Egemen Bağış, PhD, is a Turkish diplomat, having formerly served as Minister for EU Affairs and Chief Negotiator of the Republic of Türkiye in accession talks with the EU. You may follow him on X @EgemenBagis.

Europe has often been a continent of paradoxes—richly diverse yet persistently divided, historically war-torn but fiercely committed to peace. As the recent passing of Europe Day reminded us, the European Union remains arguably the greatest peace initiative the world has ever seen. Celebrating its 80th anniversary of peace since World War II, Europe today finds itself navigating an era more complex and uncertain than ever before. That the EU still stands as the most audacious peace project in human history is a testament to the power of unity over ancient rivalries.

The author during a press conference with his EU counterpart, then European Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighborhood Policy Štefan Füle | Source: Guliver Image

As the rhythms of modern geopolitics grow increasingly turbulent, Europe finds itself once again grappling with the question of relevance. What defines Europe’s role on the global stage? What anchors its influence in a world undergoing seismic shifts in power, identity, and security? With the celebration of another Europe Day on May 9th, these questions demand urgent reflection.

Born from the ashes of World War II, the EU turned battlefields into boardrooms and forged bonds where bitter enmity once persisted. The fact that EU member states have not waged war against each other since its inception is not merely a bureaucratic triumph—it is a historical anomaly. But if the EU is to remain more than a nostalgic echo of past idealism, it must prove its capacity to evolve. It must reach beyond internal solidarity and embrace an expansive, adaptive strategy for the future.

 

And that is where Türkiye enters the conversation—not as a supplicant, but as a strategic partner essential to the very relevance of the European project.

 

Today, the EU stands at a crossroads of competing imperatives. The global order that once offered predictability has fractured. Economic certainties are being upended by innovation and instability alike. Military conflicts—from Ukraine to the Middle East and other parts of the globe—have revived the specter of war in ways few Europeans thought imaginable in the twenty-first century. Meanwhile, demographic shifts, technological revolutions, and climate-driven disruptions are reshaping societies faster than governance systems can adapt.

As Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said recently, Türkiye would want to be part of any new European security architecture if NATO unravels. “The genie is out of the bottle and there is no way to put it back,” he said of European security. “Even if President Trump decides not to withdraw from Europe at this time, it is possible that in the future someone with similar views and political ideas might consider reducing America’s contributions to European security,” Fidan added.

In this landscape, the EU’s traditional strengths—regulatory sophistication, economic scale, and diplomatic clout—are no longer sufficient on their own. To lead, the EU must not only reinforce its strengths but also reimagine what it can be. And to do that, Europe must extend this vision beyond its own borders, embracing new partnerships with courage and clarity.

If enlargement once seemed like a policy decision among many, today it represents a geopolitical necessity. Europe cannot afford to retreat inward while the world demands connectivity, agility, and breadth. Enlargement is no longer just about integrating economies or harmonizing laws. It is about survival—about ensuring that the EU remains a geopolitical actor capable not only of reacting to but also of shaping global developments.

In this light, Türkiye’s candidacy is more than relevant—it’s indispensable. With one foot in Europe and the other in Asia, Türkiye sits at the crossroads of some of the world’s most critical geopolitical theaters: the Eastern Mediterranean, the Black Sea region, the Middle East, and Central Asia. This is not just geography; it’s geopolitics in its purest form. From the Bosphorus to the borderlands with Iran and Syria, Türkiye embodies the kind of connective tissue that binds disparate regions—and their futures—together. From everyday rituals such as coffee drinking to the very name “Europa,” which originates from a Phoenician princess who crossed into Europe from Anatolia, Türkiye has been an integral part of European history, culture, and geography.

Yet for all its obvious strategic importance, Türkiye’s relationship with the EU has often been mired in inertia, skepticism, and miscommunication. Negotiations for accession have dragged on for decades, entangled in a web of political hesitations, cultural anxieties, and bureaucratic hurdles. The question now is not whether Türkiye belongs in the EU, but whether the EU can remain relevant without Türkiye.

 

Cooperation Beyond the Conventional

Consider the scale of challenges facing the EU today. The war in Ukraine has reignited debates about energy security and military readiness. The humanitarian disaster in Gaza and ongoing instability in Syria reveal the EU’s limited capacity for decisive action in its immediate neighborhood. In the Asia-Pacific, rising tensions underscore the growing risk of global fragmentation. In none of these arenas can the EU act alone—and in nearly all of them, Türkiye holds unique leverage, knowledge, and experience.

As a NATO member for over seventy years, Türkiye has demonstrated both military and diplomatic capacity. It maintains one of the largest standing armies in the alliance and has been a critical player in joint operations from Afghanistan to the Balkans. But Türkiye’s relevance is not confined to its military power alone: it is also a central player in managing migration flows, mediating conflicts, securing energy corridors, and stabilizing fragile economies in its vicinity.

The EU’s dependency on energy imports is well known. Less appreciated is the degree to which these resources—whether from the Caspian, the Middle East, or the Caucasus—must pass through or near Turkish territory to reach Europe. Roughly 70 percent of Europe’s potential energy suppliers lie to Türkiye’s east, south, or north. No amount of internal EU regulation can substitute for the physical infrastructure and diplomatic partnerships that Türkiye already provides.

Moreover, Türkiye has emerged as a major logistical hub in global supply chains—a role only amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent disruptions in maritime trade. As the world recalibrates around new trade routes and regional dependencies, Türkiye’s infrastructure and geographic position offer the EU vital resilience.

 

Reaction to Anticipation: Strategic Foresight as a Shared Mission

Europe’s history is a cautionary tale of what happens when ambition outpaces strategy. Twice in the twentieth century, Europe sleepwalked into global war—not from a lack of vision, but from a failure to foresee. In today’s world, where cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and hybrid warfare increasingly define international conflict, anticipation is everything. With its deep intelligence networks, counterterrorism experience, and complex regional relationships, Türkiye can be a key partner in transforming the EU’s approach from reactive to proactive.

This partnership should extend beyond tactical cooperation. It must be institutionalized within a framework of shared strategic foresight—one that includes joint threat assessments, integrated policy planning, and real-time coordination in emerging crises. Whether it’s stabilizing Libya, navigating the Iran question, or addressing transnational organized crime, a Türkiye-EU alliance built on trust and planning can preempt crises before they escalate.

This shift from management to prevention also reflects a deeper philosophical evolution. In a world of accelerating risk, resilience is not just about defense—it is about anticipation.

 

Mutual Respect and Foundations of a Lasting Partnership

Cooperation and foresight, as critical as they are, can only flourish in an environment of mutual respect. The relationship between Türkiye and the EU has often oscillated between cautious engagement and pointed estrangement—a dynamic shaped as much by historical baggage and cultural misunderstandings as by policy disputes. To move beyond this cycle, both parties must recalibrate their assumptions. The EU, for its part, must abandon the notion that Türkiye is an outlier to be managed rather than a peer to be engaged. Türkiye, too, must recognize that integration into the European project entails a shared commitment to EU norms and institutional integrity—values that form the bedrock of the union’s identity, however inconsistently applied across its members.

Respect is not synonymous with agreement. Disagreements are inevitable in any complex alliance, and there have been many between the EU and Türkiye. However, respect transforms disagreement into dialogue. It acknowledges the legitimacy of each party’s concerns without descending into caricature or condescension.

Critically, mutual respect allows for honest conversation about power asymmetries. Türkiye is often perceived within the EU framework through a transactional lens—valuable for migration control, trade, or defense, but not fully welcomed into its political and cultural community. This selective embrace breeds resentment, fuels Euroscepticism within Türkiye, and ultimately weakens the partnership’s coherence.

To build a truly transformational relationship, the EU must not place Türkiye in a category of “countries with benefits,” but rather recognize it as a true stakeholder in the European vision. This entails a more inclusive discourse within EU institutions, equitable access to policymaking platforms, and a long-overdue reevaluation of Türkiye’s stalled accession process.

 

A Cultural and Civilizational Confluence

It is easy to reduce geopolitics to maps and trade routes, but any lasting political union must also be underpinned by a deeper narrative—a sense of shared destiny that goes beyond contracts and conferences. This is where Türkiye’s potential contribution to the EU becomes truly profound.

Türkiye is often described as a bridge—between continents, civilizations, and ideologies. While that metaphor may sometimes seem overused, its essence remains compelling. Few other nations embody such a confluence of cultural currents. From Istanbul’s minarets rising beside centuries-old Orthodox churches to Anatolian towns shaped by Roman, Seljuk, and Ottoman legacies, Türkiye is a living archive of Eurasian history. In a world increasingly defined by fragmentation—by rising identity politics, ideological polarization, and cultural enclavism—Türkiye offers a case study in pluralism under pressure. Its successes and struggles alike carry valuable lessons for the EU, which faces its own challenges with multiculturalism, migration, and social cohesion.

Rather than viewing Türkiye’s distinctiveness as a problem to be mitigated, the EU should see it as an asset to be embraced. Europe’s future will not be forged by retreating into uniformity but by mastering the art of unity in diversity. In that sense, Türkiye is not an outlier to European identity; rather, it is a mirror reflecting the complexities, contradictions, and creative tensions that define the continent itself.

Moreover, Türkiye’s deep cultural ties across the Muslim world offer the EU an unparalleled opportunity to build bridges with regions where its credibility has often been questioned. In an era marked by cultural misunderstandings and religious mistrust, Ankara’s unique position can help Brussels project a message of genuine dialogue and inclusive global engagement.

 

Economic Integration: An Undervalued Reality

While the political relationship between Türkiye and the EU has often been tense, the economic relationship tells a different story—one of deep, persistent interdependence.

Türkiye is the EU’s fifth-largest trading partner, and the EU is Türkiye’s largest by a wide margin. This is not a niche dynamic—it’s a structural one. Trade flows between the two have grown steadily over the past two decades, encompassing not only raw materials and manufactured goods but also complex value chains in the automotive, textile, chemical, and electronics sectors.

Moreover, the EU-Türkiye Customs Union—though long overdue for modernization—has laid the groundwork for one of the most integrated cross-border trade regimes outside the EU itself. It facilitates tariff-free access, simplifies regulations, and promotes economic alignment in ways that many full-fledged EU members would envy.

Yet the relationship’s economic dimension is rarely granted the political attention it deserves. Investment flows, joint ventures, and sectoral collaborations remain underleveraged due to the uncertainty surrounding Türkiye’s long-term role within the EU framework.

Modernizing the customs union to include services, agriculture, and public procurement goes beyond unlocking vast economic potential. It would also send a strong signal that the EU values Türkiye not only for its provision of security or migration control but also for its economic dynamism and innovation.

Furthermore, Brussels and Ankara face common challenges that require economic cooperation and a joint strategy: energy transition, digital transformation, labor market shifts, and climate resilience. These are not marginal issues—they are existential questions for both sides. Coordinated action in these areas would demonstrate what a mature, forward-looking partnership truly looks like.

 

Migration, Identity, and the Politics of Perception

No issue has impacted the EU-Türkiye relationship more toxically in recent years than migration. The 2015 refugee crisis, which saw millions flee the Syrian Civil War, exposed the fragility of Europe’s solidarity and the limitations of its asylum system. It also thrust Türkiye into a pivotal role—both as a buffer and as a partner.

The EU-Türkiye migration deal of 2016 was effective in practical terms, reducing flows into Greece and stabilizing borders, but it also deepened mutual suspicion. For many Europeans, Türkiye was seen as a gatekeeper with leverage; for many Turks, the deal symbolized a relationship based on utility rather than respect.

This narrative must change. Migration is not a problem to be “solved”—it is a structural feature of the modern world, driven by war, poverty, climate change, and demographic shifts. The question is not whether migration will happen, but how it will be managed—and with which values.

Türkiye, home to the world’s largest refugee population, has shouldered a burden that few others have. Its experience, from integration policies to border control, should be recognized as both a challenge and a contribution. It also positions Türkiye as a key actor in shaping a more humane, effective, and coordinated European migration policy.

In this domain too, cooperation must move from transactional to transformational. Joint development projects in countries of origin, harmonized asylum procedures, and shared responsibility mechanisms—these are the hallmarks of a mature migration strategy. And Türkiye must be present at the table when that strategy is written.

 

A Vision for the Future: From Hesitation to Strategic Integration

As the EU reflects on its purpose in the twenty-first century, it cannot afford to treat enlargement as a peripheral issue or a distant aspiration. Enlargement must be understood as a foundational strategy—one that determines whether Europe remains a cohesive force or dissolves into irrelevance under the currents of global realignment.

For Türkiye, the issue is not merely one of membership or institutional alignment. It is about affirming a shared vision of the future—a Europe that is dynamic, inclusive, and equipped to lead. Türkiye’s involvement would do more than add another star to the EU flag; it would expand the bloc’s strategic bandwidth, both geographically and ideologically.

Some skeptics oppose Türkiye in line with shortsighted political ideologies, but exclusion is never a smart solution. Engagement, conditionality, and reciprocal accountability remain the EU’s most powerful tools for fostering reform, stability, and progress.

The EU, for its part, is not without its own contradictions. From the erosion of judicial independence in some member countries to rising xenophobia and Islamophobia across parts of Europe, the bloc is grappling with its own internal crises of democracy. The answer is not to raise the drawbridge but to reaffirm the principles that make integration meaningful.

This is where Türkiye’s candidacy becomes not a burden but a test—a test of whether the EU still believes in its core founding ideals: peace through unity, prosperity through cooperation, and strength through diversity.

To meet that test, both sides must take bold steps. For Türkiye, that means reaffirming its commitment to democratic norms, the rule of law, and institutional transparency—not merely as EU requirements, but as national imperatives. As Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has said on various occasions, Türkiye implements EU reforms not to please the EU but to improve the living standards of its citizens.

Türkiye has made major progress in the last two decades: from the eradication of child labor to constitutional amendments enhancing individual rights and liberties, and major steps toward a cleaner environment and greater food safety. Ankara has been inching closer to EU standards every day, despite political barriers put forward by some circles within EU member states. Türkiye today is much more democratic, prosperous, and aligned with EU standards compared to when it first began these negotiations. As a matter of fact, I have always argued that the EU is like a dietician for candidate countries. Although the dietician can be moody at times, their prescription has been effective in helping candidate states shed excess weight and live better.

 

From a European Union to European Influence

At the same time, Türkiye meeting the test for EU candidacy means moving beyond the rhetoric of “strategic autonomy” to embrace strategic inclusion instead.

Europe’s global influence has always depended on more than just its economy or its institutions. It has rested on an idea: that diverse peoples can come together under a shared political project by managing their differences constructively rather than suppressing them. That idea is now under strain—not just from external adversaries, but from within. The resurgence of nationalist movements, the weaponization of identity, and the retreat from multilateralism have all called into question the durability of the European experiment. Recommitting to that experiment means recognizing new energy and new perspectives that can rejuvenate it. With its young population, entrepreneurial spirit, and global outlook, Türkiye brings precisely what the continent needs.

This is especially crucial as the EU faces growing competition from other geopolitical blocs. China is expanding its influence through the Belt and Road Initiative. The United States is increasingly focused on the Indo-Pacific. Russia’s actions in Ukraine have fundamentally altered Europe’s security architecture. In this rapidly shifting environment, Türkiye is not just a potential member—it is a multiplier of European influence.

With Türkiye at its side, the EU can extend its reach into Central Asia, the Caucasus, the Middle East, and even parts of Africa, where Ankara has already been expanding its diplomatic and economic presence. Together, they can shape global debates on trade, climate, migration, and security in ways that neither party could achieve alone.

 

Building the Institutional Bridge

Realizing this vision requires institutional creativity. The EU must find ways to integrate Türkiye more meaningfully into its policy and decision-making processes—not necessarily through full membership in the short term, but through incremental, sectoral integration that lays the groundwork for eventual accession.

This gradual integration could include:

• Enhanced participation in EU defense initiatives, including the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defence Fund.

• Expanded cooperation in science, research, and innovation, building on Türkiye’s active involvement in Horizon Europe.

• Deeper alignment in energy policy, especially around the European Green Deal and climate adaptation strategies.

• Increased mobility for Turkish citizens, including visa liberalization frameworks based on agreed benchmarks.

Such measures would not only improve cooperation but also reduce the sense of stagnation and frustration that has plagued EU-Türkiye relations for far too long.

Nonetheless, institutional reform is a two-way street. The EU must also confront its own enlargement fatigue—a weariness born of past integration challenges and internal divisions. This fatigue, while understandable, cannot become a justification for paralysis. Strategic patience, combined with political courage, is required to chart a path forward.

 

Toward a New European Identity

Ultimately, the debate over Türkiye’s place in the EU is a debate about what Europe wants to be. Will Europe define itself by exclusion—drawing narrower and narrower circles of belonging—or by engagement, opening space for diversity within a coherent political and value framework?

With its layered identity and complex history, Türkiye challenges simplistic definitions of Europe. But perhaps that is exactly what the EU needs right now: a challenge that compels it to refine, expand, and deepen its sense of self.

The inclusion of Türkiye would force the EU to move beyond its Western European comfort zone and reckon with the full breadth of its geopolitical and civilizational realities. The EU would no longer be merely a union of like-minded states, but a bold experiment in pluralism on a continental scale.

That is not a risk, it’s a vision.

 

The Future is Shared

Europe does not face a choice between security and solidarity, nor between sovereignty and cooperation, nor between tradition and transformation. It faces the challenge of integrating these forces into a coherent strategy for the future. In that endeavor, Türkiye is not a problem to be solved but a partner to be embraced.

By aligning around the pillars of cooperation, strategic foresight, and mutual respect, Türkiye and the EU can create a partnership that is not only resilient but transformative. Together, they can shape a continent that is not merely a geographical concept or a trading bloc, but a true geopolitical force: principled, pluralistic, and poised for the challenges of the century ahead.

In the age of fragmentation, Türkiye offers Europe the possibility of unity without uniformity. And in a world of rising walls, that unity is perhaps the most powerful proposition of all. Considering Türkiye’s current position—both regionally and internationally—it is high time for the Phoenician princess to unite Anatolia and Europe.

Back to Table of Contents