The inaction of Brussels on the arrest of an opposition leader in Türkiye can be a strategic error

The European Union is faced with an urgent problem because it decides to manage another major slide towards autocracy in Türkiye. So far, the signs are not good.

Over the past decade, the main democratic institutions have been systematically eroded in Turkey, during the reception of Recep Tayyip Erdoan, which has been in power since 2003. Media freedom, independent magistracy and civil society are all targeted. A major turning point occurred in 2016, when Turkey abandoned its parliamentary democracy in favor of a hyper-centralized presidential system. Since then, the National Parliament has been marginalized and almost all the controls of the executive power have been eroded.

Although the elections in Türkiye have not been fair for many years, they were at least free. According to the International observersThe elections were not fair because President Erdoan and the ruling parties benefited from an unjustified advantage. However, the elections could always offer voters a choice between real political alternatives Provide citizens with a ribbon of hope for democratic change.

This era may have ended on March 19, with the arrest of Ekrem Mamolu, mayor of Istanbuls. Mamolu was about to be made of the presidential candidate for oppositions and was widely considered as an Erdoans' main electoral rival. He now does not seem to be able to defend the president. It is not only a hard blow for the opposition, but potentially indicates the end of the free elections in Türkiye according to certain observers.

All this occurred in the immediate EUS district. Indeed, this has happened in a country that remains, at least nominally, a candidate for the EU membership. However, Brussels remained largely silent. This silence can be a strategic error.

Why is the EU silent?

The reaction of the EUS to the arrest of Mamolus was, at best, prudent. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, published a carefully formulated expression of concern. THE EU spokesperson Echoing a familiar refrain, affirming that as a candidate country, Turkey must respect democratic values.

In their joint statement Kaja Kallas, high representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and Oliver Vrhelyi, a widening commissioner, brought an equally cautious tone. They said Turkey should apply the highest democratic standards and practices.

Only the European Parliament, long considered the standard bearer of EUS values, adopted a more direct position. Several political groups openly criticized Turkey during the plenary session on April 1. Delegation led by the first vice-president of the European Parliament Katarina Barley Visited Mamolu in a symbolic gesture of support.

But these expressions of concern and acts of solidarity with Mamolu have not been twinned by any credible action or condemnation powerful enough to have a dissuasive effect on the Turkish government. As much observers Note that the strategic interests of the EUS have increasingly overshadowed its commitment to democratic principles.

It is not a secret for anyone that the EU has never had a coherent strategic vision on Turkey. In an excellent example of the transactional nature of the relationship, the challenge of EU externalized refugees to Turkey in 2016 in exchange for financial aid in Ankara. It was not an agreement not motivated by long -term objectives but short -term pragmatism.

Today, at a time of increasing geopolitical instability, Türkiye Has not become a more critical partner for the EU. Ankara commanded the second largest NATO army, has a rapid defense industry and has great experience in peacekeeping and operations outside the region. These are increasingly precious because the United States, under Donald Trump, withdraw from European security.

Turkey has also become a key player in Syria after the fall of Bashar al-Assad. With strong political and economic ties with the new management of Damascus, Turkey began playing A central role in the reconstruction of Syriesas well as in its energy and defense sectors. Working in the stabilization and reconstruction of Syria is a shared interest in Brussels and Ankara. For both parties, the potential collapse of Syria implies Major security presentationsIncluding other refugee entries in Türkiye and via Turkey to Europe, the proliferation of armed groups, jihadist terror and the overflow of regional instability.

And while the confinement of Kurdish groups in Syria is a priority for Ankara, the control of Islamic State activists in detention in northern Syria is a priority for the EU. Brussels recognized the turkeys essential role to play in the stabilization of the regionadding to the growing list of areas of common interest.

Add the fear of destabilization in the immediate EUS district, and it becomes clearer why Brussels could prefer stability under Erdoan to the uncertainty of the post-erdoan period.

The bad strategy

But not to resist Turkey is now an error and one with long -term consequences. The EU should worry about what's going on in Türkiye, not only for Turkish democracy, but for its own security. The way he reacts has implications for the credibility of the European project itself.

The search for closer security and defense cooperation with Turkey, in the absence of a shared understanding of the fundamental values ​​between Ankara and Brussels, is not realistic. Like the position of the Hungaries towards Russia since the large -scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has shown, if there is no agreement with fundamental values, the alignment of strategic interests becomes more and more difficult. Turkey is a safe and assertive regional power, and it will not hesitate to follow a foreign policy that could ideologically diverge from that of the EU.

Recent decisions of recent foreign policy illustrate this perfectly. Its actions in the eastern Mediterranean, in northern Syria, before the fall of the Assads, Libya and the Caucasus, demonstrate its will to continue a more assertive path without consulting the Western partners. An excellent example of this was the decision of the turkeys to buy S-400 anti-missile defense systems Russia, which has created interoperability problems with NATO allies.

In addition, autocratic ideas tend to be contagious. When a country follows a more illiberal trajectory, it affects its wider neighborhood. Finding a turn of turkeys at the authoritarian turn while cooperating on security and defense issues is likely to legitimize the Erdoans governance model. This could still strengthen the illibral axis in the region.

Finally, the EU risks alienating democrats and young generations in Türkiye. Despite the ups and downs in EU-Turkish relations, Turkish citizens have always shown strong support for the EU. Maintaining this momentum is not only an ethical responsibility or a question of credibility for the EU, it is also a long -term investment in the construction of a more democratic, trustworthy and stable neighbor.