AN ANALYSIS ON THE ALIGNMENT PROCESS OF TURKEY TO THE EU’S FTAs UNDER THE CUSTOMS UNION AND CURRENT CHALLENGES

Yıl 2009, Cilt: 27 Sayı: 1, 1 - 23, 01.07.2009

Özgür Çalışkan

Öz

AB tarihsel olarak tercihli ticaret anlaşmaları
konusunda öncü olmasına karşın, son yedi yıldır önceliğini DTÖ Doha Turu
görüşmelerine vermiştir. Doha Turu görüşmelerinin Temmuz 2006’da
duraksamasından hemen sonra, AB yeni tercihli ticaret anlaşmalarına
yöneleceğini ilan etmiştir. Bu bağlamda, AB’nin tercihli ticaret anlaşmalarına
ilişkin politika ve stratejilerinin, gümrük birliği ortağı olarak Türkiye`ye
etkileri özgün bir olay olmaktadır. Bu makalede AB’nin tercihli ticaret
yaklaşımının Türkiye-AB Gümrük Birliği üzerindeki etkilerinin ve Türkiye’nin
tercihli ticaret anlaşmalarını üstlenmesi sürecinin analiz edilmesi
amaçlanmaktadır. Makalede bahse konu sürecin hukuksal ve tarihsel yönlerine ve
güncel gelişmelere odaklanılmaktadır. Makalede günümüzde uluslararası ticaret
sisteminde yaşanan hızlı bölgeselleşme olgusu kapsamında, Türkiye ve AB gibi
asimetrik taraflar arasında oluşturulan gümrük birliğinin daha ileri bir
entegrasyon hedefi olmadan uzun vadede tam olarak çalışmayabileceği
tartışılmaktadır. Ayrıca, Gümrük Birliği çerçevesinde Türkiye’nin birçok
tercihli ticaret anlaşmasına taraf olmasının, dış ticaret rejimini
karmaşıklaştırdığı ve yönetimini zorlaştırdığı vurgulanmaktadır. Eğer taraflar arasında
danışma ve işbirliğini tesis edecek etkin mekanizma kurulmadığı takdirde, AB’nin
tercihli ticaret düzenlemelerine ilişkin yeni açılımının mevcut sorunları daha
da karmaşıklaştırabileceği ve gümrük birliğinin uygun işleyişini olumsuz
etkileyebileceği ileri sürülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tercihli ticaret anlasmaları/serbest ticaret anlasmaları, Gümrük Birliği, Türkiye, AB

AN ANALYSIS ON THE ALIGNMENT PROCESS OF TURKEY TO THE EU’S FTAs UNDER THE CUSTOMS UNION AND CURRENT CHALLENGES

Öz

Although the EU historically has been a
leading force for preferential trade arrangements (PTAs), its main priority for
the past seven years has been negotiating the WTO Doha Round agreement. Soon
after the Doha Round negotiations came to a standstill in July 2006, the EU
announced an ambitious agenda to enter into more PTAs. In this perspective, the
effect of the EU PTA policies and strategies (especially such new initiative)
on Turkey
as a Customs Union partner since 1996 is a unique case. The purpose of this
paper is to analyze the effects of EU’s PTAs approach on EU-Turkey CU and the
adoption process of Turkey
to EU FTAs. It focuses on this process in terms of its legal and historical
foundations and current challenges. The paper argues that under the current
“aggressive regionalism” phenomenon in the global trade system, a customs union
between asymmetric parties like Turkey
and EU without a clear prospect for closer integration may not work properly in
the long run. In addition, Turkey's
memberships in several PTAs, as the result of CU framework, make its trade
regime more complex and difficult to manage. Also, if an efficient mechanism is
not set up to ensure proper cooperation and consultation between the parties,
the new initiative of EU to FTAs will further complicate the present problems
and undermine the proper functioning of CU.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Preferential trade agreements/FTAs, the customs union, Turkey, EU

Kaynakça

• Ahearn, R.J. (2006) “Europe’s New Trade Agenda”, CRS Report RS22547, December, Washington DC.
• Baldwin, R. (2006) “Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls As Building Blocs On The Path To Global Free Trade”, World Economy, 29(11), 1451-1518.
• Bayar, A., H. Nuray and S. Receberoglu (2000) The Effects of the Customs Union on the Turkish Economy: An Econometric Analysis of the Four Years’ Implementation, Istanbul: IKV.
• Bayar, G., O. Caliskan, E. Arisoy (2003) “Foreign Trade Equations of Turkey: Gravity, Customs Union and Free Trade Agreements-An Econometrical Approach”, METU International Conference in Economics VII, September 6-9, Ankara, Turkey.
• Bhagwati, J. (2002) Free Trade Today, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Crawford, J., R.V. Fiorentino (2005) “The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements”, WTO Discussion Paper, No: 8, Geneva: WTO.
• EC (2002) Regular Report on Turkey’s Progress Towards Accession, Brussels. EC (2006a) “Global Europe: Competing In the World” [Com(2006)567], Staff Working Document, October 4, Brussels.
• EC (2006b) The Working Programme of EC-DG Trade, December, Brussels.
• EC (2008) Regional Trade Agreements and Bilateral Negotiations involving Trade Agreements (updated as of 04/12/2006), <http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issues/bilateral/index_en.htm> (April 2008).
• Emerson, M., K. Derviş, D. Gros, S. Ulgen (2004) The European Transformation of Modern Turkey, Brussels: CEPS.
• Hartrel, C. and S. Laird (1999) “The EU Model and Turkey-A Case for Thanksgiving?”, WTO Staff Working Paper, January, Geneva: WTO.
• Jones, E. (2006) “Europe's Market Liberalization is a Bad Model for a Global Trade Agenda”, Journal of European Public Policy, 13(6), 943-957.
• Maur, J. (2005) “Exporting Europe’s Trade Policy”, World Economy, 28(11), 1565-1590.
• Mercenier, J., E. Yeldan (1997) “Is a Customs Union with Europe Enough?”, European Economic Review, 41(3-5), 871-880.
• METI (2007) “Japan's Policy on FTAs/EPAs”, METI Working Document, <http://www.meti.go.jp/english/information/data/cFTA_EPAe.html> (April 2007).
• Meunier, S. and K. Nicolaidis (2006) “The European Union as a Conflicted Trade Power,” Journal of European Public Policy, 13(6), 906-925.
• Onis, Z. (2001) “An Awkward Partnership: Turkey's Relations with the European Union in Comparative-Historical Perspective”, Journal of European Integration History, 7(1), 105-120.
• Onis, Z. and C. Bakır (2007) “Turkey's Political Economy in the Age of Financial Globalization: The Significance and the Limits of the EU Anchor”, South European Society and Politics, 12(2), 147-164.
• Panagariya, A. (2002) “EU Preferential Trade Arrangements and Developing Countries”, World Economy, 25 (10), 1415-1432.
• Panagariya, A. (1999) “The Regionalism Debate: An Overview,” World Economy, 22(4), 477-511.
• Sapir, A. (2000) “EC regionalism at the Turn of the Millennium: Toward a New Paradigm?”, World Economy, 23(9), 1135-1148.
• Ulgen, S. (2002) “The Customs Union as the Catalyst of Globalisation”, Turkish Policy Quarterly, 1(2), 1-6.
• Ulgen, S. and Y. Zahariadis (2004) “The Future Of Turkish-EU Trade Relations”, CEPS EU-Turkey Working Papers, No: 5, Brussels: CEPS.
• Undersecretariat of Foreign Trade (UFT) (2006) The Export Strategy Plan 2004-2006, Ankara.
• UFT (2009) Turkey's Bilateral Free Trade Agreements, <http://www.dtm.gov.tr> (April 2009).
• UFT (2007) Türkiye ve AB ( Turkey and the EU), Sixth Edition, Ankara.
• USTR (2007) 2007 Trade Policy Agenda and 2006 Annual Report, April, Washington DC.
• WTO (2008) Preferential Trade Agreements, Geneva, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/a_z_e.xls> (04.15.2008).
• WTO (2007a) International Trade Statistics, Geneva.
• WTO (2007b) Trade Policy Review: European Communities 2007, Geneva: World Trade Policy Review Body.
• WTO (2003) Trade Policy Review, Turkey 2003, Geneva: World Trade Policy Review Body. <http://www.bilaterals.org> (April 2008).