INTERVIEW... with * Turkey has been granted the chance to join the E.U. by October 3, provided that Ankara agrees upon given conditions. In your opinion, which are the most significant social and political matters to be solved before its possible admission? First of all, I want to emphasize that things are moving in the right direction. It was not, and it is still not possible to imagine a European political outlook without including an organic and integrated role for Turkey. It is not by chance that, since the 1950 s, Ankara has been NATO s outpost towards the southeastern countries. Nowadays, the political scene has changed: the Cold War is over, and so, Turkey s task is increasingly important. It is not a front-line country but a boundary and a junction nation. Europe has stretched its territory into the Balkans, and, thanks to this new member, it extends a bridge towards the Middle East. It would be hardly conceivable to foresee effective and constructive relationships with many Asian and southeastern countries in the Mediterranean without Turkey. Many issues in the ongoing negotiations with Ankara remain open: the abolition of both torture and political detention, the improvement of women s and prisoners civil rights, military interference on civil matters, the Kurdish question, the adoption of protective measures for the Armenian minority. Furthermore, another issue is the recognition of the Republic of Cyprus and the observance of religious minorities, especially the Christian one. The preliminary conditions for the negotiation progress are the observance of civil and human rights and its complete assimilation in Turkish legislation principles on which the E.U. is rooted. Anyway, many steps forward have been carried out: the 80-year-old criminal code has been reformed and updated, liberal laws regarding the rights of women and minorities have been passed. As far as economy is concerned, Turkey represents an opportunity for the Union: with its 70 million new, potential consumers, its internal market may bring financial benefits to the Old Continent. The Turkish GNP (Gross National Product) is steadily growing (5.8% in the 2004): notwithstanding, the country maintains its macroeconomic balance. There is no objection that its domestic output is about one third that of a European country but it is comparable to Romania s and Bulgaria s, both future candidates to E.U. membership by the 2007. The admission of Turkey 105
Journal of Middle Eastern Geopolitics to the E.U. would have positive effects on the European economic plan, as the nation has the potential to meet competition with other E.U. members, especially in the manufacturing field. Turkey still needs structural reforms, as is the case of reform in the welfare domain, rather ineffectual at the moment and requiring a gain of competitive qualities of the whole system. Obstacles may arise in the Services sector the banking and the insurance one even if, given that negotiations will take long, there is enough time to reorganize them in the meantime. A real obstacle for Turkey becoming a E.U. member, consists on the wide range of reactions that European political leaders have displayed on the subject: the French President Chirac requested a popular referendum, while other members or political parties only welcomed it coldly. Europe must take on a unitary policy re-affirming a strong and positive belief of the Turkish question. Libya has been changing greatly its Foreign and Domestic Security Policies in these last years. Italy, a major Libyan commercial partner, has encouraged these structural reforms. This is mainly the result of both the historical tradition linking the two countries and the adoption of an uninterrupted, moderate, dialogue-oriented Italian foreign policy. Is there a European plan on the ground aiming at developing economic relationships with Libya? Italy has welcomed Libyan structural reforms with enthusiasm, siding openly in favor of the cancellation of economic sanctions towards the country. We must emphasize that Libya is an important country for Italy: it is our neighbor, with only a short strait separating it from Italy. Libya is our first commercial partner in the Mediterranean area (5.2 Billion Euros for oil and by-products); it is the third among the Mediterranean importers and it has a promising market for developing further trades. Finally, Libya is endowed with rich oil and gas stocks (50,000 Billion cubic feet), artistic and cultural resources (enhancing international tourism), rich water reserves (compared to other Saharian countries) and low-cost labor. In Libya, there is still a big demand for infrastructures and industrial machinery needs that Italian companies may fulfill. This Libyan role in the international scene is rather new, and this is the reason for which works are in progress to identify measures allowing rapid and effective commercial relations with the African country. Financial means such as rotating funds, insurances, loans issued with easy terms of payment are already available to encourage investments in the country. Nowadays, Libya is an observer member inside the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership Council. Another significant point to consider is the appointment of Libyan Italian top manager Raffaello Fellah to Head of the Mediterranean Investments Fund (FINMMED). Fellah has identified specific domains to work on: the commercial relationships with Libya and the funding of projects aiming at 106
developing peace in the whole Mediterranean area. National economic policies in the Middle Eastern countries are rather rigid. They mainly rely on energetic exports. In the next 20 years, do you foresee an economic collapse, or diversification (in case of a drop in the demand from Western countries) due to the development of alternative sources of power? First of all, an oil and by-products drop is not likely to happen and, even in that case, it would not have any consequence in the short period: today, 80% of the entire amount of sources produced and consumed are fossil combustibles. The exploitation of new sources of power requires heavy investments that Europe cannot afford at the moment. Excluding nuclear energy, which is 16% of total production, the technological means for exploiting alternative resources, such as the Aeolian or solar ones, hydrogen or biomasses, are not so advanced to replace fossil fuels on a large scale. In the case of a reduced demand from developed countries, this new situation could be easily handled: Middle Eastern countries could fulfill the energetic needs of China or India, that have no interest in investing in expensive technologies for alternative energetic purposes. On the other hand, world demand for energy will grow at the rate of 2% per year until 2020. Consequently, energetic exports from Middle Eastern countries are likely to continue, if we exclude geopolitical changes. Now, let us consider how these countries use the financial empires at their disposal: very often, they simply fulfill the thirst for power of influential oligarchies, rather than improving the general standard of living. The oilexporting countries have benefited from operating in an oligopolistic market, governed by a cartel, OPEC. It has a huge negotiating power and regulates extraction percentages. Given this context, they act as Western countries that produce advanced goods and services. The results? Transactions between Western countries and OPEC countries have tremendously increased (at the rate of 350% from 1973 up until now), while exchanges between countries producing raw materials other than oil, acting in competitive markets have lowered. The oil-producing countries entertain equal relationships with Western countries: they must take advantage of it, diversifying their economies. The politics and its representatives should seize this opportunity. Up to now, there are different duty systems that the E.U. adopts for commercial transactions purposes with Northern and Southern Mediterranean countries: this negatively affects the latter. Which, among these barriers, once annulled, could have positive effects for the development of this Southern Mediterranean area? 107
Journal of Middle Eastern Geopolitics The E.U. has carried out many steps in the direction of duty abolition. Agriculture is a productive sector, which still benefits from protectionist measures in Europe. Import duties on goods coming from Third World countries or financial aid granted to farmers by national governments to prevent the drop in price of local products are examples of protectionist policies. As a consequence, prices for Third World products have dramatically dropped, with negative side effects for European consumers as well. I believe that there are plenty of reasons to remove these barriers once and for all. First, there is economic evidence that the future outlook of Western economies relies on that of developing countries. The well-being and the welfare state we enjoy in Europe are the consequence of profitable trade with these countries whose raw materials and agricultural products are badly rewarded. Besides, it is not conceivable to exclusively encourage their industrial development, neglecting the primary sector that still remains the main source of wealth for the majority of these nations. If we take a specialization productive viewpoint for granted, there will still be in the future, countries which should only produce fruit, vegetables, wheat, potatoes, carrots or breed animals. It is of no use to make them produce cell phones or computers: it is more effective that they make investments in more profitable fields. As I have pointed out in a recent book of mine, one should hope that the agrarian goods markets would form cartels, oligopolistic in nature, like OPEC; this will provide protection to the products from the less developed countries through the observance of international cooperation measures. A good example of this is the ICO case (International Coffee Organization), acting in the coffee market. Should we view the Barcelona Declaration aiming to create both a Euro- Mediterranean Partnership and a shared market in the area as a political failure? Why? The proposals expressed in Barcelona in 1995 are still valid for the E.U.: it is an unavoidable condition to create economic, political and cultural connections with the countries situated in the north of the Mediterranean Sea. With the passing of time, some proposals have been dropped even if many steps have been carried out, such as the creation of the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly or the MEDA Program funding. The Partnership is an organic program aiming at developing relations in the security, political, financial, human and social fields. The main objective of the Barcelona Declaration is the creation of a Mediterranean free trade area, a very ambitious plan. It is undeniable that the E.U. has paid a great deal of attention to the Eastern countries: many efforts have been made to integrate the ten new members that joined the E.U. last May. It is also true that the international political scene has changed, as a result 108
of events such as the stalling of the peace negotiations in the Middle East or September 11 events. There is a widespread feeling of disappointment among Mediterranean countries for both the scarce results and the perception that the Partnership is considered a secondary matter by the E.U. I think that this is not true: Europe cannot forget it and I believe that it will carry on both the extension and proximity policies in the Mediterranean area. It is a crucial topic in the current geopolitical scene, a determining factor for the creation of a stable and peaceful area in the Mediterranean basin with the advantage to involve some of the most influential Arab countries. * is Vice Minister for Economy of the Italian Republic and professor at the Faculty of Economics, University of Rome La Sapienza 109