Turkey applied for associate membership of the European Economic Community in 1959, when this only counted the six founders (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands). Half a century in the waiting room and the enlargement prospects for Turkey still at a standstill. It is not surprising then that some have qualified these tortuous negotiations lasting for half a century as “a sad anniversary of 50 years knocking on Europe’s door”.

Turkey applied before Ireland, the UK and Denmark, but negotiations have experienced a death-slow tempo and there is not a clear and straightforward path for the long standing relationship between Turkey and the EU. Indeed, it was not until December 1999 when EU Helsinki Council recognises Turkey as an EU candidate country on an equal footing with other candidate countries and not until October 2005 when the formal opening of Accession negotiations with Turkey started.

As the negotiating framework emphasizes “these negotiations are an open-ended process, the outcome of which cannot be guaranteed beforehand”, however, there is no other case in EU history where accession negotiations, have not led to full membership. But Turkey still does not meet the requirements for membership.

Since the accession negotiations started, the EU closed provisionally one chapter, opened negotiations on seven chapters, but also decided that eight relevant chapters will not be opened and no chapter will be provisionally closed until Turkey has fully implemented the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement (Turkey’s restrictions regarding the Republic of Cyprus, mainly on the free movement of goods, including restrictions on means of transport). There are 35 negotiation areas to cover. The issue of Cyprus continues to be a major obstacle to negotiations, but not the only one.

There is no doubt that Turkey is an exceptional case: there is no other example of such a long process for any other candidate state. This is, as Egemen Bagis, Minister for EU Affairs and Chief Negotiator emphasizes, “thought-provoking”. Despite the “great and profound” determination of the government for the EU accession, this should not be taken for granted. For instance, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated that he is tired of “maybes” and “buts” and he refuses the proposal of a“privileged partnership” by France and Germany: “We have been waiting for fifty years for entering Europe. From now on, we want a sharp answer. Some of the leaders are first saying something, and then they make a correction and claim that they didn’t say so. We have been tired of comedies. I will never accept a privileged partnership. We want full membership into the EU. We don’t want anything else than full membership.”

Very recently, the Nabucco project might place Turkey as a key ally to curb Europe’s over-dependence on Russia, but it might also be an asset for EU membership. As Mr Barroso said, “I believe that with the arrival of the first gas – and some experts have said this will be as early as 2014 – this agreement will open the door to a new era between the EU and Turkey”. (6) Egemen Bagis noted that Nabucco project would make Turkey much stronger in its negotiations with the EU (7). It might be considered that this project has encouraged the view that Europe needs Turkey more than Turkey needs Europe.

Turkey’s case seems to be in contrast with Iceland’s application. The foreign minister of Iceland, Össur Skarphedinsson, stated that accession is a logical next step in a long-standing relationship with the EU. Indeed, it might be said that Iceland has already adopted 22 out of 35 chapters of the acquis communautaire into domestic law. He also criticises those who suggest that Iceland’s application is “an opportunistic reaction” to the economic and financial crises that so badly hit Iceland, and emphasizes “Iceland’s clearly European identity” as one of the reasons for the application. Commission President José Manuel Barroso said: “The decision of the Icelandic Parliament is a sign of the vitality of the European project and indicative of the hope that Europe represents. Iceland is a European country with long and deep democratic roots.”

Turkey seems to be a special case again but it still has to work hard to meet the requirements for membership and put an end to this tortuous and long path towards the EU. Some have suggested that Turkey “juggles different worlds, be they Arab or Jewish, Muslim or European” without difficulty, although this could be a dangerous play (11). Turkey should demonstrate its determination to join the EU with words and facts. But this is not only Turkey’s task, the EU should also lead by example and show a more inclusive and positive approach to an even more diverse and open Europe.