L'avenir des relations commerciales entre la Turquie et l'Union européenne : approfondissement vs él

L’existence d’une union douanière entre l’UE et la Turquie explique
le fait qu’un degré de convergence très élevé ait pu se
développer entre les deux partenaires dans le domaine des
échanges commerciaux, écrivent Sinan Ülgen
et Yiannis Zahariadis dans un article publié
par le Turkish Policy Quarterly. Pour
renforcer l’actuel niveau d’intégration commerciale, les auteurs
proposent soit de redéfinir les modalités de l’Union
douanière, soit d’intégrer à celle-ci de nouveaux
domaines tels que les services et l’agriculture – ce qui
reviendrait à élargir le champ de cette union.

Introduction

Owing to the EU-Turkish customs union, there is already a
considerable degree of convergence between Turkey and the EU in the
area of trade. In fact, Turkey is the only candidate country that
has a customs union with the EU. Therefore at least with respect to
trade in goods, Turkey is almost part of the Single Market. The
future challenge in terms of enhancing the present state of trade
integration is two-fold. First, the present customs union needs to
be deepened by refining the arrangements and addressing its
shortcomings. Second, the degree of trade integration can be
widened by incorporating hitherto excluded areas such as services
and agriculture in the customs union. 

The Customs Union: Overview and
Assessment 

The EU-Turkish customs union came into effect on 31 December
1995. It represents the culmination of a long-standing relationship
between the two parties and successfully solidifies 40 years of
commercial association. This long historical relationship, combined
with the unique status of a customs union between an existing
regional trading block and an independent country, have contributed
to the establishment of a successful, but also highly complex
regional arrangement. 

The customs union agreement (hereafter also referred to as the
‘1995 agreement’) is not restricted to conventional border
controls, but moves significantly beyond that by addressing areas
of regulatory or deep integration. This depth of integration has
been instrumental in both furthering the two parties’ commercial
association and paving the way for full membership in the future.
Yet the very structure of the arrangement also limits the
realisation of the full benefits of integration between the EU and
Turkey. Indeed, alongside its depth of coverage, the customs union
agreement also includes a number of serious discontinuities in
policy focus, partial policy treatment of potential problem areas
and a continuation of various holes and loopholes in the parties’
bilateral commitments. 

More specifically, the EU-Turkish customs union required that
apart from the bilateral liberalisation of industrial tariffs and
the alignment of external industrial tariffs, Turkey was obliged
adopt the Community legislation, with respect to the elimination of
technical barriers to trade, the protection of competition and the
administration of border procedures including rules of origin.
Turkey was also required to adopt the Community’s commercial policy
towards third countries, including establishing free trade areas
with all the EU’s preferential partners, implementing various
sectoral provisions (such as measures covering textiles and
apparel) and ensuring compatibility with international agreements
for the protection of intellectual property rights. This
substantial alignment of regulatory regimes not only deepens
integration between the EU and Turkey, but also strengthens
potential gains. Against this depth of integration, however, the
1995 agreement also allows for the continuation of contingent
protection (anti-dumping and countervailing duties) and safeguards
– which is in marked contrast to the Europe Agreements where trade
defence measures are eliminated. Further, it retains significant
leeway for the continuation of various technical barriers to trade
and continues to exclude agriculture. A more detailed presentation
of the principal components of the customs union is given in Box
1.

To read the article in full, visit the European Stability Initiative (ESI) website.