Türkiye’nin Sorunlu AB Üyeliği Arayışı

Year 2021, , 207 - 227, 20.01.2021

Gökhan Akşemsettinoğlu

https://doi.org/10.12995/bilig.9608

Abstract

Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği (AB) ilişkileri, üzerinde her zaman düşünmeye değerdir. Hiç şüphesiz ki, Türkiye ile AB arasındaki İlişkiler, altmış yıllık bir dönem içinde sık sık bozulmuştur. Son zamanlarda, bazı sorunlar ilişkileri bir kez daha kötüleştirmiştir. Bunun üzerine bazı AB liderleri ve yazarları Türkiye’nin AB’ye üyeliği ile ilgili olarak tam üyelik yerine imtiyazlı ortaklık gibi sakıncalı alternatifler ortaya koymaktadırlar. Türkiye, AB ile son dönemde yaşanan sorunlar nedeniyle tam üyelik yerine imtiyazlı ortaklığa razı olmalı mıdır? Bu makale, Türkiye-AB ilişkilerinin son dönem gelişmelerine kısaca bakmakta ve imtiyazlı ortaklık önerisine karşı çıkmaktadır. Örnek-olay
araştırma yöntemine dayanan bu makalenin bulguları, uygun zamanı bekleyerek tam üyelik hedefine bağlı kalmanın Türkiye için doğru bir davranış olacağını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu anlamda, esnek bütünleşme fikri, Türkiye’nin üyeliği için uygun bir yol olarak görünmektedir.

Keywords

Türkiye-AB İlişkileri, gümrük birliği, imtiyazlı ortaklık, esnek bütünleşme, Avrupalılaşma

Turkey’s Troubled Quest for EU Membership

Abstract

Turkey-European Union (EU) relations are always worth pondering. It is surely without doubt that relations between Turkey and the EU, within a six-decade period, have broken down frequently. Recently, a number of issues have worsened relations once again. A number of EU leaders and authors have thereupon put forward ill-advised alternatives for Turkey’s EU membership, such as privileged partnership instead of full membership. Should Turkey consent to privileged partnership instead of full membership due to recent problems experienced with the EU? This article takes a brief look at the recent developments in Turkey-EU relations and challenges the idea of privileged partnership. Based on the case-study methodology, the findings of this article reveal that adhering to the target of full membership by way of waiting for the appropriate time would be the proper stance for Turkey. In this sense, the idea of flexible integration emerges as a suitable path toward membership for Turkey.

Keywords

Turkey-EU relations, customs union, privileged partnership, flexible integration, Europeanization

References

• Akçay, Ekrem Y. and Selim Kanat (2017). “Carrot and Stick Approach in International Relations: An Evaluation throughout Turkey’s Accession Negotiations with the European Union”. Journal of Süleyman Demirel University 4 (29): 415-435.
• Alpan, Başak (2015). “Bir İmkân Olarak Avrupalılık Kimliği: Türkiye-AB İlişkileri Tartışmaların Neresinde?”. Marmara Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 23 (2): 5-26.
• Bache, Ian (2008). Europeanization and Multilevel Governance: Cohesion Policy in the European Union and Britain. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Başkan, Filiz and Selin Gümrükçü (2012). “Positions of Turkish Political Parties on European Integration”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 12 (1): 25-44.
• Bayar, Güzin and Özgür Çalışkan (2007). “Türkiye-AB İlişkileri: Bir Oyun Kuramı Yaklaşımı”. ODTÜ Gelişme Dergisi 34 (1): 19-62.
• Bilici, Nurettin (2013) Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye, Mali Yardımlar, Vergilendirme. Ankara: Seçkin Yay.
• Breuer, Fabian (2012). “Sociological Institionalism, Socialization and the Brusselisation of CSDP” in Kurowski, Xymena and Fabian Breuer. Explaining the EU’s Common Security and Defense Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 111 – 135.
• Buonanno, Laurie and Neill Nugent (2013). Policies and Policy Processes of the European Union. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Chislett, William (2015). Turkey’s 10 Years of EU Accession Negotiations: No End in Sight. Working Paper 14. Madrid: Elcano Royal Institute.
• Cini, Michelle and Nieves Perez-Solorzano Boragan (2019). European Union Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Clesse, Armand and Seyfi Taşhan (2004). Turkey and the European Union: 2004 and Beyond. Amsterdam: Dutch University Press.
• Cooper, Robert (2002). “The Post-Modern State”. Re-Ordering the World: The Longterm Implications of September 11. Ed. Leonard M. London: The Foreign Policy Centre. 11-20.
• Erhan, Çağrı and Aysun Gürbüz (2012). “Türkiye’nin AB ile İlişkilerinde Alternatif Model Arayışı: Kapsamlı Ekonomik Entegrasyon Anlaşması”. Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi 12 (1): 47-78.
• Gordon, Philip and Ömer Taşpınar (2006). “Turkey on the Brink”. The Washington Quarterly 29 (3): 57-70.
• Göral, Emirhan (2013). “Değişen Uluslararası Sistemde Türkiye’nin Balkan Politikasının Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği İlişkilerine Etkisi”. Marmara Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 21 (2): 99-118.
• Gümrükçü, Harun (2002). Türkiye ve Avrupa Birliği, İlişkinin Unutulan Yönleri, Dünü ve Bugünü. Haber Dizisi 15. Hamburg: Avrupa-Türkiye Araştırmaları Enstitüsü.
• İnaç, Hüsamettin (2016a). “Türkiye-AB İlişkileri: Entegrasyonu Zora Sokan Saikler”. Journal of Süleyman Demirel University 3 (26): 229-246.
• İnaç, Hüsamettin (2016b). “Güncel Siyasi Sorunlar Bağlamında Türkiye-AB İlişkilerine Sosyo-Politik Bir Bakış”. Journal of Süleyman Demirel University: 673-682.
• İnalcık, Halil (2006). Turkey and the Europe in History. İstanbul: Eren Yay.
• Janning, Josef (2018). “Transactional by Default: EU-Turkey Relations in Search of a New Rationale”. Turkish Policy Quarterly 17 (1): 57-65.
• Kabaalioğlu, Haluk (1999). “The Relations between Turkey and the EU – a Turkish Perspective”. Parameters of Partnership: The US-Turkey-Europe. Ed.
• Hüseyin Bağcı, Jackson Janes and Ludger Kühnhardt. Baden Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft. 19 – 68.
• Karakaş, Cemal (2007). “Türkiye’nin AB Üyeliği Tartışması: AB-Türkiye İlişkilerinde ‘Aşamalı Entegrasyon’”. Uluslararası Hukuk ve Politika 3 (9): 1-15.
• Kozma, Tamas and Peter Dobrowiecki (2018). “Turkey and the V4: Paths for Current and Future Cooperation”. Turkish Policy Quarterly 17 (1): 87-95.
• Macmillan, Catherine (2010). “Privileged Partnership, Open-Ended Accession Negotiations and the Securitizaton of Turkey’s EU Accession Process”. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 18 (4): 447-462.
• McCormick, John (2015) “What is the European Union?”. The European Union and the Member States. Eds. E. Zeff, Eleanor and Ellen B. Pirro. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers. 17 – 35.
• Müftüler-Baç, Meltem (2011). “Turkish Foreign Policy, Its Domestic Determinants and the Role of the European Union”. South European Society and Politics 16 (2): 279- 291.
• Müftüler-Baç, Meltem and Yaprak Gürsoy (2009). “Is There a Europeanization of Turkish Foreign Policy? An Addendum to the Literature on EU Candidates”. Turkish Studies 11 (3): 405-427.
• Nugent, Neill (2010). The Government and Politics of the European Union. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Oğuzlu, Tarık (2010-2011). “Turkey and Europeanization of Foreign Policy”. Political Science Quarterly 125 (4): 657-683.
• Oğuzlu, Tarık (2004). “Changing Dynamics of Turkey’s US and EU Relations”. Middle East Policy 11 (1): 98-105.
• Olsen, Johan P. (2003). “Organizing European Institutions of Governance, a Prelude to an Institutional Account of Political Integration”. Interlocking Dimensions of European Integration. Ed. Helen Wallace. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 323– 353.
• Öner, Selcen (2016). “The Influence of the Economic Crisis and Refugee Crisis on EU Politics: The Challenges and Prospects for Turkey-EU Relations”. Marmara Journal of European Studies 24 (2): 59-85.
• Öner, Selcen (2014). “Internal Factors in the EU’s Transformative Power over Turkey: The Role of Turkish Civil Society”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 14 (1): 23-42
• Paksoy, Alaaddin, F. and Ralph Negrine (2016). “Turkey as a ‘Positive Other’: A Theoretical Discussion to Comprehend the British Media’s View on Turkey- EU Relations”. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 18 (5): 494-505.
• Peterson, John and Michael Shackleton (2006). The Institutions of the European Union. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Samur, Hakan (2010). “Avrupa’da Birliğin Yolu Türkiye’den Geçer”. Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi 9 (2): 145-167.
• Schaake, Marietje (2018). “EU-Turkey Ties on the Brink?”. Turkish Policy Quarterly 17 (1): 27-35.
• Schmidt, Vivien A. (2010). “Taking Ideas and Discourse Seriously: Explaining Change through Discursive Institutionalism as the Fourth ‘New Institutionalism’”. European Political Science Review 2 (1): 1-25.
• Steinbach, Udo (1988). “Turkey-EEC Relations: The Cultural Dimensions”. Turkey’s Place in Europe: Economic, Political, and Cultural Dimension. Ed. E. Manisalı. İstanbul: Logos Yay.
• Taylor, Andrew, Andrew Geddes and Charles Less (2013). The European Union and South East Europe, the Dynamics of Europeanization and Multilevel Governance. New York: Routledge.
• Terzi, Özlem (2012). “Europeanization of Turkish Foreign Policy after More than Ten Years of EU Candidacy”. Turkey and the European Union, Processes and Europeanization. Eds. Çiğdem Nas and Yonca Özer. Surrey: Ashgate. 205 – 221.
• Torun, Zerrin (2013). “Avrupa Birliği’nin Türkiye ile İlgili Genişleme Politikası: Kuramsal Çerçeve”. Yarım Asrın Ardından Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği İlişkileri. Eds. Belgin Akçay and Sinem Akgül Açıkmeşe. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi. 79 – 98.
• Tovias, Alfred (1993-1994). “The Integration of Turkey in the European Community as a Stabilizing Factor for the Middle East”. Marmara Journal of European Studies 3 (1- 2): 50-68.
• Usul, Ali R. (2014). “Is There Any Hope on the Revival of EU-Turkey Relations in the New Era”. Turkish Studies 15 (2): 283-302.
• Üstün, Çiğdem (2010). “Europeanization of Foreign Policy: The Case of Turkish Foreign Policy towards the Black Sea Region”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 10 (2): 225-242.
• Vesterbye, Doveri S. (2018). “Preparing for a New Blueprint in EU-Turkey Relations?”. Turkish Policy Quarterly 17 (1): 67-75.
• Wiener, Antje and Thomas Diez (2004). European Integration Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Wiersma, Jan M. (2018). “Accession Abeyance: Finding a Way Forward For Ankara and Brussels”. Turkish Policy Quarterly 17 (1): 77-85.
• Zeytinoğlu, Ayhan (2018). “Turkey’s EU Odyssey: Problems and Prospects”. Turkish Policy Quarterly 17 (1): 37-46.