The Evolution of Turkey-European Union Relations in the European Parliament Argumentative Discourses

The seesaw relationship between Turkey and the European Union (EU) seems to have entered a new phase: Despite the stalling of Turkey’s accession negotiations, the growing need for responding to the global challenges boost the cooperation between the two more than ever. This requires reevaluation of Turkey’s engagement with the EU out of the enlargement context. This paper aims to provide an insight on the evolving nature of Turkey-EU relations by elaborating on the changes in the sorts of argumentative discourse in the European Parliament (EP) plenary sessions on Turkey since the beginning of its accession negotiations in 2005. Following Habermas's Communicative Action Theory (CAT), the arguments used by the Members of the EP (MEPs) are analyzed according to three criteria: utility, values, and rights. MEPs are the only part of a Euro-elite who are directly elected by the EU citizens and thus are directly responsible to their constituents. Plenary sessions in which the MEPs participate in decision making serve as an arena for justifying their decisions to the public. Building on communicative rationality assumption, the justifications are expected to reflect what the authors believe to persuade their audience, in this case, what the EU citizens consider to be legitimate. Hence, the study reveals the shifts in the weight of pragmatic, ethical and normative approaches towards engagement with Turkey at the institutional and public levels.