Turkish membership to the European Union: what stakes?
- The EU against Turkish membership
- The argument of population
- The argument of religion
- The geographic borders issue
- The geopolical context and the Kurdish issue
- The Maastricht convergence criteria and the economic situation of Turkey
- Issues of freedom of speech and others
- The EU pro-Turkish membership
- The links of history
- Improvements in human rights and ?European values?
- A dynamic country with a modernising economy
- A geopolitical advantage for the EU
In the aftermath of the enlargement of the EU and the adoption of the Lisbon treaty, Turkey’s adhesion to the European Union is a question which has often arisen since the formal accession negotiations began in 2005. Turkey first applied for associate membership of the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1959, and finally signed the Agreement creating an association between The Republic of Turkey and the EEC on September 12nd, 1963. The question of Turkey’s adhesion to the EU is very controversial because of many issues such as the economic situation of Turkey, the issue of Cyprus, the geographical position of Turkey, and its Muslim population, beside. Nevertheless, the European Union is based on a political community, which means that geographical or cultural differences should not be a problem for Turkey’s adhesion, all the more so that this adhesion presents advantages for the both, the EU, and for Turkey. So, why does Turkey presents such an issue concerning its place in the EU? In order to understand better why this question of adhesion is so controversial, we will expose the different arguments in favour or against Turkish membership of the European Union, considering the position of the EU.
[...] But what remains the most surprising is the fact that this adhesion for Turkish membership to the EU is most favourable in some of “European countries” than is Turkey. Actually, it seems that only 55% of Turkish citizens are favourable, and this is what we will try to explain in the second part of this presentation. Conclusion In a nutshell, we can observe that Turkey and the EU don’t really have the same vision of their future and seem more and more sceptic to work together. [...]
[...] Admitting Turkey into the European Union would in a certain way mean giving the opportunity for terrorists to easier access the EU. Moreover, Turkey’s relations with Iran are worsening day by day and the stability of Iraq does not seem on the agenda. e. The Maastricht convergence criteria and the economic situation of Turkey Then, and this most result from institutional visions, the EU argued that Turkey didn’t respond to Maastricht convergence criteria, but this seems to have well evolved, so it does not remain the current problem, even if Turkey is still viewed as a poor and dependant country, which is a problem in an economic concurrent space. [...]
«EU enlargement. Context and Background. How to become an EU member state?. The pro [e] cons of EU enlargement. EU-Turkey relationship: Process, Objectives, Rational, and Opinions. Context and Background. EU [e] EU members' views. Turk's perspectives and opinions.»
«In the 1960s, a community of nations like France, Germany, Italy, and the Benelux covered almost all economic sectors, introduced the future common market framework, and established common policies for agriculture, transports, international relations, and regional cohesion. The integrating economic...»
«Introduction. Arguments in favor of Turkey’s candidacy are quite conclusive. In international instances Turkey is seen as a full member of the European Union.. Turkey has changed its policies over the past decades, and tries nowadays to respect the Copenhagen criteria.. Important oppositions...»
«Many people believe that the debate regarding Turkey's adhesion to the European Union (EU) is modern and recent; it actually goes back quite a long time. As a matter of fact, it dates back to the 1960s; the issue was raised in 1963, when Turkey signed a customs union with the E.U. This agreement,...»
«Introduction. The internal, domestic politics of states. International relations. State-society approach. Different movements with respect to realism. Conclusion.»
«Theories in international relations are built in order to understand the international anarchy, according to Grieco. Scholars are interested in analyzing struggles between states, as well military as economic one. So this topic is actually the study of states' behavior in the world, and...»
«Introduction. The climax of American world. During the Clinton era (’93). George Bush. Iraq war. Obama. Rising powers. Conclusion.»
«After WWII, the charter of United Nations prohibited war. But the real order after WWII was a bipolar world with a Cold War between two powers: US and URSS = Legal system vs. reality. At the end of cold war: the world needs a new order. The US becomes the only leader because it is the only...»