THE IMPACT OF CONDITIONALITY ON THE TEMPORAL ASPECT OF ACCESSION PROCESS OF CANDIDATE STATES TO THE EU: TURKEY AND SERBIA IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

Year 2016, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 0 - 0, 23.03.2016

Pınar Erkem

https://doi.org/10.18221/bujss.89574

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı Avrupa Birliği’nin (AB) katılım kriterlerini tüm aday ülkelere objektif biçimde uygulayıp uygulamadığını incelemektir. Analizin temel odaklarını katılım sürecinin zamansal boyutu ve koşulluluk politikasının etkisi oluşturmaktadır. Bu amaçla, Türkiye ve Sırbistan’ın AB’ye katılım süreçleri karşılaştırılacaktır. Bu iki örnekten biri en uzun süredir katılım için beklemekte olan ülke iken diğeri sürece en son katılan ve görece olarak hızlı ilerleyen bir ülkedir. Örnekler üyelik öncesi geçirdikleri süreçler açısından karşılaştırılmaktadır; zamansal boyut, AB tarafından sürülen koşullar ve süreç içerisinde elde edilen ödüller, örneğin dolaşım serbestisi, ele alınmaktadır. Ulaşılan sonuçlara göre koşulluluk ilkesinin uygulanmasında iki aday ülke için niteliksel ve niceliksel açılardan farklılıklar tespit edilmiş ve ortaya konulmuştur.

THE IMPACT OF CONDITIONALITY ON THE TEMPORAL ASPECT OF ACCESSION PROCESS OF CANDIDATE STATES TO THE EU: TURKEY AND SERBIA IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to examine whether the EU implements the accession criteria objectively to all candidate states. The temporal dimension of the accession process and the impact of conditionality are the focus points to analyze. For this purpose, a comparison of Turkey and Serbia with regards to their EU accession processes is conducted. The cases are composed of the longest waiting candidate and the last candidate with relatively fast moving process. The cases are compared according to the time they spent in the way to membership, the conditions that have put forward by the EU and the prizes they received in the process, i.e. the free movement right. The findings point out to the difference in the implementation of conditionality for the two candidate states both in terms of quality and quantity. 

References

• Additional Protocol (1970). Online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:21970A1123(01):EN:HTML, (09.03.2014).
• Akgül Açıkmeşe, Sinem, (2010), “Cycles of Europeanization in Turkey: The Domestic Impact of EU Political Conditionality”, UNISCI Discussion Papers, No 23, pp.129-148.
• Ankara Agreement (1963). Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/turkey/association_agreement_1964_en.pdf, (09.03.2014).
• Balkır, Canan (1998), “The Customs Union and Beyond”, in: Libby Ritenberg (Ed.). The Political Economy of Turkey in the Post-Soviet Era: Going West and Looking East? Westport: Conn: Greenwood Press, pp. 52-77.
• Commission of the European Communities (2004), Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey’s progress towards accession, Brussels, COM (2004) 656 final, 6.10.2004. Online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52004DC0656&from=EN, (19.03.2014).
• Commission of the European Communities (2005), Communication from the Commission: 2005 enlargement strategy paper, COM (2005) 561 final, Brussels, 09.11.2005. Online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52005DC0561&from=EN, (19.03.2014).
• Commission of the European Communities (2007a), Serbia 2007 Progress Report, 6.11.2007, SEC (2007) 1435. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2007/nov/serbia_progress_reports_en.pdf (19.03.2014).
• Commission of the European Communities (2007b), Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2007-2008, SEC (2007) 663 final. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2007/nov/strategy_paper_en.pdf, (19.03.2014).
• Commission of the European Communities (2008), Serbia 2008 Progress Report, 5.11.2008, SEC (2008) 2698 final. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/press_corner/key-documents/reports_nov_2008/serbia_progress_report_en.pdf, (19.03.2014).
• Commission of the European Communities (2009), Serbia 2009 Progress Report, 14.10.2009, SEC (2009) 1339. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2009/sr_rapport_2009_en.pdf, (19.03.2014).
• Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Paper (2002), Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Stabilization and Association Report, Brussels, SEC 343. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/archives/pdf/serbia_and_montenegro/com02_343_en.pdf, (19.03.2014).
• Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament (2009), "Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2009-2010", Conclusions on Serbia, COM (2009) 533 final. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2009/conclusions_on_serbia_en.pdf, (19.03.2014).
• Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament (2011), "Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2011-2012", Conclusions on Serbia, COM (2011) 666, 2011. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2011/package/sr_conclusions_2011_en.pdf, (19.03.2014).
• Energy Community (2015), About Us. Online: https://www.energy-community.org/portal/page/portal/ENC_HOME/ENERGY_COMMUNITY, (11.01.2016).
• Eralp, Atila (1998), “Turkey and the European Union in the Aftermath of the Cold War”, in: The Political Economy of Turkey in the Post –Soviet Era: Going West and Looking East, L. Rittenberg (Ed.), Westport Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group Inc.
• Eralp, Atila (2004), “Turkey and the European Union”, in: The Future of Turkish Foreign Policy, Lenore G. Martin and Dimitris Keridis (Eds.), Cambridge: The MIT Press.
• European Commission (2015), Enlargement: EU - Turkey relations. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/candidate-countries/turkey/eu_turkey_relations_en.htm, (07.12.2015).
• European Commission, (2005), Serbia and Montenegro: 2005 Progress Report, SEC (2005) 1428, Brussels. Online: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2005/1428/COM_SEC(2005)1428_EN.pdf, (07.12.2015).
• European Commission, (2013), Turkey 2013 Progress Report, Brussels, SWD (2013) 417 final. Online: http://www.abgs.gov.tr/files/strateji/tr_rapport_2013_en.pdf, (18.03.2014).
• European Commission, (2014), Turkey 2014 Progress Report, Brussels. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2014/20141008-turkey-progress-report_en.pdf, (18.03.2014).
• European Council (2014), Decision 2006/56/EC, Official Journal, L 035. Online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006D0056:EN:HTML, (10.03.2014).
• European Council in Copenhagen (1993), Conclusions of the Presidency, SN 180/1/93 REV 1. Online: http://ec.europa.eu/bulgaria/documents/abc/72921_en.pdf, (18.03.2014).
• European Parliament (2014), Conclusions of the Presidency, Santa Maria da Feira European Council. Online: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/fei1_en.htm#V, (11.03.2014).
• European Union (2006), Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and of the treaty establishing the European Community, Official Journal of the European Union, C 321/E. Online: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/legal/pdf/ce32120061229en00010331.pdf, (11.01.2015).
• Freedom House (2015), Turkey 2015. Online: https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2015/turkey, (14.12.2015).
• General Affairs and External Relations, (2013), External Relations, 2518th Council meeting, 10369/03 (Presse 166), Luxemburg. Online: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/gena/76201.pdf, (11.03.2014).
• Hale, William (2003), “Human Rights, the European Union and the Turkish Accession Process”, Turkish Studies, Vol.4, N.1, pp.107-126.
• Keyman, E.Fuat, Öniş, Ziya (2007), Turkish Politics in a Changing World, İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Lazic, Mladen, Vladimir Vuletic (2009), “The Nation State and the EU in the Perceptions of Political and Economic Elites: The Case of Serbia in Comparative Perspective”, Europe-Asia Studies, Vol.61, N.6, pp.987-1001.
• Müftüler-Bac, Meltem (1997), “Turkey and the European Union: an historical overview”, in: Turkey’s Relations with a Changing Europe, Meltem Müftüler-Bac, UK: Manchester University Press.
• Müftüler-Bac, Meltem, Lauren M. McLaren (2003), “Enlargement Preferences and Policy-making in the European Union: Impacts on Turkey”, European Integration, Vol.25, pp.17-30.
• Official Journal of the European Union (2009), Court Proceedings, Case C-228/06, C90/2. Online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:090:0002:0002:EN:PDF, (09.03.2014).
• Orlovic, Slavisa (2008), “Parties and the party system of Serbia and European integrations”, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Vol.10, N.2, pp.205-222.
• Öniş, Ziya (2000), “Luxemburg, Helsinki and Beyond: Towards an Interpretation of Recent Turkey-EU Relations”, Government and Opposition, Vol.35, N.4, pp.463-483.
• Pavlovic´, Dusan, Slobodan Antonic´ (2007), Konsolidacija demokratskih ustanova u Srbiji posle 2000, Godine, Belgrade: Sluzˇbeni glasnik, in: Sabrina P. Ramet, “Crotia and Serbia since 1991: An Assessment of Their Similarities and Differences”, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.27, N.2, 2011, pp. 263-290.
• Presnall, Aaron (2009), “Which way the wind blows: democracy promotion and international actors in Serbia”, Democratization, Vol.16, N.4, pp.661-681.
• Ramet, Sabrina P. (2011), “Croatia and Serbia since 1991: An Assessment of Their Similarities and Differences”, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.27, N.2, pp. 263-290.
• Renner, Stephan, Florian Trauner (2009), “Creeping EU Membership in South-east Europe: The Dynamics of EU Rule Transfer to the Western Balkans”, Journal of European Integration, Vol.3, N.4, pp.449-465.
• Schimmelfennig, Frank (2008), “EU political accession conditionality after the 2004 enlargement: consistency and effectiveness”, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.15, pp.918-937.
• Sjursen, Helene, (2002), “Why Expand? The Question of Legitimacy and Justification in the EU’s Enlargement Policy”, JCMS, Vol.40, N.3, pp.491-513.
• Smith, Karen E., (2005), “Enlargement and European Order”, in: Christopher Hill and Michael Smith (Eds.). International Relations and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 270-291.
• The European Community (2011), Stabilization and Association Agreement between the European Communities and Their Member States of the One Part and the Republic of Serbia, of the Other Part, CE/SE7en 1, Online: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/serbia/key_document/saa_en.pdf, (18.03.2014).
• Tocci, Nathalie (2012), “Regional origins, global aspirations: The European Union as a global conflict manager”, in: Conflict Management in Divided Societies, Stefan Wolff, Christalla Yakinthou (Eds.), London: Routledge, pp.135-150.
• Weller, Marc (2012), “The failure of prevention: Kosovo”, in: Conflict Management in Divided Societies, Stefan Wolff, Christalla Yakinthou (Eds.), London: Routledge, pp.217-232.
• Yakinthou, Christalla (2012) “A never-ending story: Cyprus”, in: Conflict Management in Divided Societies, Stefan Wolff, Christalla Yakinthou (Eds.), London: Routledge, pp.233-248.