are unambiguously in favor of solving the Cyprus question by recognizing the Annan plan.

On the other hand, such a plan is unacceptable to the prevailing Kemalist bureaucracy.

Also Denktas and his clique in Northern Cyprus let it be known that they are in favor of freezing the Cyprus question until Turkey joins the EU.

If this view is put into practice, and Southern Cyprus becomes EU member in 2004, this can then result in the local population moving from Northern to Southern Cyprus.

Well, what are the prospects for an EU membership of Turkey after 2004?

The EU will try to dodge the issue of giving a date in 2004 also, and seek excuses to postpone it at least until after Romania and Bulgaria join the EU (i.e. 2007, at the earliest). If the Cyprus question is not solved till then in line with the Annan proposals, this will serve as a good excuse. In mid 2004 the Aegean question will be dealt with at the International Court of Justice in The Hague. It is already certain that the decision will fall against the Turkish Republic. That can also serve as an excuse. However, even if no excuse at all is found, and the Turkish Republic meets all demands to the letter, and accession negotiations were begun, say, in the second half of 2005, that would still not mean Turkey will become an EU member. That would be nothing but a letter of intent only. In reality, it is impossible for the EU to give Turkey full membership, granting her the same rights as all other member states.

That would mean Turkey would have

– The most seats in the European Parliament after Germany,

– The biggest weight in all decision-making organs of Europe after Germany,

– would in Europe protect and defend not only her own interests, but also those of the USA with which Turkey is in close cooperation;

– would be entitled, according to the present stand and calculations of the European Community Fund, to expect 8 billion Euro aid per year;

– would in terms of numbers have the largest army in Europe and in terms of weaponry a stronger army than all EU states put together, with the exception of England, France, Germany and Italy;

– It would become a country whose entire population could freely travel to all European countries.

This is inconceivable for the EU.

From the viewpoint of the EU, membership of Turkey is conceivable, if at all, at best under special conditions that limit the right of her population to free migration, for example. Schroeder said that openly on 13 December. That is the state of things.

Workers and toilers must know the state of things. They must watch out not to get off the road during the tempest that is aroused around the EU affiliation, not cling to the tail of one or other part of the ruling classes that quarrel in this question among each other, they must be conscious of the fact that democracy and freedom can be won only through class struggle.

14 December 2002