Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ANKARA: Who Is Who In Political Criteria Crisis?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ANKARA: Who Is Who In Political Criteria Crisis?

    WHO IS WHO IN POLITICAL CRITERIA CRISIS?
    Selcuk Gultasli

    Zaman Online, Turkey
    May 2 2006

    Has the crisis over the political criteria which had the potential to
    sentence the negotiations to absolute failure even before the start
    of actual talks or to exaggerate a little bit, make the talks drag on
    for a century like "the Hundred Years' War" been solved or postponed?

    The European Union (EU) has once more created a sui generic solution
    enabling each and every member country to interpret the decision
    befitting its own domestic political agenda. As you probably know, it
    is defined as "constructive ambiguity" in the Brussels lexicon. That
    is, the EU avoids undertaking any responsibility whatsoever regarding
    Turkey's future membership, which means ambiguity; meanwhile, the EU,
    on the other hand, encourages Turkey to make reforms in the country,
    which is the "constructive" part.

    Many EU experts in Turkey say the crisis was solved amicably implying
    France has backtracked. It is impossible for France to take a backward
    step. It is strained optimism to think that France, which has been
    using the Armenian "genocide" in a disgusting manner in a bid to end
    Turkey's EU journey right at the very beginning and which has already
    started the electioneering, would make a U-turn.

    The French mind, which has prepared a draft law - expected to be
    brought to Parliament's floor on May 18, which will likely pass -
    stipulating penalty for the deniers of the Armenian "genocide,"
    is also keeping the political criteria issue in its stock.

    France, proud of being the first country in the world to ratify the
    "genocide" law, is now preparing for a second success (!) by being the
    first to stipulate "the penalty for deniers." Belgium that emulates
    French policies will probably pass the bill swiftly.

    However, France will not discuss what was done in Algeria, nor will
    Belgium talk about the genocidal colonization of Congo. Naturally,
    to punish the Turks is an easier way of clearing Western conscience.

    Getting back to the issue of the political criteria, France is of the
    opinion that the English word "benchmark" does not exist in French
    and that the expression, in a way, means political criteria. Any
    EU member would be able to bring up the issue because this debate
    went into the EU minutes. Anyhow, letters containing "benchmark,"
    interpreted as political criteria by the French, will be sent to
    Turkey for tough chapters.

    We know Greek Cypriots firmly supported France while Greece
    reconsidered its stance due to the gravity of the consequences. We
    should concede that Finland, Britain, and Spain acted according took
    a principled stance knowing that the issue was brought up to prevent
    Turkey from joining the EU. These three countries suggested that Turkey
    has faced enough difficulties in its EU bid and the political criteria
    issue will spark unnecessary and endless debate. It is not a surprise
    that Angela Merkel's Germany, which orchestrates the "privileged
    partnership" chorus, placed itself somewhere between Finland, Britain,
    Spain and France. What is surprising is that Italy; Turkey's so-called
    advocate in the EU did not join the three-party alliance.

    According to many diplomats in Brussels, the political criteria crisis
    has now been postponed. Some members which have not been satisfied
    with the 71 veto rights on Turkey's accession process can not even
    stand the snail's pace of talks. To summarize, it is in our best
    interest to carry on the EU process as long as it can move.
Working...
X