Is the EU Kidding or Offering a Solution

Indeed, the occasions held by two different delegations on the day of the announcement of the Commission’s recommendation decision coincided at the same time. For this reason, some people invited by the two sides had to travel back and forth between the two meetings.

One occasion was about the election of Istanbul as the Culture Capital of Europe of 2010. The Turkish figures, who pioneered the initiative, including Istanbul mayor Kadir Topbas, hosted the Europeans who made contributions to the decision on the election of Istanbul at a diner.

The other one was the reception and concert hosted by Istanbul Chamber of Commerce at the European Parliament’s prestigious hall Yehudi Menuhin. During his contacts with the European authorities, the Chamber Chair Murat Yalcintas, who arrived in Brussels two days ago, brought up the visa issue that Turkish businessmen encountered. Meanwhile twin artists Didem and Sinem Balik contributed to Turkey’s promotion with their concert.

A distinguished group of guests attended the occasion. In addition to Turkish members of the European Parliament Vural Oger and Cem Ozdemir, “the national groom” Joost Lagendijk and Turkey rapporteur Camille Earlings were also there. According to the reports, more than 20 from the European Parliament were present. Since it coincided with the meeting of Turkey-EU Joint Parliament Commission, Turkish deputies also participated in the occasion. Among them were Sukru Elekdag, Algan Hacaloglu, Zekeriya Akcam, Murat Mercan, Aydin Dumanoglu. The Belgian parliamentarians from Turkish origin, Turkey’s EU representative Volkan Bozkir, and representatives of TOBB and TUSIAD were also present.

It was very nice for us to see this large number of figures who has been following our EU bid all together. It meant we could talk about the meaning of the Commission’s recommendation decision.

The Commission recommended the suspension of eight chapters out of 35, unless Turkish ports were opened to Greek Cypriots. Under the recommendation, the other chapters would be opened, but not closed. The decision was surprising for Turkey, which expected the suspension of 3-4 chapters only. Even the European Parliament’s Turkey rapporteur Camille Earlings, who has been often criticized in Turkey because of his assertive approach, found the decision to be harsh. He criticized the commission because it failed to attain a solution for the ports issue by not gathering the parties together behind the closed doors.

For us, the most important point was whether the decision would contain a guarantee that prevented the Greek Cypriots from blocking the opening of the remaining chapters because negotiations have already been on hold since June 12. If this decision told the Greek Cypriots that “we are suspending the eight chapters for you; do not interfere in the others,” this would mean the opening of negotiations on the 27 other chapters. If, while eights chapter were being suspended, the others were left to the Greek Cypriots’ discretion, this would lead to a full interruption of the membership talks. In such a case, making a special reference to the eight chapters would mean nothing but fooling us.

During my conversation with Lagendijk, I realized he was focused on the same point. Showing the notes he took during Olli Rehn’s press conference, he said the decision implied the Greek Cypriots would not impair the negotiations in the chapters other than the suspended ones. He stressed that it was the outcome of a bargaining process, and drew attention to Rehn’s remarks underlining that the other chapters would be discussed within their own contexts.

It was uncertain whether the decision set limitations on the Greek Cypriots’ veto power. However, the assessments of the diplomats who had close contacts with their counterparts in the commission confirmed Lagendijk. Cem Ozdemir also recalled that the European countries should no longer tolerate Greek Cypriots’ obstructionist stance in the negotiations of the chapters other than the eight.