Prime Minister M. Topolánek‘s address at Ankara University: Turkey‘s role in a globalised world, 8 October 2008

It may sound strange. Why would Turkey be important to us when our countries supposedly have nothing in common? We differ in our historical and cultural development and we differ in size. But in reality, we very much need a successful Turkey. Not only with regard to issues of geopolitics, geostrategy and security. This is a question of philosophy as well. We are among those in the West who believe that Europe’s future is in openness. We are not afraid of differences; we are afraid of inflexibility. We believe that sharing our values with others will save us, not closing ourselves off. I know that you yourselves are posing a number of questions about your future. And that is good. It’s not just your future that depends on having the correct answers, but indirectly, the future of Europe and the world as well.

The Turkish way

Asia Minor has always been a cultural crossroads, a crossroads of religions and civilisations. But your country has been a global player for millenia. In contrast with a number of other countries, today’s Turkey has successfully faced the challenges resulting from the transformation of the international security environment. As a state, Turkey is successfully playing a role as a stabilising element at a restless crossroads of the world, and is a regional power as regards military and economic power – so-called „hard power.“

But the Turks are also important to us as a nation that wants to maintain its politically democratic legacy, and at the same time not lose its cultural traditions. Or, if you would prefer, a nation that wants to maintain its cultural heritage and not lose its place in the modern world. In this, the Turkish model is eminently valuable for both East and West. As they say, examples are followed by others, and Turkey has been preordained to the role of moderator of events in the Middle East, to the role of a country that draws the Muslim and Christian worlds closer. In the sense of societal stability and soft power, that is Turkey’s important role.

I can assure you that I understand Turkey’s efforts toward a stable and safe anchorage in the world. The Czech Republic is in Central Europe, which traditionally has been a "buffer zone" between Germany and Russia. We managed for the first time in the 1990s to find a safe alliance in trans-Atlantic ties. Turkey preceded us in this. Since 1952, its army has formed NATO's solid defence pillar in the southeast. Like us, Turkey also has good reasons for membership in the alliance. It has reasons to fear the influence of eastern powers. The Soviet Union occupied us in 1968, and Stalin wanted Turkey to revise borders agreed to in 1921 so that he could take part in control over the straits leading to the Mediterranean.

Turkey remained in defence of democratic values even after the end of the Cold War. You have your units in Kosovo, in Afghanistan, and you take part in air policing missions in the Baltic states. This is clear evidence that you have long belonged in the Euro-Atlantic space, that you share its values and that you are prepared for its active defence. And I want to thank you for that. The progress you have made in fulfilling EU terms, especially recently, is also evident. For me, these clear acts are far more important than the evasive words of certain Western statesmen who are trying to give reasons why your country's European Union accession must be delayed indefinitely.

I always say that Europe's borders are based on values, not geography. This or that small piece of land around Istanbul will not get you classified as part of Europe, but faithfulness to common values will. For this reason, when I come to you as the prime minister of a country that will hold the future EU presidency, I also come to you with a clear message. We see Turkey as an important partner for our successful presidency. This is for reasons that are both long-term and current. The first reasons relate to Turkey's geopolitical standing, and the second with the priorities we have pointed out for our presidency, even with the momentary foreign policy situation.

Geopolitical importance

Turkey's geopolitical importance is clearly not only due to its location. A number of other countries are in strategic locations, on sensitive fault lines. But they tend not to bring the world anything positive, and do not contribute to global stability and balance. Turkey, on the other hand, has shown it is something more than a buffer zone. For me, Turkey is one of the few countries that can serve as an example of how to come to terms with changes in the nature of security threats after the fall of the Iron Curtain. Turkey managed the transition from a bipolar arrangement into a world in which the USA plays a dominant role; at the same time, however, new local conflicts are constantly being born; aggressive regional powers are gaining strength and the threat of world terrorism is escalating.

Today's threats are far from only having a military nature. While the terminology of the cold war has long been insufficient to describe them, neither can current political science studies. It is typical that there is not even agreement on the name for the global order we live in. And that speaks for itself. I lean toward the concept as described by American international relations theoretician Richard Hass, which he called a "non-polar" order.

In a non-polar order, there are a greater number of regional, not global, players existing side by side, and not only those with a state character. Such non-polar players could include world organizations such as the World Bank and the United Nations or regional groupings such as OPEC or Mercosur. In the hierarchy of these international systems, the position of individual players is relatively levelled and fungible. As opposed to a multi-polar or bi-polar world, the non-polar players do not give too much of a chance to the establishment of a firm world order, to a "concert of powers," which would set the rules of the game and serve as a guarantee of world stability and security. As an analogue of how the nature of the international system is transforming, the character of threats is also logically changing.

The importance of countries such as Turkey is increasing at the same time as the transition from a bi-polar, uni-polar or, if you prefer, a superpower arrangement to a non-polar one. But so is Iran. While this second regional power is the source of instability throughout the entire Middle East, Turkey plays an important geopolitical role as a stabilizer of the territory between the Caucasus, Middle East and Europe.

The power of reforms

I spoke here about Turkey's participation in NATO and international missions. Nonetheless, you could not have been able to develop this praiseworthy activity if Turkey was not a country that was economically successful and socially cohesive. Long ago, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk announced: "Let us not be inappropriately proud of military victory – let us prepare scientific and economic victory."

In today's world, economic power is continuing to increase in importance. Military power enables you to win a battle, but it does not guarantee prosperity, political stability or the resolution of social problems. Long-term victory depends on high-quality and effective management, on functioning institutions, on economic power, and last but not least on access to education. We have grown accustomed to considering all of this groundwork as guarantees of well-being. But at the same time they are guarantees of peace and security. Where people do business, they do not engage in warfare. Turkey has not only shown its military preparedness in the defence of peace, but it has also gone down a long part of the path toward a successful modern society. It is a country that, through its own efforts, has become a stabilising element in the region. At the same time it has become a model for others. Turkey is proving that the difference between prosperity and poverty is not in the disfavour of perceived enemies, but in the ability of its society and their leaders.

The numbers on economic performance are eloquent. According to the OECD, Turkey is the 16th largest economy in the world, with an average five-year GDP growth of 5 % to 9 %. I've half a mind to joke with you and ask why you want into the EU at all, when its economic growth is one-third to half of yours, especially due to the amount of regulation. Despite Turkish economic growth being fragile and frequently marked by political turbulence, the long-term trend is unambiguous: Turkey is becoming the largest economy in the eastern Mediterranean, southeastern Europe and the Middle East.

Its societal reforms are just as important as its economic reforms. From improving the condition of minorities to changes in civil, business and criminal legislation. I am convinced that these dynamic societal changes will enable all Turkish citizens to share the fruits of economic success. These reforms will contribute to a gradual smoothing out of social and regional differences. Without these, you could not have had the pleasant phenomenon with the ugly name: Social cohesion.

Energy security

Turkey is also a key player in energy security and the security of sources of strategic raw materials. Not just for the Mediterranean and Central Asian region, but for all of Europe. Europe, including Turkey, today faces the dilemma of how to diversify resources that come in large part from problematic areas (Russia, the Caucasus, the Persian Gulf, Africa, Latin America). Unfortunately, not all EU countries are aware of the political and security risks related to the need to cover rising energy demands and do not understand that the EU and Turkey are in the same boat. Certain large countries' efforts at a solo approach, agreeing to separate agreements with Russia, threaten both Turkey and the Czech Republic. This is why we feel the need to devote increased attention to the issue of energy security during our presidency. This includes deciding to hold the EU-Trans Caspian summit, which will provide us with an opportunity to deepen European cooperation with supplier and transit countries in the region, including Turkey and Ukraine.

The Czech Republic is strongly aware of Turkey's fundamental importance in ensuring Europe's energy security. Today Turkey plays an important role in the energy corridor for the transport of oil and natural gas (the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum natural gas pipeline, and the Nabucco natural gas pipeline under consideration). Turkey's economic, political and cultural influence influence on the Caucasus and Central Asian republics (Turkmenistan, Azerbaidjian, and others), which play an ever greater role on the global oil and natural gas market, is just as important. This was also confirmed during the recent crisis in Georgia. Stability in this region is important for the stability of the energy shipments which flow through this region to Europe. But this is not just about oil and natural gas. Turkey controls the flow of the Euphrates and Tigris into Syria and Iraq, and these rivers, with their massively supply water to the northeastern parts of the Mediterranean have their sources within its territory. The value of water as a strategic raw material is rising in the Middle East, and Turkey's weight in the region is rising with it.

From hard power to soft power

In the past, Turkey was perceived mainly from the point of view of hard power, as a watchman at Europe's southeastern tip, as a state that contributed to global stability mainly through its tanks and soldiers. And of course as a key country for oil deliveries, natural gas and strategic raw materials. Now your role as a soft power is becoming ever more important. A role that was unthinkable against the backdrop of the cold war. A role that is becoming more important in a new world order, in which military power alone is not decisive, but where the power of institutions, the power of a successful societal model is decisive. Three factors have contributed to this transformation for Turkey.

The first is economic growth. Economic interests and development started to be impinged upon by historic residue, which had to be removed. As I have said, where people do business they do not engage in warfare. Today old resentments appear to be far less important than interest in economic cooperation, where neighbours' hostility gets in the way. I am convinced that economic development was therefore an impulse toward a more active Turkish diplomacy.

I can assure you that both from our point of view from Central Europe, as well as from the position of a country which will hold the presidency, we perceive a pronounced paradigm shift in Turkish foreign policy, in the sense of a more active and more careful building of constructive affairs with your Middle Eastern neighbours, as well as in the sense of an effort to overcome the questions of the past.

I would call the second factor religious-cultural. Arab nationalism in neighbouring countries has been on the decline. On the other hand, the expression of political Islam is a more and more current form. Turkey, however, is a successful model of functional melding of state secularism with a moderate Islamic tradition. All of this makes it into an example that today appears in the Arab world as worthy of following in a far greater amount than could have been assumed even some decades ago.

Because of its unique position between two worlds, Turkey is also appropriate in the role of a mediator, which it wants to play in Arab-Israeli peace talks. Mainly between Israel and Syria, but also between Israel and Palestine. And now in Georgia. This is immensely valuable for us. Especially in connection with our presidency; the end of the Annapolis process and the January elections in Iraq will fall within our term.

The third factor contributing to the perception of Turkey as something of a soft power is its EU accession process. Neighbouring states correctly see it as a sign of Europe's openness toward Islam in general. Of course I do not want to entertain false hopes that everyone has the same opinion on this issue. Supporters of Turkey's integration into the EU, and I count myself as one, see Turkey as a future bridge between Islam and Christianity. They see in it a chance that for once we will be able to overcome the clash of civilizations that is occurring today; they see it as a chance for us to find a small intersection of common values, a minimal foundation for civilization. The terms of entrance to the EU could serve as one of the starting points for the definition of the values that people can share regardless of cultural differences. This is why, in my opinion, it is so important that Turkey be successful in fulfilling these criteria. And why we will also advocate that in such a case the EU keep its promise and invite Turkey further.

Turkey into the EU

Opponents on the other hand argue that Turkey is failing in its role as a beacon for the rest of the Muslim world. It has a special position in the region because of its imperial past, membership in NATO as well as traditionally close relations with the USA and Israel. According to its critics, Turkey will be a source of instability for the EU because it neighbours inscrutable Iran; with Syria, which has relations with Hezbollah; with Iraq, where insurgent attacks are a daily occurrence; but also with Azerbaidjian and Georgia, transit states for Islamic terrorists from Chechnya. And we cannot forget the 200 million Turkish-speaking inhabitants of Central Asia. Including the Turks among the "EU citizens" would actually shift the EU's vital border to northern China. These negative arguments unquestionably reflect the reality of the current international order. But if the EU wants to reach its paper ambition to become a global player, it should not close to Turkey the gates of Fortress Europe for these reasons.

I will say it again and clearly. The Czech Republic is an emphatic supporter of Turkey's full membership in the EU as long as it fulfills all criteria. You were accepted among candidate countries and it does not seem fair to us to change the rules in the middle of the game, even if of course we know that this game still has a long way to go. It seems unfair to us to pulverise your integration efforts with premature considerations of alternatives to your membership. We do not like this both formally and from the point of view of existing considerations about the content of such "alternatives." In these considerations, a disproportion reigns between advantages for the EU, which would gain in this privileged relationship with Turkey, and disadvantages for Turkey, which would have a very limited voice in the EU's decision-making processes. On one hand, the authors of this deliberation want to use the economic potential of the 70-million strong Turkish market, as well as its geopolitical position and the security-strategic values of your country. On the other hand, those proposals have evident signs of attempts to limit Turks' attempts to the EU's internal market and to its labour market.

The debate about Turkey's membership in the EU says a lot about not only your country, but also about the European Union. I would even say that it says more about the EU than about Turkey. Your country has not undergone reforms primarily because of the EU, but because of your own people and your own prosperity. If you continue in this, you will one day simply fulfill the given criteria and will be prepared to become a full-fledged member. But what about the EU? Will it be able to keep its promises and its own civilizing mission? The EU's civilizing mission consists of adherence to our own values, in how it manages to continue to expand the space of stability, peace, security and prosperity in its vicinity. The first assumption for this is that it will be attractive for Turks and others to even vie for membership. But it is just as necessary that the EU know how to deal with the demands that its global role will lay before it.

The EU must especially not close itself into its shell; it must be open, and must know how to develop more into breadth rather than depth, as has been the case thus far. Further violent unification would turn it into a third-rate power; I am convinced of this. I do not want Turkey to become a victim of the inability of European leaders to face these challenges. On the contrary, I want to resolve these challenges and progress in the accession talks with Turkey are therefore in line with the priorities of the Czech presidency.

The motto of the European Union is In Varietate Concordia. Unity in diversity. How typical this is, especially for Turkey. Turkey is not a European nightmare, as some in the West argue. Turkey can be the fulfillment of a European dream of freedom, the fulfillment of a dream of a society held together due to common values and which moves forward due to its internal diversity. Hopefully the dream we have together will be fulfilled. Not just because of us, but mainly for the next generation.