December 2008 13 English There is no EU-wide debate on EU-Turkey rela- Series tions, but rather a set of overlapping yet distinct European debates reflecting the different actors, interests and ideas across the European mosaic. Talking Turkey II unpacks this complex reality by TALKING TURKEY analysing the positions of national stakeholders IN EUROPE: across the EU, the reactions of Turkish stakehol- ders to these EU debates, as well as the influen- TOWARDS A DIFFERENTIATED ce of the US in shaping European debates on Turkey. The underlying aim of this research is to COMMUNICATION STRATEGY develop an EU Communication Strategy for Tur- key. Based upon the findings of this project, a edited by Nathalie Tocci Communication Strategy ought to be differen- tiated and dynamic. It must also engage in a ge- nuine two-way communication with its interlo- cutors. It is only by Talking Turkey and making such talk a two-way street that Turkey’s Europe- Talking Turkey II an course may be strengthened in the long-term. IAI-TEPAV Project Quaderni IAI ISTITUTO AFFARI INTERNAZIONALI Istituto Affari Internazionali 00186 Roma - Via Angelo Brunetti, 9 Tel. 39-6-3224360 Fax 39-6-3224363 http://www.iai.it - e-mail: [email protected] Per ordini: [email protected] December 2008 13 English Series IAI TALKING TURKEY IN EUROPE: TOWARDS A DIFFERENTIATED COMMUNICATION STRATEGY edited by Nathalie Tocci Talking Turkey II IAI-TEPAV Project Quaderni IAI ISTITUTO AFFARI INTERNAZIONALI This project and publication has been made possible with the generous support of the Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey, (TOBB), the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation - Turkey (OSIAF- Turkey), the Compagnia di San Paolo and The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF-US). Quaderni IAI Direzione: Natalino Ronzitti Redazione: Sandra Passariello Istituto Affari Internazionali 00186 Roma – Via Angelo Brunetti, 9 Tel. 39-6-3224360 Fax 39-6-3224363 http://www.iai.it – [email protected] Per ordini: [email protected] © Istituto Affari Internazionali Finito di stampare nel mese di dicembre 2008 dalla Tipografia Città Nuova della P.A.M.O.M.via San Romano in Garfagnana, 23 - 00148 Roma Telefono & fax 06.65.30.467 e-mail: [email protected] 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction, Nathalie Tocci 5 1. “Mamma Li Turchi!”: Just An Old Italian Saying, Emiliano Alessandri and Ebru Canan 11 2. Polish Stakeholders in the EU-Turkey Debate, Adam Balcer 41 3. Austrian Stakeholders in the EU-Turkey Debate, Cengiz Günay 59 4. Greek Stakeholders in the EU-Turkey Debate, Kostas Ifantis and Eleni Fotiou 85 5. Danish Stakeholders in the EU-Turkey Debate, Dietrich Jung 103 6. Marcus Aurelius’ Foot: Looking for Turkey’s Project in the EU. An Interpretation of the French Debate on Turkey, Anne-Marie Le Gloannec 119 7. Wait-and-See Attitudes of German Stakeholders Towards EU-Turkey Relations, Barbara Lippert 135 8. UK Stakeholders in the EU-Turkey Debate, Richard Whitman 161 9. Attitudes of Key Stakeholders in Turkey Towards EU-Turkey Relations: Consensual Discord Or Contentious Accord? Asli Toksabay Esen and H. Tolga Bölükbas¸ı 175 3 10. The Effect of US Policy in the Middle East on EU-Turkey Relations, Henri J. Barkey 199 11. From Advocate to Stakeholder: US Policy Towards Turkey and Implications for EU-Turkey Relations, Ian O. Lesser 215 12. The Impact of Transatlantic Relations on the European Debate on Turkey, Hanna Ojanen 231 13. A European Communication Strategy on Turkey, Nathalie Tocci and Donatella Cugliandro 249 Notes on Contributors 279 4 INTRODUCTION Nathalie Tocci In 2007 IAI and TEPAV launched a network of European analysts assessing the public debates in several member states on EU-Turkey relations. The net- work analysed how perceptions and misperceptions shape European public debates on conditionality and impact in EU-Turkey relations. Beyond the cre- ation of the network “Talking Turkey”, the project organized a set of events in Rome, Ankara, at the European Parliament in Brussels, as well as spin-off meetings in Washington, London and Helsinki to present its first publication: Tocci, N. (2007) (ed.) Conditionality, Impact and Prejudice in EU-Turkey Relations, Quaderno IAI (available in print and freely downloadable from: http://www.iai.it/sections/pubblicazioni/iai_quaderni/indiciEng.asp#9E). 1. Opening the Member State Box: European Stakeholders in the Turkey Question This first cursory analysis revealed that member state positions not only vary widely, but also and most saliently, that within each member state dif- ferent actors hold different views for different reasons on the Turkey ques- tion. In other words, Turkey is “talked about” in different ways both within and across EU member states, and the reasons for this are rooted in a diverse and dynamic set of interests and ideas. Having scratched the surface of this complex reality, in its second stage our project has adopted a con- stituency-based approach. The first phase provided valuable findings 5 Nathalie Tocci regarding the specific themes raised in the context of the EU-Turkey debate in different member states (see Table 1). Yet gaining a deeper understand- ing of which actor within which member state frames the debate on Turkey by focusing on which specific theme is of the essence. Table 1 - Core topics regarding Turkey’s EU membership as revealed by Talking Turkey I In order to communicate Turkey to the EU and the EU to Turkey, it is therefore necessary to identify and analyse far more clearly and carefully the positions of the stakeholders within different member states, concen- trating on the following set of questions: - Who are the principal stakeholders within each member state on the “Turkey question”? Which actors influence the state’s stance on EU-Turkey relations? Stakeholders include, where relevant, political parties, state insti- tutions, the business community, the media, civil society actors and interest groups, academia, key personalities in the arts and entertainment, as well as “public opinion” at large. - What is their position on Turkey? In this respect, the analysis focuses on stakeholder views and objectives regarding EU-Turkey relations and Turkey’s accession process. - Why are these views and positions held? What are the underlying inter- ests and beliefs underpinning these stakeholder positions, are these related to specific Turkey-related concerns (e.g., specific business interests in 6 Introduction Turkey) or are they instrumental to other objectives and beliefs (e.g., pro- moting a particular understanding of the EU, its institutional functioning and identity)? - How do such stakeholders influence the overall position of each member state on the Turkey question? How influential are these actors, what kind of alliances do or might they forge, what is their overall influence within national debates? - What are the implications for the development of a differentiated and dynamic Communication Strategy? Given national stakeholders, their views, their underlying interests and their influence over national policy- making, what does this entail for a Communication Strategy that resonates within each member state? This set of questions is tackled by analysing eight member states: Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland and the UK. Of course, this list is far from comprehensive and other member states which play as critical a role in shaping European public debates on Turkey were exclud- ed. This selection has been driven by the priority of considering cases which exhibit relatively negative (e.g., Austria, France), positive (Italy, UK, Poland) as well as mixed (Denmark, Germany and Greece) attitudes towards Turkey’s accession process. This selection criteria was used in order to ensure as broad a representation as possible of the different actors, actions and arguments raised by Europeans in relation to Turkey. At the same time we wanted to keep the number of member state studies limited in number, in order for the final chapter to do justice to all authors. Finally, we include a study on Turkey. While also analysing the positions, interests and beliefs of Turkish stakeholders in EU-Turkey relations, the focus of this chapter is somewhat different. The objective here is not that of analysing how Turkish stakeholders shape the European debate on Turkey, but rather to examine how Turkish actors have reacted to European debates on Turkey, and what impact this has had on the evolution of EU- Turkey relations as well as on Turkey’s process of EU-driven reform. 2. The Transatlantic Dimension In addition to this set of questions, Talking Turkey II broadens the scope of analysis beyond the EU. As evident in the results from Talking Turkey I, the positions of different member states and stakeholders within them are cru- 7 Nathalie Tocci cially affected by their wider understanding of Turkey’s role in its region and in the world. As such a second branch of our research delves into the “Impact of Global Trends” on European stakeholders regarding the Turkey question. Arguably, the most important source of external influence on European stakeholders’ wider understanding of Turkey and its role in the world is the United States. US policies and positions have shaped European views, inter- ests and objectives regarding Turkey by operating on three different levels: - By interacting directly with Turkey and engaging Ankara in debate about its EU course; - By influencing the positions of the EU, its member states and Euro- Atlantic institutions on the Turkey question; - By shaping the overall regional and international milieu in which EU- Turkey relations unfold, including most saliently the situation in Iraq and the Middle East. More specifically, US policies towards Turkey, the EU and the wider Middle East have different impacts on different stakeholders within the EU. During periods of intense US pressure on European capitals to launch and proceed with Turkey’s accession process, such as for example in the run up to European Council meetings in 1999 or 2002, US lobbying efforts may have increased the propensity of some member states to pro- ceed with Turkey’s accession process (e.g., the UK and Italy), while back- firing with others (e.g., France).