Southern Gas Corridor managed by Azerbaijan and Turkey. OSW Commentary No. 86, 2012-07-18

The Southern Gas Corridor is a European Commission initiative with the aim of facilitating the diversification of the routes and sources of gas imported into Europe in the hope of reducing the EU’s dependence on Russia. Although the Southern Gas Corridor – alongside the EU’s flagship Nabucco project, which constitutes a part of the Corridor – was originally conceived as a means of furthering the interests of the West (officially the EU but in practice also the US), the implementation of the project has become possible almost exclusively thanks to measures taken by Azerbaijan and Turkey. Consequently, a project which the EU had hoped would protect its political interests has indirectly given Azerbaijan and Turkey considerable influence over the EU, since it is those two countries that have effectively begun to define the shape of the Southern Corridor. This became particularly clear when the Trans-Anatolian gas pipeline (TANAP) agreement was signed on 26 June 2012. If the EU wishes to ensure that the implementation of the Southern Gas Corridor project retains at least some of its original design, Brussels has little choice but to take into account the preferences of Azerbaijan and Turkey at the expense of its own original plans.

Turkey and the EU: A play in search of a script. EuropEos Commentary No. 5, 28 September 2010

This Commentary warns that by continuing to act as if Turkey’s membership of the EU was still a credible prospect, the EU is dodging the critical issue of how to establish friendly and constructive relations with an independent, self-confident Turkey. More importantly, this approach prevents the EU from at last accepting that enlargement is not the only – nor necessarily the best – policy option available to deal effectively with a strategically important country on its borders.

Land Markets in the EU Candidate Countries of Croatia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey. Factor Markets Working Paper No. 1, September 2011

The paper provides an overview and a comparison of land markets covering the three candidate countries for European Union membership: Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic (FYR) of Macedonia and Turkey. It analyses and compares agricultural land structures and factors driving land markets, based on the available cross-section and time-series evidence on agricultural land structures and land productivity (yields). The land productivity measured by production per hectare of agricultural land varies between the three countries. Agricultural land structures are the result of historical evolution in land markets and land-leasing developments with additional different institutional environments and agrarian and land reforms.

Agricultural and Rural Labour Markets in the EU Candidate Countries of Croatia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey. Factor Markets Working Paper No. 6, September 2011

This paper provides an overview and comparison of labour markets in agricultural and rural areas in the three candidate countries for the EU membership: Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey. We analyse and compare the labour market structures and the factors driving them. The analyses are based on the available cross-section and time-series data on agricultural labour structures and living conditions in rural areas. Considerable differences are found among the candidate countries in the importance of the agricultural labour force, between rural and urban labour, and in poverty and living conditions in rural areas. Agricultural and rural labour market structures are the result of demographic and education processes, in addition to labour flows between agricultural and non-agricultural activities, from rural areas to urban ones and migration flows abroad. Declines in the agricultural labour force and rural population are foreseen for each of the candidate countries, but with significant variations between them. Showing different patterns over time, labour market developments in the sector and rural areas have been shaped by the overall labour market institutions, conditions and other factors in each country, such as the legal basis, educational attainment and migration flows, as well as the presence of non-agricultural activities in rural areas.

Agricultural and Rural Capital Markets in the EU Candidate Countries: Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey. Factor Markets Working Paper No. 8, October 2011

This paper analyses agricultural and rural capital factor markets in the three European Union candidate countries: Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic (FYR) of Macedonia and Turkey. Aggregate capital market indicators and their dynamics, and factors driving agricultural and rural capital markets are analysed and compared in these countries. In general, agricultural and rural capital markets show similarities with general capital market developments, but agricultural and rural capital markets are facing specific credit constraints related to agricultural assets and rural fixed asset specificities, which constrain their mortgages and collateral use. Credit market imperfections have limited access to the investment credits necessary for the restructuring of small-scale individual farms. Government transfers are used to differing extents in the candidate countries, but generally tend to increase over time. Remittances and donor funds have also played an important role in agricultural and rural economy investments.

Turkey and the Kurdish problem; new approaches in the face of the Middle East crises. Point of View No. 30, February 2013

From the Introduction. For almost a hundred years (since World War I and the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire) stability – or rather, the permanent threat to stability – has been a key challenge for the Middle East. One of the central elements of this threat has been the so-called Kurdish problem, that is, the issues that continually arise between the states of the region and the Kurdish minority living in the area, as well as the tensions among the individual states caused by a range of issues related to local Kurds. The country most affected by the Kurdish problem is Turkey.

Russia and Turkey - What does their partnership mean for the EU? EPC Policy Brief, 13 February 2015

Russia and Turkey have, over the past two decades, developed a very constructive relationship across a wide variety of policy areas. Imperial rivals during much of the Cold War, both countries have since then found common interests in matters of energy, trade and even defence. Besides their growing interdependence, it is hard not to notice the similarities between the two leaders of these countries, especially when it comes to the conspiracy mind-set of blaming dissent at home on foreign meddling. But does this mean that Turkey is fundamentally realigning its foreign policy strategy, away from the EU and towards Russia? And is the EU facing the emergence of an “axis of the excluded”? Not so according to Dimitar Bechev. In this Policy Brief, he argues that the ties between Russia and Turkey are driven by pragmatism and realpolitik. Contentious issues – such as the war in Syria - may be insulated from areas of overlapping interest, but deeper examination shows the glue holding the two countries together – their energy interdependence – is slowly weakening. Bechev believes the EU should take advantage of this divergence and try to (re-)anchor Turkey to its own initiatives and policies.

EU-Turkey plan for handling refugees is fraught with legal and procedural challenges. CEPS Commentary, 10 March 2016

EU-Turkey relations in the scope of the ongoing refugee crisis were at the heart of the European Council meeting of 7 March 2016. Among the set of initiatives proposed, the following two have attracted the most attention: First, for every Syrian readmitted by Turkey from the Greek islands, another Syrian from Turkey would be resettled in an EU member state. This has come to be known as the ‘one for one’ resettlement approach. Second, all new irregular migrants and asylum-seekers crossing from Turkey to the Greek islands would be returned to Turkey without offering any guarantee of protection.

EU-Turkey Summit on the refugee crisis Law and (dis)order? EPC Commentary, 21 March 2016

After many meetings and long hours of negotiations, the overwhelming feeling when a deal between the EU and Turkey was struck, was one of “mission accomplished”! Faced with an unprecedented crisis and forced to appease increasingly hostile public opinions back home, EU leaders had only one objective in mind: reducing the number of migrants arriving in the EU so that order can return in the framework of EU rules. However, a closer look at the Summit Conclusions and the EU-Turkey statement leaves a bitter taste, according to Yves Pascouau. In this Commentary, he questions the feasibility of the final EU-Turkey deal, saying that it creates more problems than it solves: besides the obvious legal and practical issues, it is far from certain which member states will be willing to do their part, or whether or not the EU can come up with a strategic vision on human mobility for the future.