The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) wields a significant military influence within Cyprus, Greece and Turkey, with the aforementioned states being member-states of said organization. Verily, the NATO is an alliance of different nations that takes primacy in terms of securing defense within member-states in the face of attacks from without, thus making it the “first resort” in terms of mutual defense of Cyprus, Greece and Turkey (Cebeci 94). Several announcements reaffirmed NATO’s position as the prime protector of said member-states. The 1999 Washington Summit emphasized that NATO stands as the main body that will respond to external attacks to any of its member-states, in the face of questions that seemed to challenge the body’s predominance in lieu of the involvement of the European Union (EU). Said summit expounded on said issues by highlighting that in cases where NATO did not involve itself as a whole, the EU has permission to organize autonomous military engagements. NATO’s role in the previously mentioned aspect received further weight in other announcements such as the Helsinki European Council (Cebeci 94-96).
Cyprus, Greece and Turkey currently face struggles in terms of the current state of affairs involving NATO. Turkey, being an outsider of the European Union yet an associate member of the now-defunct Western European Union (WEU), brought forth several of its concerns being at stake in light of the NATO-EU security cooperation issue. Said nation contended that it does not have much power of representation to get their message across EU in the event of ESDP operations that may affect their self-interests, in particular those held in areas where it holds particular interests. Following said concern is the possibility that Turkey might be hindered from participating in operations instigated by the EU, in light of Cyprus’ entry into said union (which it does not regard as an independent state due to territorial interests within it) and Greece’s status as a full-fledged member (to which it has disputes over territories in Cyprus). Indeed, Cyprus acted against Turkey through its motives to prevent the signing of the EU-Turkey Security Agreement and the nation’s association in any affairs pertaining to the European Defense Agency (EDA). Turkey, for its part, successfully prevented Cyprus from being involved in any NATO-EU cooperating agenda and has stopped said nation from forging a NATO security pact. (Cebeci 97-100) General conflicts between NATO and EU (in terms of its autonomous military operations) have caused an ongoing ambiguity on the Atlantic security alliance’s role in Cyprus, Greece and Turkey, despite its status as the “first resort”.
The EU provides a standardized political and economic framework to member-states – in this case, Cyprus and Greece. Turkey is not a member of the EU, despite its apparent interest to join the union ever since its inception in 1959 as the European Economic Community (Kuniholm). The relations of said nation to Cyprus and Greece provide relevant bearing to its status as a candidate for accession. Both Greece and Turkey have long-standing differences over Cyprus, the former being supportive of the island nation’s eventual accession to the union and the latter being adamant due to territorial claims on the island. Northern Cyprus, a portion of the island nation declaring itself an independent state recognized only by Turkey, forms part of the larger reason between the Greece-Turkey disputes. In 1974, Greek Cypriots wanted Greece to take over the island, which resulted to Turkey’s response by occupying areas that form part of the previously mentioned disputed territory. The result – the occurrence of a social divide between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, led to unsavory dealings between Greece and Turkey. This particular aspect alone can be a factor that can potentially weaken Turkey’s prospects of accession to the EU (Kuniholm).
In terms of membership, the EU looks into aspects pertaining to the candidates’ democratic principles, rule of law and regard for human rights (Kuniholm). While Cyprus and Greece have become successful in providing for those aspects, Turkey appeared left on the trail. Disputes against Greece on the Cyprus issue has influenced the outcome of the 1997 Luxembourg summit, in which the EU held the rejection of Turkey’s accession bid to be tenable. Apart from the dispute per se, the ongoing process of Cyprus’ accession bid heavily influenced by Greece’s support aggravated Turkey’s position on political grounds. As a result, Turkey suspended its relations with the EU, until the union reconsidered its bid two years later. Leadership changes within EU and individual nations (particularly Germany, which initially rallied against Turkey’s membership) and Turkey’s erstwhile response to the 1997 rejection (that it is becoming a regional power) led the union to reconsider its stance during the 1999 Helsinki council.
In the economic aspect, the EU wields considerable influence, having established a single market across all member-states. While Cyprus and Greece, being EU member-states, are getting full economic rights and benefits from the union, Turkey – being a non-member, provides another distinct case in this aspect. Verily, Turkey initially wanted access to the Customs Union of the EU- a move that would grant the nation stronger free trade relations with the union. While Greece threatened to veto such move, its stance mellowed when talks of granting accession to Cyprus – its universally recognized portion controlled by Greek Cypriots, pushed forward. Analysts have perceived Turkey’s interest in joining the Customs Union as a way of securing the nation’s interest towards its amicability with the EU without guaranteeing full accession to the union. Those who support Turkey’s accession to the EU see such move as a possible catalyst of reform. According to them, “the prodding provided from outside” – EU and the Customs Union, in this case, can bring in reforms to Turkey in the absence of a formidable leadership. The same is applicable in the case of Cyprus and Greece – two nations that are currently afflicted by political and economic turmoil (Kuniholm).
Both NATO and EU provide significant frameworks for Cyprus, Greece and Turkey, particularly in terms of their disputes with one another. Turkey, in particular, has received substantial focus in this context mainly because of the fact that it is not a member of the EU. Such has portrayed Turkey in a distinct light when paralleled with Cyprus and Greece – both being EU member-states. The EU’s motives to launch autonomous military endeavors have placed Turkey – a NATO member-state, in a compromising situation, mainly because such operations might undermine NATO’s authority as the primary organization in mutual defense within Europe. As for EU, the union has an undisputed role in maintaining political and economic stability among its member-states – Cyprus and Greece included. Yet, with Turkey – a candidate state for EU accession, its membership to the union’s Customs Union has ensured better trade relations with member-states, providing a significant step towards potential accession.
Works Cited
Cebeci, Munevver. "NATO-EU Cooperation and Turkey" Turkish Policy 10.3 (2011): 93-103. Print.
Kuniholm, Bruce. Turkey’s Accession to the European Union: Differences in European and US Attitudes, and Challenges for Turkey, IREX, 2001. PDF file.
