"The EU Doesn't Want Us Anyway: Concerns of Double Standards"

Turkey's Roadblocks on the Path to the EU: The Charter of Local Self-Government, Visa Liberalization, Human Rights, and Fundamental Freedoms

For years, negotiations with the EU have held a significant place in Turkey's agenda, capturing public interest. However, since the process began in 2005, the Turkish public has started to seek alternative reasons for the never-ending journey toward EU membership. This quest for understanding has become one of the most debated issues in the country. Some citizens, who closely follow the process, believe that Turkey has failed to implement the political and judicial reforms required by the EU, especially in areas such as judicial independence, human rights, and fundamental freedoms. On the other hand, another segment accuses the EU of applying double standards, treating Turkey more harshly compared to other candidate countries, and displaying prejudice due to cultural and religious differences. This group argues that Turkey's cultural, religious, and geographical distinctions from Europe are the main factors complicating the EU membership process. Consequently, a widespread perception is created that, even if Turkey were to become a member, it would struggle to integrate into European society. So why does Turkey face such significant challenges in this process? Is the EU really applying double standards, or are the existing shortcomings the primary reason for the prolonged negotiations? In this report, we will examine three key issues and seek to answer the question: "Is the EU extending the process for years simply because it does not want Turkey, or is it due to genuine deficiencies?"

An Important EU Process Highlight: The Charter of Local Self-Government

Turkey signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government in 1992 and ratified it in 1993, but it applied reservations that prevented full compliance. As a result of this non-compliance, the EU found Turkey's reforms insufficient. Let's start by examining what this Charter entails.

The EU expects candidate countries to meet various political and legal criteria known as the "Copenhagen Criteria," established at the 1993 EU Summit in Copenhagen. These criteria fall under three main headings: political, economic, and the acceptance of the acquis. In addition to these general criteria, the EU Commission conducts detailed evaluations for each candidate and sets specific requirements based on each country's situation. Candidate countries strive to demonstrate compliance through various reforms. Those who believe the EU is applying double standards may base their opinion on these specific requirements. However, is this the only reason?

The "European Charter of Local Self-Government" is one of many political and legal reforms expected from candidate countries. This Charter aims to protect the constitutional and legal status of local governments, ensure their autonomy within their areas of jurisdiction, make financial resources adequate and independent, and promote participatory democracy. Turkey started the process by signing the Charter in 1992 and ratifying it in 1993, but it applied reservations. These reservations, particularly regarding the delegation of powers and responsibilities to the most relevant local level, diversification and increase of financial resources, and conditions for the election of local administrators, have led to criticism from the EU. The EU continuously calls on Turkey to fully implement local self-government and remove these reservations. But why hasn't Turkey responded adequately to these calls?

Historically, Turkey has adopted a centralized governance structure. The central government fears that increasing local autonomy will limit its control and authority. One of the primary reasons for this concern is the fear that empowering local governments will require the central government to transfer some powers and responsibilities to them. The significant Kurdish population in the Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia regions is another factor contributing to Turkey's cautious approach. For years, this population has demanded more autonomy from the central government. The central government worries that increasing local autonomy could strengthen separatist movements in these regions, potentially leading to the country's division. Additionally, concerns about strengthening local governments in areas with active terrorist organizations, such as the PKK, and the potential security gaps this could create, further complicate the issue. Despite these challenges, Turkey has attempted some reforms to find a middle ground. For instance, the Metropolitan Municipality Law (Law No. 6360), adopted in 2012, aimed to increase the powers and responsibilities of metropolitan municipalities to enhance local governance effectiveness. This law allowed metropolitan municipalities like Diyarbakır, Van, and Mardin, where the Kurdish population is significant, to gain more authority. However, security concerns and political factors have hindered the desired level of reform and project implementation.

The Kurdish population has also made specific demands from Turkey regarding Local Self-Government. Kurdish political movements have sought the right to self-governance and greater political representation at the local level under the concept of democratic autonomy. This model envisages local governments making decisions independently from the central government. These demands aimed to strengthen local governments and establish a more balanced distribution of power with the central government. Meeting these demands could contribute to a more democratic, fair, and equitable governance system in Turkey. However, mutual dialogue, negotiation, and compromise are crucial, and a resolution has yet to be reached.

The reasons behind Turkey's reservations about the EU reform demand for Local Self-Government are multifaceted. Turkey has attempted some efforts to find a middle ground and peace. For example, the Democratic Opening process initiated in 2009 aimed to resolve the Kurdish issue through peaceful and democratic means. This process included expanding the rights and freedoms of Kurdish citizens, recognizing cultural rights, and adopting new approaches in counterterrorism. Some steps were taken within this framework, such as launching the Kurdish-language TRT Kurdi channel, allowing Kurdish courses, and opening Kurdish Language and Literature departments in universities. However, these measures were insufficient to build a bridge of peace between the two communities. Between 2013 and 2015, another initiative called the "Solution Process" was undertaken, involving peace negotiations with the PKK to achieve disarmament and lasting peace. However, this process did not yield the desired results and ended in 2015. Numerous unresolved issues still exist between the two communities, contributing to Turkey's cautious approach to the EU's reform demands. In conclusion, it can be said that the inability to meet the requirements requested for EU membership significantly complicates the process.

However, it would be incomplete to consider the Local Self-Government Charter solely within the context of the Kurdish community. Another long-standing issue for Turkey is the EU's demand for "Enhancing the Capacity of Local Governments." The capacity of local governments involves their ability to provide services effectively, efficiently, and accountably. Local governments in Turkey often face limitations, especially in smaller municipalities and rural areas, where there is a lack of qualified personnel and modern management techniques. This situation hampers the effective delivery of services within their jurisdictions. Additionally, local governments' financial resources primarily come from central government transfers and their revenues. Local governments in Turkey have limited financial independence and are highly dependent on central government transfers. With insufficient authority to increase their revenues, local governments struggle to provide many services due to financial constraints. Under these conditions, local governments facing resource shortages cannot meet the requirements outlined under the EU's "Capacity of Local Governments" criteria. Addressing the capacity issues of local governments in Turkey involves tackling significant deficiencies in institutional, financial, personnel, technological, planning, and accountability areas. To resolve these issues, supportive policies from the central government, provision of necessary resources for enhancing local capacities, and increased efforts by local governments to develop their capabilities appear to be effective solutions. The steps Turkey will take toward local self-government in the coming years will continue to be a significant topic.

72 Criteria: Visa Liberalization Dialogue

The Visa Liberalization Dialogue between the EU and Turkey aimed to allow Turkish citizens to travel to the Schengen area without a visa. The process began in 2013 and involved commitments and demands from both sides. Starting with the EU's demands, the EU required Turkey to fulfill 72 conditions. Among these conditions, six critical issues remain unmet. One of these is "the acceptance and implementation of personal data protection and regulation in line with EU standards." According to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Turkey must align its regulations with GDPR's high protection standards to progress in visa liberalization and other agreements with the EU. To meet these standards, Turkey must take additional steps. While an independent authority operates under Turkey's Personal Data Protection Law (KVKK), the EU expects this independence to be further strengthened and the rights of data subjects to be expanded. However, Turkey has not shown sufficient effort in this regard. Public opinion in Turkey has criticized the EU for allegedly making it difficult for Turkish citizens to obtain Schengen visas as a form of sanction. In response, the European Parliament's Turkey Rapporteur, Nacho Sanchez Amor, expressed surprise at these accusations, stating, "The idea that the EU has agreed to make it difficult for Turkish citizens is a figment of the imagination." He also described some of the rhetoric in Turkey's recent Schengen visa discussions as "artificial" and emphasized that the solution lies in visa liberalization. Amor suggested that the public should question the government about why visa liberalization has not been achieved, noting that only six of the 72 criteria remain unmet and seeking an explanation for why these have not been fulfilled. However, this situation has not garnered much response in Turkey, and the EU is criticized for not providing visa liberalization. This criticism is compounded by the significant devaluation of the Turkish Lira. Amor explained that Turkish citizens struggle to meet the required guarantees for Schengen visas in Euros, a situation exacerbated by extraordinary conditions in Turkey, independent of the EU.

In the Visa Liberalization issue, the EU faces significant public backlash in Turkey. However, discussions regarding the role of the Turkish government in this matter appear insufficient. Before the 2023 elections, the EU Rapporteur indicated that Brussels was ready to reactivate Turkey's membership process, contingent on a return to the Copenhagen Criteria. However, following the election results, which continued the existing government, the "Visa Liberalization Principle" demands, like many other issues, have yet to be met.

A Fundamental EU Value: Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

Human rights and fundamental freedoms form the foundation of the European Union and the Copenhagen Criteria, central to EU candidacy. The EU places great emphasis on the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights, the establishment of independent judicial mechanisms, and adherence to the rule of law are among the primary requirements. In this context, the EU closely monitors Turkey's performance in protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms. However, Turkey faces numerous challenges in this area.

Concerns are frequently expressed about human rights violations in Turkey. Issues such as freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and the right to peaceful assembly are areas where Turkey often falls short. Journalists, human rights defenders, and political activists face intimidation and harassment. Additionally, there are numerous cases of arbitrary detentions, restrictions on freedom of expression, and violations of the right to a fair trial. These problems damage Turkey's human rights record and pose a significant obstacle to progress in EU membership negotiations. Another crucial issue is the functioning of the judiciary and the rule of law in Turkey. The independence and impartiality of the judiciary are critical components of the rule of law. However, in Turkey, there are frequent allegations of political interference in the judiciary, and concerns about the independence of the judiciary are widespread. This undermines the justice system and creates an environment where human rights and fundamental freedoms are not adequately protected. Moreover, Turkey has received numerous rulings from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) regarding human rights violations. However, the Turkish government often fails to comply with these rulings or delays their implementation. This failure to comply with ECHR decisions creates a negative perception of Turkey's human rights performance and further strains relations with the EU.

In summary, Turkey's challenges in protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms hinder progress in EU membership negotiations. The EU expects candidate countries to meet specific standards in this area and closely monitors their performance. However, Turkey's shortcomings in areas such as freedom of expression, judicial independence, and compliance with ECHR rulings create significant obstacles. To move forward in the EU membership process, Turkey must address these issues and demonstrate a commitment to protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms in line with EU standards. The path to EU membership requires significant and sustained efforts to overcome these challenges.

The issue of EU membership for Turkey is a multifaceted and complex one, involving numerous political, social, and cultural dimensions. Turkey's journey toward EU membership has been long and fraught with challenges, and while the EU has set specific criteria and standards, Turkey's unique circumstances and internal dynamics have made it difficult to meet these requirements fully. The discussions around the EU's demands, such as the Charter of Local Self-Government, Visa Liberalization, and Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, reveal a broader picture of the ongoing negotiations and the complexities involved.

The EU's insistence on Turkey meeting the political and legal criteria, including the European Charter of Local Self-Government, highlights the importance of local governance and decentralization in the EU's framework. Turkey's historical centralization, coupled with security concerns and the Kurdish issue, has made it challenging to implement the required reforms fully. This situation underscores the need for Turkey to find a balance between maintaining national unity and meeting the EU's standards for local self-government.

The Visa Liberalization Dialogue reflects the broader issue of mutual trust and cooperation between Turkey and the EU. While Turkey has made progress in fulfilling many of the required conditions, the remaining unmet criteria, particularly in data protection, highlight the gaps that need to be addressed. The public perception of the EU's visa policies and the economic challenges faced by Turkish citizens further complicate the issue.

Human rights and fundamental freedoms remain at the core of the EU's expectations. Turkey's performance in protecting these rights is crucial for progress in the membership process. The ongoing concerns about freedom of expression, judicial independence, and compliance with ECHR rulings underscore the need for significant reforms in these areas. The path to EU membership requires Turkey to demonstrate a genuine commitment to upholding these fundamental values.

Ultimately, the question of whether the EU is applying double standards or whether Turkey's shortcomings are the primary reason for the prolonged negotiations remains open to interpretation. What is clear is that both sides must engage in constructive dialogue and take concrete steps to address the challenges and build a foundation for a mutually beneficial relationship. Turkey's EU journey continues, and the road ahead requires careful navigation, mutual understanding, and a shared commitment to common values and principles.