(UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION)

The fourth of the Regular Reports prepared by the EU Commission every year for Turkey, together with the other candidates, was made public today. The EU Commission simultaneously announced its Strategy Paper that contains proposals on the procedures to be followed for the coming period.

The Regular Reports evaluate the achievements in and the fulfillment of commitments by the Candidate Countries only within the preceding year. In this context, the report for Turkey this year is different in scope than its precedents. By format and content, this year’s report evaluates Turkey’s preparations for accession, and in line with this approach, analyzes all chapters of the acquis, as is the case for the other candidates.

While our views on the Regular Report and the Strategy Paper shall be submitted later, after an in-depth study of the documents, our preliminary observations concerning the documents are as follows:

When compared with the last one, this year’s Report was drawn up in a more careful manner in view of the momentum created by the recent constitutional amendments. Those matters that were found wanting were also enumerated in the same way.

The Report underlines that the constitutional amendments are an important step towards the fulfillment of the Copenhagen Criteria. This is a positive and constructive development. In essence, the expectations in the Report for the implementation of the constitutional amendments and for the expansion of their practical scope correspond with the current agenda of our Government and Parliament.

It is evident that some of the weaknesses pointed out in the Report concerning fundamental rights and freedoms will disappear as our National Programme comes to life with all its aspects. In fact, this assumption finds its place in the Report, which states that as the constitutional changes are reflected into the secondary legislation, these weaknesses will gradually disappear. On the other hand, the steps taken in Turkey concerning improvements in the economic, social and cultural rights areas, training carried out in the human rights field and the modernization in the prison system were found to be positive by the EU Commission. This assessment is constructive and an encouragement for Turkey’s ongoing reform process carried out in these fields. Our country has lately made some real progress deserving attention and it is believed that individual cases ought not shadow these developments.

In the summary of the political part, it is underlined that although some progress has been made, Turkey does not yet fulfill the Copenhagen criteria.

In the economic field the economic crises that our country underwent are evaluated within the scope of the macroeconomic analysis and it is mentioned that Turkey has taken important steps on the road to alleviating economic disparities. It is stressed that although many sectors of the Turkish economy have been able to withstand the competition with the EU arising from the Customs Union, there is still instability. The Commission also asserts that a functioning market economy has not yet been fully established in Turkey. On the other hand, economic reforms such as the one in the banking sector, reduction of the role of the state in the economy and the ending of monopolies are highlighted and it is underlined that the good functioning of mechanisms will greatly add to this process.

The fact that the National Program has been appreciated within the context of harmonization of legislation also constitutes an important development. However in the Report it is mentioned that the National Program, which has been prepared for the first time and the Accession Partnership Document do not correspond entirely. Within this context Turkey has stated that the National Program, which had been prepared for the first time, would be revised and that the necessary work for the second Program, envisaged for March 2002, will start shortly.

The Report states that the administrative and legal capacities in Turkey as in the other candidate countries need to be developed. The necessary work within this framework is actually being carried out and the proposal for legislation concerning reform in personnel policies, which has just been adopted by the government, constitutes a natural development for this need. 

The Commission’s assessment concerning the activities of the sub-committee’s in the scope of the harmonization process is attached to the Progress Report. According to this assessment on the two rounds of sub-committee meetings held between July 2000 and July 2001, harmonization has advanced mostly in those areas related to the Customs Union, while except for a few sectors, a more extensive and detailed review is required. It was because of this need that Turkey called on the EU to initiate the screening process, in order to carry out a comprehensive examination.

Regarding Cyprus, Turkey continues to support the UN Secretary General’s efforts within the framework of the good offices mission in seeking for a mutually acceptable solution, based on the existing realities in the Island. Turkey appreciates the constructive attitude and contributions made by the Turkish Cypriot side. In fact, Mr. Rauf Denktaş, President of the TRNC, has recently called on Klerides, leader of the Greek Cypriot Administration, for a face to face talk in Cyprus. However, this call was first rejected and then tied to preconditions.

Proceeding with the unlawful process of accession of the Greek Cypriot Side to the EU without a mutually acceptable settlement on the basis of equality, will bring about negative consequences. In this context, we expect the international community to make a correct diagnosis of the Cyprus issue.

The fact that the Strategy Paper, which includes assessments of all candidates and prospects for the future, did not propose the initiation of a screening process for Turkey is the most negative aspect. During the past year, under the sub-committees, 16 meetings have been held and Turkish legislation has been thoroughly examined. However, there is a need for a more comprehensive study. The manner to achieve this is to initiate the screening process, as done with the other candidates.

It is an unfortunate development that a number of EU Member States have made the initiation of the screening process a political issue and identified it with accession negotiations. The fact that there is a linkage between screening and membership negotiations is not challenged. However, there are no conditions to start a screening process, while to begin accession negotiations, political criteria must be fulfilled. Although the proposal of the Commission to deepen the harmonization process in order to prepare Turkey for EU membership in a more detailed manner is insufficient and vague, we will nevertheless try to assess this proposal positively. In this respect, the Commission’s statement of a new phase for Turkey’s accession process is considered to be constructive. These issues will be taken up in detail at the next Association Committee.

The Strategy drawn up with the objective of Turkey’s accession to the EU is a continuing, comprehensive and dynamic process. In fact, Turkey has delineated clearly the main tenets of this process in her National Program and prepared it in a manner that corresponds to the priorities listed in the Accession Partnership Document. In this respect, those issues that need to be addressed in accordance with the Regular Report will be dealt with in a gradual manner. However, the essential element here is that the EU must show its will to reflect the areas of tangible cooperation envisaged with Turkey onto the Pre-accession Strategy as soon as possible.

In conclusion, irrespective of some controversial criticisms, in essence, the 2001 Regular Report is considered to be generally positive with respect to continuing future work. It does not however meet our expectations totally. By taking some concrete steps at the Laeken European Council on 14-15 December 2001, the EU would be making an important contribution to Turkey’s ongoing efforts.