The European Parliament’s latest Türkiye report highlights the contradiction between Europe’s strategic dependence on Türkiye and Brussels’ persistent habit of lecturing it.
The European Parliament’s 2025 report on Türkiye has sparked frustration in Ankara because of what Turkish officials see as its critical and unbalanced tone.
The timing is particularly striking.
The report was adopted just as the EU has been seeking to improve relations with Türkiye, following a period of tensions between 2016 and 2020 and a recent return to more constructive engagement.
Russia’s military offensive in Ukraine and the resulting security challenges pushed the EU to deepen cooperation with Türkiye.
Since US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House in early 2025, Türkiye’s strategic importance to Europe has grown even further.
Trump’s increasingly distant approach toward traditional European allies, coupled with his efforts to improve relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, has intensified Brussels’ search for reliable security partners.
In this context, Türkiye — a long-standing member of both NATO and the Council of Europe — is viewed by many European governments as an indispensable pillar of European security.
Why Ankara rejects EU criticism on the Cyprus issue
What undermined relations between Türkiye and the EU was Brussels’ reluctance to advance Türkiye’s long-standing membership bid, often for reasons Ankara viewed as cultural rather than political.
When German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy, leaders of the EU’s two most influential member states, openly opposed Türkiye’s accession in the mid-2000s, Ankara’s motivation to pursue membership weakened significantly.
The optimism that had characterised Turkish-European relations during the era of German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder gradually gave way to growing mistrust and frustration.
Developments surrounding Cyprus island after 2004 further reshaped Türkiye’s perception of the EU.
The Greek-administered Southern Cyprus was admitted to the EU even though 75 percent of Greek Cypriot voters had rejected the UN-backed Annan Plan in a referendum held on both sides of the island in April 2004.
By contrast, 65 percent of Turkish Cypriots supported the proposal. For many in Türkiye, the decision raised questions about Brussels’ commitment to a fair and lasting settlement of the Cyprus dispute.
The EU’s continued restrictions on the Turkish Cypriot community, despite its support for the UN plan, reinforced these doubts.
Since then, Ankara has viewed European involvement in the Cyprus issue with increasing scepticism.
From the Turkish perspective, admitting the Greek Cypriot administration to the EU, despite its rejection of the proposed settlement, effectively made Brussels a party to the conflict rather than an impartial mediator.
Related
Understanding Ankara’s reaction to the European Parliament’s latest criticism over Cyprus requires this historical context.
For many years, Türkiye supported efforts to reach a comprehensive settlement on the island. Today, however, Ankara advocates a two-state solution, arguing that the EU’s approach has undermined the prospects for a mutually acceptable agreement.
From Türkiye’s perspective, Brussels aligned itself with the Greek Cypriot side during negotiations, overlooked Turkish Cypriots’ security concerns, and maintained restrictions on the Turkish Cypriot community despite its support for the UN-backed settlement plan.
These developments played a key role in shaping Ankara’s current position.
At the same time, Türkiye argues that some EU member states have used the Cyprus issue as a political tool to obstruct its accession process.
