Summary: EU Parliament postpones vote on protocol to Ankara Agreement (28 September 2005: Strasbourg)
The Parliament postponed voting on approval of the protocol extending Turkey's association agreement with the EU to the ten new member states. MEPs feared that the Turkish declaration that the protocol does not mean any form of recognition of Cyprus would form part of the ratification process in the Turkish parliament and thus gain legal force. Nevertheless, in a political resolution voted afterwards, Parliament noted that accession negotiations with Turkey can start on 3 October as
foreseen.
At the request of the EPP-ED group, Parliament voted 311 votes in favour, 285 against and 63 abstentions to postpone the vote on Parliament's approval of the protocol extending Turkey's customs union with the EU to all its new members, including Cyprus. The vote to postpone has no legal consequences in terms of the starting date for accession negotiations. Stumbling blocks were the Turkish declaration that the signing of the protocol to the Ankara Agreement does not mean any form of recognition
of Cyprus and the Turkish refusal to admit vessels and airplanes from Cyprus. A majority of MEPs first wanted guarantees from the Turkish authorities that the declaration was not going to be part of the ratification in the Turkish parliament, fearing that it would then have legal implications.
Nevertheless, in a political resolution adopted afterwards by 356 votes in favour, 181 against and 125 abstentions, Parliament noted the Commission's and Council's view that access negotiations with Turkey can start on 3 October. But by the end of 2006, the Commission must assess if Turkey has fully implemented the protocol. If not, this could lead to halting the accession negotiations. During the negotiations, which are open-ended and will not automatically lead to Turkish EU membership,
Turkey should be kept under permanent scrutiny and pressure to ensure that it maintains "the pace of the necessary reforms".
Parliament also said it considered Turkish recognition of "the Armenian genocide ... to be a prerequisite for accession".
MEPs deplore that the Annan plan for a settlement of the Cyprus question has been rejected by the Greek Cypriot community and hopes that Turkey will maintain its constructive attitude in finding an equitable solution. Meanwhile, the Council should keep its promise and reach an agreement on the financial aid and trade package for northern Cyprus.
On other issues, MEPs voiced their concern about the criminal proceedings against Turkish author Orhan Pamuk, about article 305 of the penal code which criminalises "acts against the fundamental national interest", about the restrictions on foreign funding for associations, and about the "Law on Foundations" concerning religious communities.
Parliament wants each negotiation session at ministerial level to be preceded by an assessment of the fulfilment of the political criteria, both in theory and in practice, "thus exerting permanent pressure on the Turkish authorities to maintain the pace of the necessary reforms". Also, a full programme of clear targets, timeframe and deadlines should be fixed for the fulfilment of the political criteria. The Commission and the Council should report annually to the European Parliament and the
national parliaments on the progress made by Turkey in this respect. MEPs reiterate that the accession negotiations are an open-ended process and will not automatically lead to Turkey joining the EU, even if the objective is Turkish EU membership. Finally, Parliament underlines that the EU's capacity to absorb Turkey is an important consideration as well, and needs to be monitored by the Commission during the negotiations.
Debate on opening of accession negotiations with Turkey
Speaking on behalf of the Council, Britain's Minister for Europe, Douglas ALEXANDER said the strategic case for opening negotiations with Turkey was convincing, but it was necessary to be scrupulous in ensuring all the requirements were met before Turkey could join.
Turkey had met the two conditions laid down by the Council in December, and its declaration stating that it had not recognised the government of Cyprus had no legal effect. The negotiations would be the most rigorous yet, and Turkey would not accede imminently. The Turkey which would join would be a different Turkey, and the EU might also be different by then too. Progress so far had been encouraging, and the conditions for opening talks had been met, he said.
Enlargement Commissioner Oli REHN agreed that the formal conditions set out by the Council for opening negotiations had been met. He also stressed that the talks would be the most rigorous yet undertaken. There were good signs - such as the Turkish government's recognition that there was a Kurdish issue and that the conference on the Armenian question would finally go ahead - but also bad signs - such as the uneven implementation of freedom of expression rights. "Both Europeans and Turks
should work to build a relationship based on mutual trust, " he said, pointing out that the common goal would be accession but that by their very nature the talks were open as to the result they would achieve.
Roger KNAPMAN (IND/DEM,UK) said that he opposed political union with Turkey as much as he opposed it with France, Germany or Italy. "But what of the euro-fanatics whose ardour suddenly cools when they reach the Bosphorus? It is not hypocrisy, but fear, fear that public support for the whole EU project will collapse if Turkish membership were seriously pursued." For this reason, he said, he was happy to see the EU plough ahead with negotiations, destroying itself in the process.
Andrew DUFF (ALDE, UK) said "It is extraordinary that those who have profited so much from EU integration in terms of prosperity, security and liberal democracy should not refuse to extend these prizes to Turkey." He said the EU's absorption capacity was a real issue, with the need for a settlement of the constitution ahead of Turkish or Croatian entry. He also argued that the Cyprus issue and instability in the Balkans could not be resolved if the EU refuses membership to Turkey, and
called for a stepping up of trade relations with northern Cyprus.
Roger HELMER (NI, UK) said there were powerful reasons in favour and against Turkey's accession to the EU. The key condition, he said, should be "democratic accountability", Mr Helmer felt that Turkey's accession would "dilute the influence" of his constituents in terms of self-determination and he therefore opposed Turkish membership of the EU. Mr Helmer welcomed the proposal from Angela Merkel on privileged partnership for Turkey as it would incur fewer costs for Turkey. Mr Helmer
wished the option of privileged partnership could also be made available to the United Kingdom.
Geoffrey Van ORDEN (EPP-ED, UK) stated that "last Christmas the Council voted for Turkey". The conditions laid out at that time had been met and Turkey was therefore ready to start negotiations. Mr Van Orden warned against the separatist dissidents still at large in Turkey that risked undermining Turkish secularism and unity. He stated that Turkey should be treated in the same way as all other candidates for accession. Mr Van Orden stated that the Cyprus question should be treated
separately from the accession negotiations. However, he recalled that the people of Northern Cyprus had voted in favour of the Annan plan on reunification and that Greek Cyprus had rejected. He said the EU had done little to support Northern Cyprus. Mr Van Orden welcomed the imminent opening of negotiations and recognised that the talks would last many years.
| Top |
European Union Member States
Alerts by email
Email this page
Print this page