{"id":14810,"date":"2009-09-19T01:33:08","date_gmt":"2009-09-18T23:33:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.turkishforum.com.tr\/en\/content\/?p=14810"},"modified":"2012-07-30T14:05:22","modified_gmt":"2012-07-30T11:05:22","slug":"diaspora-turks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/2009\/09\/19\/diaspora-turks\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cDIASPORA TURKS\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bridge or Barrier in the EU Process?
\nDr. M. Murat Erdo\u011fan, <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Hacettepe University, Ankara,
\nDept. of Political Science and Public Administration.
\nHe is Vice Director of the Hacettepe University
\nEuropean Union Research Center (HUAB) and
\nof the Strategical Research Centre (H\u00dcSAM).t Erdo\u011fan<\/span><\/p>\n

Centuries have gone by since the retreat of
\nTurks, who once controlled the entire Southeast
\nof Europe and who had once expanded their territory
\nup to Vienna. \u201cEurope\u201d and \u201cTurkey\u201d, once
\n\u201cmutual enemies\u201d, then saw themselves rallying
\non the same side during the Cold War, deleting
\nthe negative marks of the past to a large extent.
\nAt the same time, the ideological-political
\norientation of Turkey toward Europe was more
\nand more institutionalized and a strong human
\ndimension was eventually added as well. Participating
\nas far as possible in Western European
\ninstitutions had a strong Europeanising effect,
\nmaking Turkey a part of Europe. Turkey\u2019s European
\ncommitment never seemed to perish
\ndespite the considerable challenges on the way
\nto full participation in European institutions. Increasing
\n\u201cEuropeanness\u201d was not only limited
\nto the state, it also established itself as one of
\nthe most important aspects of modern Turkish
\nidentity. \u201cEuropeanness\u201d is a deliberate political
\nchoice of Turks and the efforts spent to reach
\nthis goal continue with great commitment.
\nThe human factor, a dimension hardly taken
\ninto account at the beginning, became an ever
\nmore important issue with the start of substantial
\n\u201cworkforce immigration\u201d, particularly to Germany,
\nat the beginning of the 1960s. The agreement
\nwith the Federal Republic of Germany in 1961
\nwas soon followed by other European countries.
\nThe process and its implications, which have
\nbeen characterised by the famous phrase of Max
\nFrisch (\u201cWe wanted workers, but we got people\u201d),
\nstarted almost half a century ago. Even though
\nthe conditions of the Cold War are no longer
\npresent, the process continues to carry on. The
\nimmigrants and their families, identifying themselves
\nas European Turks, increasingly hold signifi
\ncant positions in the economic, cultural and
\npolitical life of the countries they live in \u2013 especially
\nafter it had become apparent that most of
\nthem are not living in Europe on a \u201ctemporary\u201d
\nbasis. More than 5 million Turkish migrants, with
\nhalf of the population already being European
\ncitizens, are living example of this fundamental
\nand qualitative change in European societies.
\nThe former \u201cGastarbeiter\u201d identity, which meant
\n\u201csitting on the baggage as if returning tomorrow\u201d,
\nhas practically been surpassed for the majority
\nof Turks living in Europe. The economic, cultural
\nand intellectual capacity of Turkish immigrants,
\nhaving evolved into a \u201cEuropean Turkish middle
\nclass\u201d as active participants in European societies,
\nconstitutes part of Europe\u2019s reality.
\nAlthough impacting fi rst and foremost the countries
\nwith substantial Turkish immigration over
\nthe past fi fty years, the process has always been
\nlinked to European integration as well. Mass
\nimmigration of Turks to Europe and relations
\nbetween Turkey and the EEC developed hand
\nin hand, although there is no organic bond between
\nthe two. However, the lack of workforce in
\nrevitalised post war Europe played an important
\nrole in the association of Turkey to the European
\nEconomic Community. However, the charm of
\ncheap labour seemed to decrease for the EC in
\nthe 1980s. Ironically, one of the most contested
\nissues between Turkey and the EC became the
\nquestions related to the free movement of persons
\nand European efforts to stop admissions
\nor even to send back, if possible, people already
\nliving in Europe. Accordingly, Turks were eventually
\nnot granted the right of free movement, although
\nthis had been foreseen before.
\nFor Turkey, the migration of workforce meant a
\ncontribution to European growth, helping foreign
\ncountries to solve their notorious lack of labour.
\nThe revenue sent back to Turkey initially constituted
\nan important source of income but gradually
\nlost its importance because of the economic
\ndevelopments in Turkey and the decision of
\nmany migrants to eventually rather invest money
\nin the country they live in. Whereas in 1995
\ntransfers still amounted to 5 billion USD, they
\ndropped to an estimated 1 billion USD in 2009.
\nAccordingly, after the 1990s, for Turkey the signifi
\ncance of Turks living in Europe shifted from
\nthe economic to politics. The main change in
\nmigrant Turks\u2019 attitudes in this context was illustrated
\nby a considerable number of them turning
\nfrom Turkish migrants into citizens of European
\ncountries. Turkish citizens in Europe were more
\nand more perceived as a politically relevant entity,
\nnot only by Turkey but also by EU politicians,
\nespecially after 1993: The discussions on the
\nnew EU architecture and the establishment of
\na Customs Union between the EU and Turkey
\ncreated an important atmosphere for European
\nTurks to become part of the European equation.
\nAccordingly, the group that had been cause for
\nconcern due to the problems attached to the
\nfree movement of persons became \u2013 anew \u2013
\nan important factor for Turkey. Now European
\nTurks were more and more considered \u201cTurkish
\nDiaspora\u201d, expected to help Turkey to reach
\nits goals in foreign and domestic politics, going
\nwell beyond the signifi cance formerly attached
\nto workers\u2019 transfers of money. In 1997, Turkish
\nPrime Minister Mesut Y\u0131lmaz even demanded of
\nGerman Chancellor Helmut Kohl to \u201cdefi ne his
\nattitude\u201d towards Turkey and its EU ambitions
\nahead of the 1998 general elections.
\nMany discussions and debates have accompanied
\nthe process ever since the workforce
\nagreement with Germany in 1961. Despite all
\nproblems, half a century of common history
\nhas demonstrated that Turks in general have
\nintegrated well into the norms of Europe.
\nZEI EVENTS
\nThe task of the European Commission in
\nongoing accession negotiations consists
\nnot only in the technical conduct of negotiations,
\nbut to an increasing degree in the
\nmediation between different expectations
\nand demands attached to enlargement policy.
\nThis mediation is an important factor in
\nadequately responding to European as well
\nas to partner\u2019s interests. During his visit to
\nthe Center for European Integration Studies
\n(ZEI) on 24 June 2009, Commissioner Olli
\nRehn particularly acknowledged the moderating
\nfunction of ZEI\u2019s EU-Turkey-Monitor,
\naccompanying accession negotiations between
\nthe EU and Turkey ever since their
\nlaunch in late 2005. The reinforcement of
\nmutual understanding and recognition in
\nthis as well as in other policy fi elds with particular
\nexternal implications plays a major
\nrole in any successful European policy.
\nhard time fi tting into European culture and
\nlifestyle, never became a source of massive
\ndisruption in the countries where \u2013 initially \u2013
\nthey were outsiders. On the contrary, they were
\nthe kind of group who contributed to the development
\nof these countries by their labour and
\ntaxes, respecting the laws and integrating into
\nthe societies they live in. On the occasion of an
\ninternational symposium, commemorating and
\ndiscussing \u201cTurks Abroad: Immigration and Integration
\nin 50 Years\u201d in Ankara in May 2009, Minister
\nof State Faruk \u00c7elik, in charge of migrant
\nTurks, opposed the popular view that \u201cTurks will
\ncreate imbalance due to their cultural differences.\u201d
\nTo the contrary, he stressed that \u201cthe existence
\nof our citizens on European land and their
\ncontributions to Europe are the most meaningful
\nresponse to those opposing the membership of
\nTurkey in the EU\u201d. An environment of symbiosis
\ncreates new dynamics, but the positive potential
\nof this situation outweighs the negative ones and
\ncould be seen as an asset for Turkey on its way
\nto the EU. At the same event, Egemen Ba\u011f\u0131\u015f,
\nMinister of State for EU Affairs and Chief Negotiator,
\nclearly highlighted the important role of
\nthe Turkish \u201cDiaspora\u201d in this context: \u201cWe are,
\nthanks to you, already in the EU and I see each
\none of you as our ambassador in our EU efforts\u201d.
\nThese words clearly illustrate Turkey\u2019s new policy
\ntowards \u201cits European citizens\u201d. According to
\nrecent declarations by Turkish politicians \u201cintegration
\nthat does not turn into assimilation\u201d shall
\ngenerate a win-win-situation for both, Europe
\nand Turkey \u2013 only if Turkish migrants are taken
\nseriously and are having economic, cultural and
\npolitical relevance, they can play this role. Turkish
\nmigrants causing problems in the countries
\nthey live in, however, also create problems for
\nTurkey \u2013 or, at least, are far from adding value.
\nTherefore it could be argued that Turkey has no
\nchoice but to be truly sincere about integration,
\nbecause only then all parties can benefi t. The
\nquestion however remains, in how far the EU
\nis equally sincere about it. If one considers the
\npersistent obstacles to free movement, which is
\nstill one of the central issues in EU-Turkey relations,
\nit appears that Turkish migrants as well as
\nTurkish citizens suffer: Visa-free travel is still an
\nillusion and it seems unlikely that the decisions
\nof the Court of Justice in individual cases, which
\nare only putting the fi nger on Europe\u2019s negative
\nattitude on free movement, will lead to a general
\nimprovement; one could therefore conclude that
\nTurkish people are effectively being prevented
\nfrom exercising some of the rights European
\nlegislation gives them.2 On the other hand, the
\nEuropean concern of potential mass immigration
\nof Turks to Europe must also be addressed
\nand taken into account in order to formulate a
\nwin-win-solution to this central obstacle to true
\nintegration.3
\nWithin the EU, the obstacles to free movement
\nare complemented by limitations on political
\nrights. The European demand to renounce Turkish
\ncitizenship for a working, tax-paying, lawabiding
\nTurkish migrant, who has lived 30 or even
\n40 years in Europe, reduces the eagerness to
\nreally become an EU citizen. It also raises emotional
\nreactions for Turks to be subjected to different
\nregulations in the process of admission to
\ncitizenship. The EU will have made a major contribution
\nto integration by changing its attitude in
\nthis regard by, for example, giving migrants who
\nhave lived in Europe for a certain time the right to
\nvote regardless of citizenship. Already today, the
\nimportance of Turkish migrants, accounting for
\nan approximate 2.5 million qualifi ed voters, has
\ncome to an unprecedented degree. Political parties
\nwill increasingly be affected by this growing
\npotential. The conservative notion that the emotional
\nbond between Turkish migrants and Turkey
\nis an obstacle for integration and therefore
\na reason for marginalising them from national
\npolitical life requires re-examination. Turkey can
\nbe a part of the solution just as it can also be a
\npart of the problem: As long as Turkish EU membership
\nis used \u2013 or rather misused \u2013 for cheap
\npropaganda, the topic as an election issue emotionally
\ndisturbs Turkish migrants. Arguments for
\nan anti-enlargement course along the lines of
\n\u201ccultural-religious\u201d differences, used for justifying
\nwhy the \u201chomeland\u201d of many migrants (i.e. Turkey)
\nshould not be admitted, create the ground
\nfor dangerous reasoning: Turkish migrants,
\nin the eyes of many Europeans displaying the
\ncharacteristics of the country that shall not be
\nadmitted, are concerned whether those saying
\n\u201cAn EU without Turkey\u201d may someday say \u201cAn
\nEU without Turks\u201d. Accordingly, they perceive
\nthe \u201cno to Turkey in the EU\u201d campaign as a campaign
\nagainst them, especially in the post 9\/11
\nenvironment with its growing Islamophobia and
\ndiscriminatory policy approaches.4 This is not to
\nargue that Turkish migrants shall be manipulated
\nin the favour of Turkish policy goals since this
\nwould mean intervention in the internal affairs of
\nthe countries concerned. However, it should be
\nacknowledged and taken into consideration that
\nthe integration (or non-integration) of Turkish
\nmigrants into different EU societies is partly but
\nstrongly linked with the question of Turkey joining
\nthe EU or not. To ignore this fact would mean
\nto be ignorant to central links and connexions in
\nthis complex puzzle.
\nFrom the presented point of view, it seems that
\nTurkey is more successful than some EU member
\nstates if it comes to integration. Turkey is already
\nplaying a major \u201cEuropean\u201d role in terms
\nof culture (Eurovision, European Capital of Culture),
\neconomy (Customs Union, commerce
\nwith the EU), politics (Council of Europe), and
\nsecurity (NATO, OSCE, European Security and
\nDefence Policy). The only \u2013 central \u2013 European
\narena whose decision making mechanisms
\nTurkey does not participate in is the EU. It is
\nan undeniable fact that Turks are an important
\ncomponent of European life. Through immigration,
\nEuropean countries have already tested
\nwhether it is possible to live with Turks. At this
\npoint, it can already be concluded that Turkish
\nmigrants constitute an undeniable \u201csocial-political
\ncapital\u201d to Europe that should not and must
\nnot be wasted by building up barriers instead
\nof establishing a climate of mutual understanding,
\nrespect and cooperation. Only by really accepting
\nand understanding Turkish migrants as
\n\u201ccapital\u201d, the countries they live in can fully benefi
\nt from the potential of its migrant population.
\nTurkish migrants are a \u201csoft power\u201d that cannot
\nonly contribute to the admission of Turkey to the
\nEU but also to the general interests of European
\ncountries \u2013 particularly in times of crisis as they
\nare experienced today in the fi nancial and economic
\nsphere.<\/p>\n

1
\nTurks, who were expected to have a rather
\nZEI EU-Turkey-Monitor Vol. 5 No. 2 August 2009 7
\nDr. Olli Rehn, EU Commissioner for Enlargement, meets with ZEI Director Prof. Dr.
\nLudger K\u00fchnhardt and Dr. Andreas Marchetti, Editor of the ZEI EU-Turkey-Monitor.
\n1) Cf. also Eleni Mavrogeorgis: A Clash of Perceptions,
\nNot of Civilizations.: Revealing Muslim & Non-Muslim
\nPerceptions of National Loyalty and Integrated Living
\n(Rutgers DGA Policy Brief, 1), Newark 2009.
\n2) R. Gutman during the mentioned symposium.
\n3) Former MEP V. \u00d6ger at the same event.
\n4) U. Erdener, Rector of Hacettepe University, at the
\nmentioned symposium.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bridge or Barrier in the EU Process? Dr. M. Murat Erdo\u011fan, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Dept. of Political Science and Public Administration. He is Vice Director of the Hacettepe University European Union Research Center (HUAB) and of the Strategical Research Centre (H\u00dcSAM).t Erdo\u011fan Centuries have gone by since the retreat of Turks, who once controlled the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":83,"featured_media":46413,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[835,89],"tags":[1779,184],"class_list":["post-14810","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-europe","category-turkey","tag-european-parliament","tag-union-for-the-mediterranean"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14810","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/83"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14810"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14810\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/46413"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14810"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14810"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.turkishnews.com\/en\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14810"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}