It has been continuously discussed on TV channels for the past three days. It came to the agenda of the General Assembly and it caused tension between Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and Republican People's Party (CHP) leader Deniz Baykal.
While the ruling wing of the parliament welcomed the outcome, protests arose from the opposition wing and tables were hammered. It is impossible for the society not to be confused and puzzled with this picture. Does the document signal success or failure? Further assessments about whether it is a victory or a fiasco are also made.
While an analyst, who reads a sentence in the document comments, "there is a trap for Turkey here, it is unacceptable" another analysts may interpret the same sentence as, "This is extremely good for Turkey." The politics have been divided into two, while the ruling party sees the document as a "breakthrough", the main opposition interprets it as an "absolute failure".
As the society, we like moving around the edges, but there should be a center point to this movement. There are risky components in the document as well as components, which will extend Turkey's European horizons. It has both advantages and disadvantages. It is apparent that sitting at the negotiation table with Europe for full membership is an important step for Turkey’s movement towards the west.
The success depends on how the process will be carried out. The risks may be eliminated with political and diplomatic maneuvers and the door may be jarred with the developments caused by freezing relations. Both of these cases are possible. But, we began this journey aware of all these challenges 42 years ago. Everybody knew our relations would continue on a stony, rough road. In the course of years, challenges and difficulties were always emphasized.
Foreign policy cannot be carried out with hostility and sentimentality. Logic must stand out and distances can be overcome with the slippery face of various diplomacy maneuvers. It is easy to say no and to destroy the bridges with Europe because it contains some risks. And this may yield short-term benefits in internal politics.
The opponents of the EU in the political field expressed their views in a better way to the public than the supporters of the EU. The voice of the opponents was stronger; it suppressed the voices of Europe's supporters. I mean, even if the decision to continue with Europe has been welcomed by the media, it was not reflected in the society to the same extent. I do not think that it will yield political benefits if an election was to be held tomorrow. To say "No" may be for the benefit of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) in terms of politics…However, this means loss for Turkey, particularly in the long term. We know from experience how difficult it is to compensate for lost years.
It is beneficial for the political parties, primarily CHP and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) to behave as the possible ruling parties of the future while forming their EU policy and determining their styles and its content accordingly. Particularly, MHP should follow a more cautious attitude; it seems as if it is the address of EU opponents. The sharpest and the most striking opinions come from this party. The wind, which started to blow upon losing some locations in foreign policy in the society, increases the number of MHP's votes. It may be challenging for MHP to face its remarks and actions if it comes to power or becomes a coalition partner tomorrow.
The same thing goes for CHP’s sharp attitudes, which may cause a headache for itself tomorrow. The CHP deputy, who opposes the negotiations framework document today, may sit at the negotiations table as a minister tomorrow.
After the nerve wrecking evening of October 3rd, Turkey woke up the next morning in excitement. EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn came to Turkey. "Our aim is the elimination of isolations imposed on Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)," he said. Rehn will go to Kayseri today.
The document is neither victory nor failure, it is in between. This should be explained in a good way to the public because those who act with anxiety produce irrational conspiracy theories.
October 7, 2005
