Introduction:

With the EU Commission's green light for the beginning of negotiations towards Turkey's full membership in the EU in the October 6, 2004 progress report, during the December 14, 2004 Copenhagen Summit it became possible for negotiations to begin on October 5, 2005. However, both the 2004 progress report and the December 17 Summit Report were full of unreasonable demands that were not required of previous candidates.

Before moving further into these discussions, information on the meaning of the negotiation process from an economic point of view, the Maastricht and Copenhagen Criteria, Types of Economical Integration and Bodies of the EU will be described, and then the EU-Turkey relationship between 1999 and 2009 will be summarized and discussions and negotiations that already began with the EU will be discussed. France's accusation of genocide, the possible date of full membership and some recommendations to readers will be placed in the last section. In conclusion, ideas on the stance and style that should be followed by government, civic society and private institutions' representatives will be offered.

The Maastricht Criteria

The negotiation date was granted to Turkey because it satisfied the Copenhagen Political Criteria. For full membership, as well as success in the implementation of the political reforms, Maastricht Criteria need to be met. In this sense, Turkey happens to have accepted a 10 year standby agreement program towards its full membership goal because, the Maastricht Criteria are:
- Price stability: Annual average inflation rate of any member state cannot be more than 1.5% higher than the average of three member states that has the lowest inflation rate. (such as annual inflation around 1.5%+1.5%=3%),
- Public Gap: Budget gaps of member states cannot exceed 3% of that state's GDP (Budget Gap/GDP ratio). Due to the global crisis, this ratio has been raised to 4% in 2009. (In Turkey, this ratio was 11.2% in 2005, 7.1% in 2004, 1.7% in 2005 and 1.5% in 2008). The 2009 program target is 4.6% due to the economic crisis.
- Public Debt : the public debt of the member state cannot exceed 60% of the state's GDP (Public Debt/ GDP ratio). In Turkey, while this ratio dropped from 65% to 39% between 2006 and 2008 (292.2/741.8), the real problem is that especially the domestic debt stock is very short term.
- Interest Rates: Long term interest rates cannot exceed the annual average interest rate of the three member states with the lowest inflation more than 2% (such as 6%+2%=8%).
- Stable Exchange Rate: National currencies of states that have not adopted the Euro should obey normal fluctuation margins (adjustments) that have been foreseen by the European Money Systems exchange rate mechanism, without devaluation.

The Copenhagen Criteria

The Copenhagen Criteria cover 3 main topics and are prerequisites for the beginning and continuity of EU negotiations for candidate states. These are:
- "Stabilizing institutions that guarantee democracy, legal order, respect for human rights and protection of minorities,
- Existence of a working market economy that can adopt to the competitive pressures and market forces within the Union,

- Ability to fulfill requirements of membership such as participation in political, economic and monetary union."

Turkey-EU Relations: 1999-2009

After Turkey was granted the candidate status at the December 11, 1999 Helsinki Summit of the EU, the highest decision making body between Turkey and the EU, Turkey-EU Partnership Council established 8 subcommittees for adjustment of Turkey to the EU legislation during the candidacy period, in its April 11, 2000 assembly. These committees began working on 28 of the 35 topics on June 28, 2000. However, the achievements of these committees were limited because the negotiations with the EU have not started at the time. With the December 17, 2004 decision (document), the EU stated that Turkey is fulfilling political Copenhagen Criteria and gave green light for the negotiations to begin. However, some issues were raised that were not applied to previous countries. These can be summarized as;

- it states, "A long transition period for structural policies and agriculture, the continuation of protective measures for free movement of people and the process of negotiations are open ended and the results cannot be guaranteed."
- Turkey is not given a full membership date,
- the Cyprus issue is raised, although it is not related to the Copenhagen Criteria,
- there can be continuous limits on common agriculture policy and regional development issues,
- a unanimous decision of all members is required at the beginning and closure of each negotiation on all 35 topics.

This means that there are 70 veto rights on the Southern Cyprus issue in the negotiation process.

The October 3, 2005 EU Summit and Negotiations: The beginning of Turkey's negotiations with the EU was decided at the EU Foreign Ministers meeting in Luxembourg, on October 3, 2005. The Negotiation Framework Document publish on the same day has 3 main chapters and 23 amendments. The chapters are:
1-Principles for Negotiation
2-The basis of the negotiations and
3-Negotiation procedure.

In the first chapter of the Framework Document, decisions made in the December 17, 2004 Summit are given, as well as;
- conditions of continuation and holding of negotiations in detail,
- that the negotiations are naturally open ended but that the final goal is full membership,
- the assimilation capacity of the EU.

In this context, even if Turkey fulfilled all requirements after a minimum 10 year negotiation marathon, the full membership date of Turkey can be delayed by suggesting that the assimilation capacity of EU for Turkey is not sufficient at that date.

Negotiation Topics(Chapters): The 35 topics in order given in the last chapter of the Framework Document are:

1. Free movement of goods
2. Freedom of movement for workers
3. Right of establishment and freedom to provide services
4. Free movement of capital
5. Public procurement
6. Company law
7. Intellectual property law
8. Competition policy
9. Financial services
10. Information society and media
11. Agriculture and rural development
12. Food safety, veterinary and phytosanitary policy
13. Fisheries
14. Transport policy
15. Energy
16. Taxation
17. Economic and monetary policy
18. Statistics
19. Social policy and employment(1)
20. Enterprise and industrial policy
21. Trans-European networks
22. Regional policy and coordination of structural instruments
23. Judiciary and fundamental rights
24. Justice, freedom and security
25. Science and research
26. Education and culture
27. Environment
28. Consumer and health protection
29. Customs union
30. External relations
31. Foreign, security and defense policy
32. Financial control
33. Financial and budgetary provisions
34. Institutions
35. Other issues

November 9th 2005 Progress Report and Accession Partnership Document (APD)
The scope of Progress Reports, APD and NP's: The EU prepares progress reports for candidate countries every year. After briefly defining relations between the union and the candidate, the report reviews a) the status of the candidate in terms of political and economic criteria for membership, b) responsibilities of membership and c) the capacity to adopt to EU legislation. The APD on the other hand, lists short and medium term political and economical criteria (EU demands) according to the latest progress reports and draws a road map for candidates.
A few months later candidate countries fulfill their commitments by publishing a National Program (NP) that contains steps and goals towards membership to the EU about how and when they will realize the demands in the APD. In addition to the statements below, the 2005 progress report and APD stated that " Turkey can be recognized by the European Commission as a functional market economy as long as it continues efforts for stability and reform, and it can cope with the competition pressure and market forces in the Union in the medium term if it continues to make determined steps. In other words, it states that it meets one of the two main parameters of the Copenhagen criteria and that it will meet the other in the medium term. Furthermore, the APD demands that all relations with member states including Southern Cyprus should be normalized, responsibilities that rise from Partnership Agreement and Customs Union should be fulfilled in the short run, and in the transportation section of the Legislative Adoption chapter, that port and airports should be opened for South Cyprus.

The Beginning of Negotiations on June 12, 2006 and Ultimatums:

Actual negotiations between Turkey and the EU began on June 12, 2006 with the temporary opening and closing of the Science and Research session, in spite of the veto threat from Cyprus Greek Administration. At the press conference following this negotiation the Minister of Foreign Affairs Abdullah Gül said, "the Cyprus issue should not contaminate Turkey-EU negotiations" and "if Greek Cyprus with its 600,000 population offers more contribution to the EU on economic, political and military issues than Turkey of 72 million, EU can exclude Turkey, choose the Greek Cyprus and we will go on our way. On June 16, 2006 at the ISO meeting Prime Minister T. Erdoğan stated, "We will not sell out Northern Cyprus. As long as the isolation of Northern Cyprus (economic limitations) is not lifted, sea and air ports will not be open to the Greek Cyprus...if negotiations are stopped, that's fine." On June 20 at the parliament group meeting, the prime minister said, "The negotiations with the EU is a technical issue, it cannot be mixed with politics. Greece is trying to carry the Cyprus issue to the EU. The solution in Cyprus cannot be found in the EU. The solution of the Cyprus issue is in the UN."
The EU officials staked on the June 16, 2006 EU Summit: In the Turkey paragraph of the final declaration of the EU Summit on June 16, 2008 in Brussels, according to the demands of the Greek Cyprus and Greece, statements and threats were made that till the end of the year, demanding that Turkish sea and air ports should be open to ships and planes with Greek flags, the CU Additional Protocol should be signed (approval of the port opening by the parliament), the reform process and implementations should be speeded up, the expansion rhythm and assimilation capacity of the EU should be considered in the summit document.
- on June 13, 2006, the negotiations were temporarily opened and closed during the Science and Research session.

- on October 12, 2006, the scanning process of the 35 topics (evaluation of Turkeys level of compliance with EU legislation) is completed.

EU-CU Compliance, Negotiations and November 2006 S. Cyprus Precondition
According to EUGS Associate Secretary General Şükran Yazıcı, by November 2007 Turkey complies with EU legislation on CU at a rate of around 70%. The remaining 30% is expected to be completed in the process of membership negotiations started in October 2005. As we know, CU is merely about trading industrial goods. The negotiation process will include Agriculture and Services as well. However on November 29, 2006 the European Commission put negotiations on hold for 8 topics (1,3,9,11,13,14,29,30) until Turkey opens its sea and air ports to South Cyprus and allows free circulation of Greek Cypriot goods in Turkey. Moreover, on December 11, 2006 The Council of Europe (Ministers of Foreign Affairs) approved the advisory decision that topics that have been opened or will be opened will not be closed until this precondition is met. Although this decision created a shock in Turkey:
-the technical elaboration of Turkey's membership and CU issues and new negotiation topics being opened at the 115th assembly of the Turkey-EU Partnership Committee on March 22, 2007 decreased the tension in Turkey-EU relations and showed that the EU process is still continuing.

Topics opened before 2009:
- Science and Research, temporarily opened and closed in June 2006, in 2007;
- Enterprise and industrial policy,
- Statistics,
- Financial Control and in 2008;
- Moreover, we have been invited for negotiations on Trans European networks and financial control topics.
- Consumer and Health Protection,
- Intellectual Property Law and Company Law topics have been opened for negotiation although the 2006 S. Cyprus precondition continues for closure.

EU Financial Aid

Between 2006 and 2007 the EU granted a 500 million Euro credit to Turkey. In 2008 540 million Euros were allocated by the Pre Accession Investment Tool (PAIT). These credits are generally managed by the Central Finance and Contract Unit of the Undersecretariat of Treasury. The European Commission declared on February 22, 2007, that Turkey will be granted a total of 2.2 billion EUROs by the EU in the 2007-2010 period.
New Adjustment Program
Minister of Foreign Affairs Assoc. Prof. Dr. Abdullah Gül and Ali Babacan held a joint press conference on April 17, 2007 and announced the 412 page book of Turkey's Adjustment Program to EU Legislation (2007-2013) to the Turkish public. Despite the cold attitude of Eu towards Turkey, Mr. Gül stated, "Turkey will continue its own adjustment program until 2013 including the 8 topics on hold and the road map of EU process is determined to change 200 laws." This Adjustment Program should become official as Turkey's National Program (NP) with some changes made by the government after the elections.

2007-2008 Progress Reports and 2008 APD Demands

In the 2006-2008 period, especially German, French and Austrian officials repeatedly opposed Turkey's full membership and demanded that Turkey should be granted an exclusive partnership. In this period and in 2008, Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan said, "Turkey will not accept any alternative other than full membership and EU officials should follow through on their 46 years of promises."
On November 7, 2007, The European Commission declared Turkey's 2007 Progress Report. Since the Council of Europe (Ministers of foreign Affairs) were finally forced to unanimously approve the APD, the exclusive partnership demands that German, French and Austrian leaders saw fit for Turkey had to lose its official status. The political and economical criteria listed in EU's APD for Turkey was a summery of the 2007 progress report. On December 31, 2008, the government responded by publishing its National Program (NP) containing its commitment to meet certain of the APD demands. Some of the economic and political demands in the 2008 APD are:

France's Accusation of Genocide and Hypocrisy

The best answer to the French parliament, which ratified a law proposal that recognizes the denial of the Armenian Genocide lie as a crime (punishable by 1 year of imprisonment and a 45,000 Euro fine) came from the British, French and US media and calmed the Turkish public down to a degree. The Financial Times in England: The decision of the French parliament is " diplomatic idiocy" and "election expediency." The Times: By approving the proposal, France shamed the French government and greatly angered Turkey. The Guardian: It is hypocrisy for the EU to ask Turkey to modernize its laws, while France is moving in the other direction. Le Figaro in France: The results of the continuation of tension with Turkey might be very painful for France, who will lose 10 million Euros of public bidding. Le Soir: What France did is political ugliness and lightheadedness. It is highly probable that the proposal will be buried. The Washington Post in the US: the French parliament definitely acted ridiculously by passing this incomprehensible law on the Armenian genocide.

J. Chirac's hypocrisy: When the French Parliament was ridiculed and insulted by global media and similar views were declared by EU officials, J. Chirac called Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on October 14, 2006 in order to save face, apologizing and stating that he will try to stop the law from passing the senate, is hypocrisy and a great excuse to lay blame. This is hypocritical because, during his visit to Armenia two weeks ago, the same person dared to state: "Turkey has to recognize Armenian genocide in order to become a member of the EU." Since J. Chirac would lose his presidency in May 2007, this statement was meaningless and France, where Armenian genocide is state policy, could not be expected to change its stance. The French passed the Armenian Genocide law in 2001 and our outrage was put out like flash in the pan. This law has been passed in 14 countries led by Austria, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and even Argentina. The Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs declared that the French are excluded from public biddings on billion dollar projects such as helicopters, civilian and military aircraft and energy investments. We support this. However, this decision by government officials should be continued for more than 10 years, whether the proposal passes or gets shelved. Today and in the future of our EU relations, the leaders of Turkey and the Turkish business world are responsible for following our proverbs, "Don't burn a blanket for one flea" and "Stand up in anger, sit down in sorrow," and develop necessary, coherent policies. Sabotaging the French companies that employ 65,000 people in Turkey, boycotting and burning French products would be cutting the branch we are sitting on and shooting ourselves in the foot, because, Turkey's share in French exports is 1.5%, while the French share in Turkey's export is 5.7% and import is 5.1%. It is sufficient to exclude France from public bidding for 10 years.

The EU Adventures of Other Countries

England applied for membership in the EEC on August 9, 1961 and negotiations began on October 10, 1961. However, then president of France de Gaulle vetoed the application and the continuation of negotiations on January 14, 1964. ON May 11, 1967, England, Ireland, Danmark and Norway applied for full membership to EEC together. Although General de Gaulle did not veto this time, he continued his obstruction (see Table 1). Finally, when de Gaulle resigned on April 28, 1969, negotiations with these 4 countries began on April 18, 1969, accession agreement was signed on January 22, 1972 and England, Ireland and Denmark became full members of the EEC in 1973. Norway on the other hand, said "no" to EEC with 53% of its votes on the referendum on September 25, 1972.

De Gaulle's slogan "Europe belongs to Europeans" and policies against Anglo-Saxon (US and American) power caused a 12 year struggle over England's becoming an EU member. As seen in table 1, for EEC, EC or EU membership, Greece waited 6 years (1975 - 1981), Portugal and Spain 9 years (1977 - 1986), Sweden, Finland and Austria 4 - 6 years, Central and Eastern European Countries (CEEC) and Baltic countries 9 - 10 years, Romania and Bulgaria 12 years.
However, Turkey has been waiting since April 1987, for 22 years, for accession agreement (full membership date) and full membership, as a result of the "crusader mentality" of the founding big countries!

In this sense, that bigger countries in terms of economy and population (such as England and Spain) took longer and had more difficulty becoming members. Here, Turkey's biggest mistake was that prime ministers of the 1976-78 period, Demirel and Ecevit, did not follow the letter of advice from the EC official, Emil Noel, to the Turkish ministry of Foreign Affairs. The letter said, " We are not planning to accept Greece's application to the EC, if Turkey applies soon enough, it will be easier to reject both countries." However, if Turkey applied to the EC after Greece, since the two countries would be evaluated together, we could have prevented Greece from joining the EC in 1981. As a result, Greece would not have been able to veto billions of dollars of grants from the EC and the EU to Turkey since 1981.

When will full membership happen?

The real reasons for EU's unwillingness to accept Turkey in the near future are economical and about Turkey's population potential, rather than political. The average annual population increase rate in Turkey is around 1.5%, which will lead to a population of 90 million in 2020. This way, Turkey will become the country with the largest number of representatives in EU bodies and the European Parliament. Meanwhile, the population increase rates of 27 EU countries is around 0.25%, their population is almost constant. Another concern for the Europeans is that with full membership Turkish workers would invade EU countries, because, in recent years unemployment rates in some important EU countries reached the level of 7.5-10.7%. In fact, the unemployment rate in February 2008 is 10.7% in Belgium, 9.0% in Spain, 7.8% in Germany and 7.5% in France, very high for western standards (The Economist, April 19, 2008). In 2009 these rates are rising in all EU countries as a result of the global crisis. I would like to emphasize that, if Turkish workers gained the right to free movement in the EU 20-25 years ago, Turkey would have lost skilled labor, rather than unskilled, and this would have put Turkish industry under more stress, since it already has skilled labor force and intermediate staff problems. Moreover, it should not be forgotten that Turkey's loss of skilled labor would have been a kind of human capital grant to the EU, because Turkey is a very big country compared to EU countries and the financial support it will receive will be much bigger that others, this financial support seems very strenuous for EU. Together with the worry that Turkish labor force will invade EU, EU officials avoid stating these reservations and try to gain time by putting forward political requirements that Turkey cannot accept. Turkey's accession seems to depend on Turkey's ability to stabilize the economy with an inflation rate kept below 5%, complete its agricultural and industrial development and lower the unemployment rate to about 6%. When we reach this level of economic stability, Turkey's economic burden on the EU will fall from 8-10 billion to a few billion Euros and the population increase will fall under 1% as a result of industrialization, removing the threat posed by Turkey's unemployment rate and leading to the acceptance of Turkey as a full member. OF course, the precondition is reaching the stage where EU decisions are made with rule of highest vote rather than unanimity. Therefore, we need to forget about full membership for a long time and focus on reaching economic and political stability. In other words, full membership is in Turkey's hand and only possible when EU standards are reached in inflation and unemployment (2015-2020 period).

Turkey's ability to reach EU standards in economy and democracy depends on the continuation of the negotiations, because, when we think about the political life in Turkey in the last 50 years, the governments of Turkey unfortunately and generally did not conduct economic or democratic reform without IMF or EU force. The issue is not entering the EU, but reaching EU standards.

10-15 years later, when Turkey reaches EU standards in every area, it will not need to be a member of the EU. It has the right to conduct a referendum on joining the EU when the time comes. France and Austria already decided that they would hold a referendum when it is time for Turkey's full membership. The ratio of the population that wants Turkey to join EU is 30% in France and 5% in Austria. These countries still have a crusader mentality towards Turkey. It has been 10 centuries since the crusades. The French, Austrians and some other Europeans will not forget the 1000 year old pain of Turkey's slap on their faces in 10-15 years.

Some Recommendations for Students and Readers
My students and readers are rightfully going to ask this question: "Well, sir, if they won't accept us to the EU, why are you defending efforts towards joining the CU and EU?" My answer is that Turkish industrialists have been forced to be competitive and our products reached world standards in terms of quality and price, all due to the last 46 years of EU efforts, especially after the CU. In the end, while Turkish consumers are not exploited anymore, Turkey reached the final stage of industrialization. Moreover, our students have the opportunity to participate in Erasmus and other EU organizations and study for 1-2 semesters in EU countries where they learn the Western outlook, work and business discipline, follow scientific developments. Some extreme nationalists in Turkey claim, "Every economic and political problem arising in Turkey is fueled by the IMF, the US and the EU," and numb the Turkish youth with their conspiracy theories. If we believe that there are external forces behind all problems in Turkey, this would mean, "We are useless, we did not establish 17 states until today, and we did not prevail as a world power for 500 years until the beginning of the 19th century. Another meaning of this slogan is, "We are ruled by the IMF and the EU; there is no need for reading, thinking and struggle." Dear readers, although Turkey's export/import correspondence in total international trade in 2008 is 65.3%, this ratio is 84.8% in trade with the EU. Moreover, again in 2008, only 16.3% of out total international trade gap is with EU countries, while the remaining 83.7% is with non-EU countries. Unfortunately, the conspiracy theorists do not talk about these facts. For more details see: Note-1: "Economic Developments" and "Relations with the EU and the Cost of the Customs Union." Therefore, the source of every problem is not the EU. The real solution is looking for our own shortcomings and economic and political problems, elaborating on the roots of these problems, working very hard and doing a lot of research to find solutions.

Conclusion: In spite of Turkish and EU officials' corresponding ultimatums, Turkey-EU relations are continuing, although slowly. The precondition for beginning negotiations for all candidates is meeting the Copenhagen political criteria. The negotiations began with Turkey because these criteria were met in 2005. If the AKP was closed, EU could have shelved relations and negotiations with the justification that the "democracy" criterion was violated. However, it is necessary not to allow any interruptions with Turkey's own will in this process (negotiation process), considering the gains from the 46 years of arduous struggle for the EU process and the expectations for a stronger integration with the EU in politics and economy.
In spite of the EU's 46 years of promises, for Turkey the consequences of the EU's sabotage of its full membership are: a) degrading Turkey's international economic credibility, b) Direct Foreign Capital (DFC) entry will decrease, c) interest rates, exchange rats and inflation will start to increase,

d) the stock market will continue to fall, e) especially in the Eurasia region, Turkey's political prestige and weight will be harmed, and f) political instability may arise in the country. For the EU: a) the hopes for peace between the Muslim world and Christian world will end, b) clash of civilizations will continue, c) the EU will remain a dwarf political power against the US and the world. In the end, it is obvious that any kind of shelving the negotiation process will have heavy costs for both Turkey and the EU. Turkey's most important and even the only expectation in the EU process is to reach the standards (in every field) that full members have reached today. Therefore, the issue is continued negotiation with the EU and to gain maximum benefit in every field. Some big countries in terms of population and economic power have already met great difficulty during the EU process. The shelving of negotiations by the EU is not the end of the world. For example, the membership process was interrupted twice for England and once for Spain. With this in mind, it can be expected that Turkey will go through similar difficulties. At this point, an unemotional, calm and determined policy needs to be followed during the EU accession process. We need to point out that despite everything, the opening and closing of negotiations during the Science and Research session on June 12, 2006 and completion of the scanning process in 35 topics by October 2006, opening another 7 topics in 2007 and 2008 are all important stages in Turkey-EU relations and the ticket to the full membership train for Turkey. If negotiations are shelved by South Cyprus's veto, Turkey should remind EU officials of their 46 years of promises and stand bye rather than getting off the train. Because, Turkey became a partner member to the European Economic Community with the full membership target with the 1963 Ankara Agreement. The introduction to the Customs Union Decision book says, "Turkey's full membership rights reserved." Since both agreements were approved by the member states' parliaments at the time, Turkey's full membership has been promised by Turkey and the EU nations. In fact, during her visit to Turkey on October 6, 2006, the German Prime Minister Angela Merkel, daughter of a priest from East Germany, was obliged to state, "Although I support Exclusive Partnership for Turkey, due to pacta sunt servanda, the promises made to Turkey by the EU will be kept."
Eventually, EU countries will prevent small countries like Greek Cyprus, with its population of 600,000 and Malta, with its 500,000, from having the same rights and powers as giants like England and Germany, the EU will not be South Cyprus's puppet, and Turkey-EU relations and negotiations will stay on course. Supporter groups in the EU see Turkey as strategic, some are impartial, and we have opponents (Christian Democrats, France and Germany) and abusers (Greek Cyprus and Greece trying to pressure Turkey using the EU). Right now Turkey's task is to put the 9th Democratization Package in effect and to empower governments and EU officials that are friends of Turkey and Turks. In the end, Turkey-EU negotiations must continue, because commercial partnerships and Free Trade Agreements with the US, Russia, Turkic Republics and Far Eastern countries, rather than EU relations, is not an alternative to commercial and economic relations with the EU, but complimentary measures. 14 years after and 40 years before the CU, more than 40% of Turkeys international trade was with today's EU countries. Today the EU share in our major industrial goods exports such as automobiles, refrigerators, televisions and ready to wear clothing is in the 75-80% range and 48% of our total exports in 2008 went to EU countries. Additionally, Turkey-EU relations are not only a commercial issue, but one that brings standards and discipline to 35 negotiation topics including industry, agriculture and service sectors. (For more details see: Note-1: "Economic Developments" and "Relations with the EU and the Cost of the Customs Union.").
To summarize: Since EU decisions are made unanimously, in order to reach the targets above, without focusing too much on full membership, the government needs to adopt a more decisive, calmer and more coherent stance towards the EU and develop brave and more active implementations in terms of economical policies, while every section of Turkish society should support the current and future governments on the EU path. (For further information see Note-1).

Note-1: Prof. Dr. Emin Çarıkcı's articles: 1- "Economy Advice for Students," 2- "Economic Developments in Turkey: 2007-2009 (revised quarterly in January, April, July and October)', 3- "Relations with the EU and the Cost of the CU," 4- "Negotiations with the EU and Expectations' and 5- "Economic developments in Turkic Republics: 1980-2006," more than 45 pages, are published on the author's new Çankaya University web page. See: http://carikci.cankaya.edu.tr