Türkiye-AB İlişkilerini Yeniden Biçimlendirmek: Gümrük Birliğine Alternatif Olarak Farklılaştırılmış Entegrasyon “İsviçre Modeli”?

Yıl 2021, , 493 - 521, 28.06.2021

Serdar Altay

https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.593006

Cited By: 2

Öz

Brexit
süreci bağlamında tartışılan Avrupa Birliği (AB) ile alternatif farklılaştırılmış
entegrasyon modelleri yakın tarihin en derin kriziyle karşı karşıya olan Avrupa
ve Türkiye için çözüm arayışındaki paydaşlar için ilham kaynağı olabilir.
Gelecek dönemde gerçekleşecek bir gümrük birliği modernizasyonu müzakereleri
Türkiye-AB ilişkilerini Norveç ve İsviçre vakalarındaki gibi daha güçlü bir dış
farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon şekline dönüştürmek ve gümrük birliğinin şimdiki
yapısından kaynaklı sorunların tamiri için bir fırsat yaratabilir. Bu makale
İsviçre örneğini gümrük birliği güncelleme sürecinde değerlendirilebileceği
düşüncesiyle Türkiye ve AB arasında alternatif bir entegrasyon modeli olarak
incelemektedir. Makale İsviçre modelinin hem halihazırdaki gümrük birliği hem
de Avrupa Komisyonu (AK) tarafından gümrük birliğinin güncellenmesi için Aralık
2016’da ortaya atılan iki senaryosu ile kıyaslamalı bir analizini yapmaktadır.
İsviçre modelinin yakın gelecekteki Türk-AB ilişkileri için potansiyel avantaj
ve dezavantajlarını ortaya koyan makale İsviçre’nin “serbest ticaret anlaşması
artı” modelinin hem var olan gümrük birliği hem de AK tarafından önerilen iki
senaryodan daha iyi bir alternatif teşkil ettiğini iddia etmektedir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Avrupa entegrasyonu, Türk-AB ilişkileri, gümrük birliği, farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon, İsviçre modeli

Remolding Turkey-EU Relations: The ‘Swiss Model’ of Differentiated Integration as an Alternative to the Customs Union?

Öz

Alternative
models of differentiated integration with the European Union (EU) discussed in
the context of Brexit might be inspiring for European and Turkish stakeholders
who are concerned with overcoming the deepest crisis in bilateral relations of
recent history. The forthcoming customs union modernization negotiations are likely to
create an opportunity to bring Turkey-EU
relations to a stronger mode of external differentiated integration as in cases
of Norway or Switzerland and fix problems aroused by the current structure of
the customs union. This paper examines Switzerland’s case as an alternative model of
integration between Turkey and the EU which can be considered during the
upgrade process. The paper compares and contrasts the Swiss model with the
existing customs union and the European Commission’s (EC) two upgrade scenarios
for the customs union which were proposed in December 2016. It lays out
potential advantages and disadvantages of a Swiss model for Turkish-EU
relations in the coming future and argues that Switzerland’s “free trade
agreement plus” model provides a better alternative than the current form of the
customs union and the EC’s scenarios. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

European integration, Turkey-EU relations, Swiss model, Customs union, Differentiated integration

Kaynakça

• Altay, Serdar (2018a), “Associating Turkey with the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: A costly (re-) engagement?”, World Economy, 41(1): 308-336.
• Altay, Serdar (2018b), “Toward a “Privileged Partnership: The EU, Turkey and the Upgrade of the Customs Union”, Insight Turkey, 20(3): 179-198.
• Bobowiec, Zuzanna (2017), “Brexit and Free Movement of People: The Frameworks and Legal Bases of Possible Migration Control”, King’s Journal for Politics, Philosophy and Law, 1: 105-116.
• Booth, Stephen; Howarth, Christopher; Persson, Mats; Ruparel, Raoul and Swidlicki, Pawel (2015), “What If . . .? The Consequences, Challenges & Opportunities facing Britain outside EU,” Open Europe Report 03/2015.
• Cianciara, Agnieszka K. and Adam Szymański (2019), Differentiated integration: towards a new model of European Union–Turkey relations?”, Turkish Studies.
• Crespo, María José Pérez (2017) “After Brexit…The Best of Both Worlds? Rebutting the Norwegian and Swiss Models as Long-Term Options for the UK,” Yearbook of European Law, 36: 94–122.
• Dyson, Kenneth and Angelos Sepos (2010), Which Europe? The Politics of Differentiated Integration (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
• Emerson, Michael (2017), “Which Model for Brexit?”, in da Costa Cabral, Nazaré, José Renato Gonçalve and Nuno Cunha Rodrigues (ed.), After Brexit (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan): 167-188.
• European Commission (EC) (2016), “Commission Staff Working Document Impact Assessment”, http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/ia_carried_out/docs/ia_2016/swd_2016_0475_en.pdf. (21.12.2016).
• EC (2018), “Commission Staff Working Document Turkey 2018 Report”, Document No. SWD/2018/153final, https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/20180417-turkey-report.pdf (17.04.2018).
• Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA), (2018) “Institutional agreement between Switzerland and the EU: key points in brief,” Note by Directorate for European Affairs DEA, 7 December 2018.
• Fossum, John Erik (2016), “Norwegian Reflections on Brexit”, The Political Quarterly, 87(3): 343-347.
• Gstöhl, Sieglinde (2015), “Models of external differentiation in the EU's neighbourhood: an expanding economic community?”, Journal of European Public Policy, 22(6): 854-870.
• Hakura, Fadi (2018), “EU–Turkey Customs Union Prospects for Modernization and Lessons for Brexit”, https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/publications/research/2018-12-12-eu-turkey-customs-union-hakura.pdf (12.12.2018).
• Karakaş, Cemal (2013), “EU–Turkey: Integration without Full Membership or Membership without Full Integration? A Conceptual Framework for Accession Alternatives”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 51(6): 1057-1073.
• Kawka, Inga (2014) “The Movement of Services between the European Union and Switzerland,” Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy, (10)10.
• Lavenex, Sandra (2015), "The external face of differentiated integration: third country participation in EU sectoral bodies" Journal of European Public Policy, 22(6): 836-853.
• Leruth, Benjamin, and Cristopher Lord (Ed.) (2016), Differentiated Integration in the European Union (Oxon: Routledge).
• Leuffen, Dirk, Berthold Rittberger, and Frank Schimmelfennig (2013), Differentiated Integration: Explaining Variation in the European Union (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
• Ministry of Economy (MoE) (2015), Pazara Giriş Engelleri 2015 Raporu, (Ankara).
• Müftüler-Baç, Meltem (2013), “The Future of Europe, Differentiated Integration and Turkey’s Role”, Global Turkey in Europe, Commentary No. 9. https://www.iai.it/en/pubblicazioni/future-europe-differentiated-integration-and-turkeys-role (18.10.2013).
• Müftüler-Baç, Meltem (2017), “Turkey’s future with the European Union: an alternative model of differentiated integration”, Turkish Studies, 18(3): 416-438.
• Müftüler-Baç, Meltem and Brooke Leutgert (2016), “The European Union’s Alternative Models for Maximizing its Integration Strategy for Candidates and Neighbour States. A Process of External Differentiation.”, MAXCAP Working Paper, no. 35. http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/kfgeu/maxcap/system/files/maxcap_wp_35.pdf.
• Piris, Jean-Claude (2016) “If the UK Votes to Leave: The Seven Alternatives to EU Membership,” Centre for European Reform, January 2016.
• Schimmelfennig, Frank (2014), “EU Enlargement and Differentiated Integration: Discrimination or Equal Treatment?”, Journal of European Public Policy, 21(5): 681–698.
• Schimmelfennig, Frank, Dirk Leuffen and Berthold Rittberger (2015), “The European Union as a system of differentiated integration: interdependence, politicization and differentiation”, Journal of European Public Policy, 22(6): 764-782.
• Schwok, René (2013), “‘Brexit’: the Swiss model as a blueprint?”, https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/brexit-swiss-model-as-blueprint/ (07.01.2013). Senior Officials Working Group (SOWG) (2015), “Report of the Senior Officials Working Group (SOWG) on the Update of the EU-Turkey Customs Union and Trade Relations”, https://ticaret.gov.tr/data/5b87b62f13b8761160fa10c4/YDMCG_Raporu.pdf (27.04.2015).
• Stubb, Alexander C-G (1996), “A Categorization of Differentiated Integration”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(2):283–95.
• Togan, Sübidey (1997), “Opening up the Turkish economy in the Context of the Customs Union with the EU”, Journal of Economic Integration, 12(2):157-79.
• Togan, Sübidey (2015), “The EU-Turkey Customs Union: A Model for Future Euro-Med Integration”, in Ayadi, Rym, Marek Dabrowski, Luc De Wulf and Leonor Coutinho (eds.), Economic and Social Development of the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean Countries (London: Springer International Publishing): 37–48.
• Vahl, Marius and Grolimund, Nina (2006) Integration without Membership: Switzerland’s Bilateral Agreements with the European Union” (Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies).
• World Bank (2014), Evaluation of the EU: Turkey Customs Union, Report No. 85830. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/298151468308967367/pdf/858300ESW0P1440disclosed090260140TR.pdf (28.03.2014).