In the course of the past two years Turkey made tremendous efforts to bring its legislation to conform with the Copenhagen criteria and these efforts are now constituting at fiıll speed. It can be said that after the passage from parliament 7 packages of reform legislation Turkey now fulfills the political criteria inasmuchas laws are concerned. Furthermore, Turkey has also established necessary bureaucratic structures needed for the conduct of negotiations and monitor the implementation of reforms.

According to the program agreed in Copenhague last year if the Commission report in 2004 attests to it that Turkey has fulfilled the Copenhagen criteria EU Council will decide for the beginning of negotiations with Turkey without delay.

There are, however, few unknowns that make the Picture somewhat murky.

First unknown concerns the evaluation of progress in implementation of the reform legislation. European Commission does not have a monitoring organization and has to rely on other European institutions and NGOs. The leading institution is the Council of Europe. Council of Europe's Human Rights Court is the watchdog for ensuring that member countries respect fundamental rights and freedoms embodied in the European Human Rights Convention. Turkey's standing with the Court has improved substantially because of the lessening in the number of complaints presented and the change of their nature. However, the Parliamentary Assembly and Committee of Ministers keep Turkey under monitoring process and until this process is brought to an end, Assembly almost every year adopts a resolution criticizing the Turkey's human rights performance mostly on the basis of false or outdated information. It is expected that this year’s report will be no better than the previous ones. The European Commission’s assessment of Turkey's conformity with the Copenhagen criteria is largely based on these reports that are sometimes tarnished by the biased political motivations of the rapporteurs.

Secondly, the protection of minorities requirement of the Copenhagen treaty is very difficult to assess as there is no mechanism to provide an objective assessment. Members of European Union widely differ on the subject of minorities some countries like France does concede the concept of existence of minorities in their country, some others like Germany uses â la carte definitions. Furthermore, in respect to the rights of minorities recognized under the Laussane Treaty there is some grumbling on the part of some the current EU officials.

Therefore, instead of relying on what may be partial hearsay press reports and NGO assessments an impartial EU-Turkey committee must examine the implementation and sustainability of reforms.

In all respects it seems that it will be highly diffıcult for the EU to pay adequate attention to the enlargement process in the course of 2004. These diffıculties are claimed to be as follows: In May, ten new members will join the European Union and they will appoint ten new Commissioners, a new Commission President will be elected in June or July and hearings will be conducted in the European Parliament for the confırmation of the appointment. European Parliament will have to approve the progress report and recommendation of the Commission for the beginning of negotiations. Furthermore the results of the intergovernmental conference on the New Constitution will be debated a fınalized through national parliaments or referenda. Under these conditions there is an ambiguity whether the present or the new Commission will prepare the 2004 report on Turkey. In view of the uncertainties for the next year and the wide and substantial progress achieved in Turkey to ensure conformity with the Copenhagen criteria it would be inadvisable to further delay the beginning of negotiations beyond 2005 as such a move would be an injustice to Turkey's efforts and will cause strong resentment in Turkey.

A more practical and equitable solution would be for the EU Council to decide in its meeting in December 2003 under the Italian presidency that Turkey has fulfilled the minimum requirements of Copenhagen criteria and if the sustainability of these reforms continue in the course of the year 2004 accession negotiations should start in 2005. Council should also set up a joint committee to monitor sustainability.

Better still would be to express confidence in Turkey's determination to adopt the European acquis and decide outright that the negotiations could begin in 2005.

Yet, everyone knows that before the Cyprus issue is resolved Greek and Greek Cypriot vetoes will bar any further progress in Turkey EU relations even if in all other conditions are fulfilled to a satisfactory measure.