There are times when the European Union seems to acknowledge reality while at the same time refusing to face its consequences. The European Parliament’s new report on Turkey is one such example.
The text, drafted by Spanish MEP Nacho Sánchez Amor, leaves no room for misinterpretation. It describes a country that is drifting further and further away from European values, a country where the rule of law is eroding, rights are being curtailed, and the opposition is under constant pressure.
The criticism is overwhelming. Against Ekrem İmamoğlu. Against the CHP. Against journalists. Against academics. Against human rights defenders. Against all those who oppose the rule of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
Even more interesting is that, for the first time, the European Parliament is also turning against Europe itself. It accuses institutions and member states of remaining silent in the face of Turkey’s democratic regression and calls on them to speak out more forcefully.
The picture is rounded out by references to Greece and Cyprus. The “Blue Homeland” is denounced. The casus belli is deemed unacceptable. Violations of the sovereign rights of EU member states are clearly documented. The Turkey-Libya memorandum is rejected. The occupation of 37% of Cyprus is highlighted. Challenges to Greek sovereign rights are specifically named.
In other words, the European Parliament itself describes a country that is not only drifting away from democracy but is also, in practice, challenging two EU member states and calling into question sections of the Union’s external borders.
One would expect the conclusion to be self-evident. But it is not.
Because political flip-flopping follows immediately afterward.
The report notes that Turkey’s accession process remains frozen and cannot be restarted under the current circumstances. It acknowledges that the country is steadily drifting away from European standards. It admits that there are serious trust deficits. It notes Turkey’s aggressive behavior toward Greece and Cyprus.
And yet, it proposes closer strategic cooperation with Ankara and calls for exploring new possibilities for Turkey’s participation in the European Union’s current and future security and defense policies.
This is a glaring contradiction.
Europe states that it does not trust Turkey enough to consider it a candidate for membership in the European family. It does not trust Turkey enough to reopen accession negotiations. It does not trust Turkey enough to believe that it respects the rule of law, human rights, and good neighborly relations.
It does, however, trust it enough to discuss its own defense with it. It trusts it enough to consider it a potential partner in building the European security architecture. It trusts Turkey enough to recognize its role in shielding Europe.
The very same Turkey that, according to the report, maintains a casus belli against Greece. The very same Turkey that challenges the sovereign rights of member states. The very same Turkey that occupies European territory in Cyprus. The very same Turkey that, in practice, challenges the European Union’s external borders. This Turkey is being called upon to contribute to European defense.
If this does not constitute a strategic impasse, then what does?
In reality, the report reveals something deeper than Euro-Turkish relations. It reveals Europe’s own predicament. Its inability to support its own geopolitical ambitions on its own. Its inability to build a credible defense policy without seeking crutches even where trust is lacking.
The Union appears to be telling Ankara: you are authoritarian, you violate rights, you threaten member states, you challenge European borders, but we need you.
And when a power is forced to send such a message, it does not project strength.
It conveys a sense of need. And in politics and geopolitics, that need is often the clearest form of an admission of defeat.