Turkey and Europe : Looking to the Future from a Historical Perspective

Ismail Cem
Turkish Foreign Minister

    Turkish history has been moulded through an ongoing process of interaction with the West and with the East. As a country and people, we have been situated at the crossroads of civilisations, religions and trade. Therefore, the external environment, external dynamics, and the interaction with Europe, confrontational and harmonious at times, were among the decisive factors in our historical development. Thus, the Turkish/Ottoman presence in Europe during the 15^th, 16^th and 17^th centuries brought forward new ideals and new patterns of social relationships. Given the realities of an era when feudalism, lack of tolerance and exploitation of masses prevailed, humane values and a highly egalitarian, efficient and sophisticated organisation were introduced.

    The Turco-Ottoman civilisation and its moral values contributed to the evolution of Middle Ages into modern times. It turned Turkey into the safe-haven of the persecuted ethnic and religious masses in the 16^th century and onwards. A role,  which Turkey had to resume through the II. World War.

    As modern times approached, the historical interaction with the West contributed the external dynamics, mainly positive, for the institutional reformation of Turkey in the 19^th and 20^th centuries.

    The particular historical development of Turkey, its civilisation that comprises western as well as eastern values, a multitude of beliefs and ethnicities, bestowed upon Turkey a unique identity:

    We consider ourselves both European (since seven Centuries) and Asian, and view this diversity  to be an asset. Our history and culture was moulded as much in Istanbul, Edirne, Tetova, Kosovo and Sarajevo as it was in Bursa, Kayseri, Diyarbakir or Damascus.

    I want to elaborate on a few elements of “European Culture” which we share, for it seems that sometimes there is a need to contribute mutually to a better understanding:

    On some issues, the Turkish and West European perceptions differ. This is mainly due to the different nature of their respective historical developments.

    In analyzing and understanding  the social fabric of Turkey, criteria based on race as a distinctive and major tool leads to wrong presumptions. We do not conceive of the ethnic origin of our citizens as a relevant factor in Turkey. No one really cares about the race of anyone. The concept of race as the main attribute of “minorities” does not fit in our realities and perceptions.

    In Turkey, the Ottoman interpretation and implementation of Islam is one of the main components of cultural identity. For centuries, the state, not solely because of its ethical beliefs, but for its own survival as well, had to keep united a multitude of ethnicities and cultures. In line with these ideals and constraints, “race” did not exist as a social and political category. The main distinctive factor has been religious, implemented with great tolerance. Social and political differentiation was always conceived in religious concepts, i.e., the “Muslims” and the “Non-Muslims”. On the other hand, “Muslim Ottoman Subjects”, whether in Sarajevo, Kosovo, Istanbul, Kayseri, Benghazi, Cairo, Aleppo or elsewhere, and of whatever ethnic origin, were totally equal in their status.

    Contemporary Turkey based itself on her heritage of non-discrimination and developed it through its modernization process. When some West European scholars apply their version of social analysis based on their particular socio-cultural experience to a country like Turkey, they are misled. They end up with an overemphasis on race as a social factor and generally bring  up wrong conclusions. This is why Turks whether of Balkan, Kurdish, Caucasian, or of whatever origin are somewhat irritated when they discover that they are considered as “minorities” by the West European discourse.

    This, of course, does not mean that I am not, in fact, that we are not, in favour of freedom of cultural and democratic expression for any citizen who feels the need.

    I have always said, as a writer, politician, and as a Minister, that there are some delays in certain points in our democratic development. This, in spite of the fact that Turkey is among the front-runners in Europe in some fields of democracy as gender equality, women’s votes, secularism, upward mobility, etc. In some of the criticism formulated, the starting points might generally be justified. But, the overall, exaggerated conclusions are generally unjustified.

    It is not an excuse or a pretext, but it is obvious that some of the difficulties were mainly due to the horrible terrorist/secessionist campaign which we faced. During the last 15 years, the terrorists have killed thousands of civilians. There were cases like that of the 128 primary-school teachers who were executed in groups.

    As our Prime Minister Mr. Ecevit has explained, the more we free ourselves from the constraints of terrorism, the greater will be the momentum of democratic reforms. Actually, we are in the process of overcoming terrorism. It is interesting to note that, during the last three months, the Parliament, through a record-breaking performance, has enacted two major constitutional changes and sixty-seven laws, including several democratic legislations. Frankly, I do not think these  would have been possible about a year ago, when terrorism was not as limited in its scope as it is today.

    These conceptual and legislative changes represent an ongoing trend; a trend which is initiated by Turkey’s internal dynamics.

    Considering Turkey’s candidacy and membership, I always ask myself: “what is it that Turkey will contribute to the European Union; what will be its genuine input; what will be the enhancement that Turkey will bring to the European Union? And, what will be the advantages, which Turkey will derive, by being part of the European Union?”

    As for advantages, I believe that being part of EU will provide Turkey with a challenge and with a wider opportunity to attain a higher rationale. This, in all aspects of its organisational, political, social, democratic and economic life. The historical, cultural and geographic settings of Turkey, which provide for ample interaction with our international environment, enhance  the contribution of external dynamics.

    I can refer to the positive aspects of our already existing partnership in the Customs Union: It was a huge challenge, it is only four years old, but this union has further motivated Turkey to reach an economic competitiveness, an industrial infrastructure and skill comparable to that of the EU. We have achieved this end without any considerable economic assistance from the EU.

    I do not overlook the limitations and burdens that this partnership has caused and is causing. But, we are already integrated to the economic dimension of EU.

    I believe that initiating the process of being part of the political dimension of EU will bring about parallel results in reaching higher levels of a new rationale.

    Furthermore, we are now in a better position to take advantage of this process, for we actually benefit from having a strong government and a sound majority in the parliament  -a privilege we have not had in Turkey for the last five years.

    What Turkey can contribute to EU is a historical experience of a different kind; a dimension that only a country that for centuries was the representative of a huge geography and a genuine civilization can provide. It actually represents as well the assertiveness of its republican and democratic evolution, and it has a unique role as a “model”: Being the only country with a predominantly Muslim population which has the ideals and practices of a pluralist democracy, secularism, rule of law, human rights, gender equality, Turkey enjoys the privilege of constituting a paradigm of modernization.

    Furthermore, the post cold-war political framework witnessed the appearance or the confirmation of several independent states. Out of the multitude of those “new” states, almost all  -in the Balkans, in the Caucasus or in Central Asia-  are those with whom Turkey shares a common history or a common language and cultural affinity. This provides Turkey with a new international environment of historical, political and economic dimensions. Turkey thus becomes a “center” for the emerging Eurasian reality and constitutes Western Europe’s major historical, cultural and economic opening to Eastern horizons.

    Nevertheless, it seems to me that the EU has not yet firmly decided on its strategy vis-a-vis the challenges of emerging new geographies; whether it is interested in the vast opportunities of encompassing new economic, historical and cultural dimensions; whether it can contribute more to the harmonization of civilizations in a world endangered by the much discussed “clash” of civilizations;  whether it will assume a larger responsibility to create a better world for all.

    Turkey contributes to all these causes positively, to some, perhaps, decisively.

    In order to further develop our relations with EU, the confrontational approach that has sometimes been displayed should mutually be put aside. Generally, problems are solved more efficiently if the other party’s sensitivities, concerns and constraints are taken into consideration.

    Western Europe, for a long period of history, considered Turkey as “The Other”, to put it in Edward Said’s terms. Turkey was the “anti-thesis”, the “outsider”. Now there is growing evidence that this unfortunate categorizing is withering away. It is a mutual responsibility  to assure that this positive trend further develops.

    Finally, I expect that a just and clear decision be reached in Helsinki Summit of December 1999. I believe that Turkey should be declared an official candidate  for accession to EU.

    Human values are universal. “The Copenhagen Criteria” are values that are not particular to EU; they are values, which are shared by millions inside and outside Europe. They are values, which we share, which we develop, and will continue to develop, whether we are a candidate, a member, or not.

    I believe in a future, which is brighter for Europe. I believe in Turkey’s contribution to this future.