Turkey's candidature poses with a new sharpness the question of Europe's frontiers. The argument which has broken out on this question risks polluting...

Turkey's candidature poses with a new sharpness the question of Europe's frontiers. The argument which has broken out on this question risks polluting the debate on the Constitution, some electors being tempted to refuse to ratify the Constitutional Treaty out of hostility to Turkey's accession. This problem is stoking up passions and dividing Europeans. The cleavage on the Turkish question coincides neither with the traditional conflict between Europhobes and Europhiles nor with that between supporters of a Europe of the States and defenders of a federal Europe. My point here is to present readers of The Federalist Debate, all or nearly all of whom I suppose to be defenders of this imperfect but unexpected constitution, with arguments to be set against those who would be tempted to seize upon the Turkish question in support of a 'no' vote.
Let us start by recognising that, since the accession of the three neutrals (Austria, Finland and Ireland), it has become customary to give enlargement the priority over deepening. The strongest argument against Turkey's accession is the strange eagerness of many Europhobes to support it. That is why, in addition to the conditions for membership regarding the fundamental issues of democratisation of the country, its legal system and even more its moral codes - I think in particular of the crimes of honour, whose victims are so many Turkish young women, - it would be appropriate to add some conditions making clearer the aims and objectives of the Union.
The arguments for and against Turkish membership are as of now well known
The main arguments in favour are the beneficial effects for Turkish society of the accession process and the potential contribution that this country would give to European influence in the Near and Middle East. The main arguments against are its economic, social and cultural heterogeneity and the resulting impossibility of sharing with the Turkish people the will to participate in a common European political destiny. There, then, is the link between the Turkish accession problem and the political objectives of the Union. The argument about the difficulty of integrating the Turks into a European political union is however very much weakened by the observation that certain present members do not appear to share these objectives and that France, which has made itself the proponent, refuses to accept the ensuing institutional and budgetary consequences.
Starting with these simple ideas, it should be easy for Federalists to define their position: 'yes' to Turkey's accession if, when the time comes, it is accompanied not only by an in-depth transformation of Turkish society, but also by a clarification of the objectives of the Union and the establishment of the mechanisms to achieve them. If this exercise in political clarity shows a persistent cleavage between Member States, a federal avant-garde will be needed, not outside, but at the very heart of the Union. If the proposed Constitution can assure the future of the enlarged Union for a dozen years, it would evidently not be appropriate for the much more enlarged Union lining up on the horizon. Hence the interest in reflecting on the forms which the organisation of a federal core could take at the centre and not on the edge of the Union. The intergovernmental bloc of the most populous countries, which certain French and British leaders are dreaming about, would in reality be a soft centre subject to the paralysis of unanimity, as well as a source of division, for it could not but irritate those countries which will be excluded. A Europe of several tiers will probably be the result of further enlargements. But the core group, pursuing integration most vigorously, will either be federal or it will not be, the criterion for membership being not size but the will to unite. It would be, to say the least, imprudent to draw up today a list of the countries which will desire to take part.
Finally, should we determine now once and for all the frontiers of this "multi-circled Europe"? To do so would be to deprive a number of our neighbours of the powerful incentive to wisdom provided by the ambition to join the Union. For Europe's most noble vocation, the most obvious aim of its policies, should be to be the vehicle for promoting the values of reconciliation and democracy.