Adrian Hamilton: Exclusion of Turkey is dishonest, stupid and short-sighted

There were two things missing from yesterday's report on the historic enlargement of the European Union. One was optimism; the second was Turkey.

The two things – a vision to match the facts and a date for starting negotiations with Turkey – are part of the same problem. Five years ago when talks were first started to set a seal on the end of the Cold War and take the EU into countries of the former Soviet bloc and Yugoslavia, history seemed within the grasp of statesmen. There are moments, as Otto von Bismarck, Germany's greatest chancellor, put it, when destiny passes by and you must catch its cloak.

That remains true today. An expansion of the Union to take in 10 more countries and 75 million more people within a couple more years is hardly unambitious. But the truth that no political leader dare express in Europe today is that no one within the existing Union particularly wants the newcomers any more. Although the Irish may vote in favour of the Nice Treaty in 10 days' time, opinion polls in France, Germany, Italy and elsewhere all show the same loss of confidence in the institution. Given a deepening recession, the citizens of Europe – if asked today – would cast their votes overwhelmingly against the £60 per person extra cost that enlargement will bring.

This is the truth of the decision not to give Turkey even a date for starting to negotiate entry. The ostensible reason is that the Commission does not feel that it is nearly ready. And there is no doubt the country is not yet a "nice democracy". Journalists and writers are in jail for voicing their views, the army remains powerful in the background and the Kurds are still oppressed.

The Commission talks about readiness. The truth is that several members of the Union are determined that Turkey never joins – the Greeks because of historic enmity, the Germans because they fear an invasion of Turkish workers and because they wish to see a northern-centred Europe, with Berlin as its natural capital, rather than a Europe balanced around the Mediterranean.

It is both dishonest and short-sighted. Turkey does indeed pose problems on human rights and numbers (within 15 years it could have a population as high as Germany). But in terms of economic development and political maturity Turkey is in advance of Greece before it joined, or Portugal.

Visitors to Turkey today can vouch for the fact that the Turks now want to join. Prices are widely quoted in euros as well as Turkish lire. There is widespread support for the changes in the law on the death penalty and criminal code that have been introduced to make Turkey a suitable candidate. One can discuss the issue of the Kurds in a way that was inconceivable five years ago.

Turkey is a country poised on the cusp of European style-change. And it's a country that would – as its history as a member of Nato suggests – take its responsibilities as a member of the EU extremely seriously (unlike a number of existing members). With Turkey as a member, or prospective member, there is also a far better chance to solve the problem of Cyprus.

To snub it, only weeks before Turkey goes to the polls in a general election, is sheer stupidity. It is also foolish when bringing in a state that bridges Europe with the Muslim world and holds such a pivotal role in the Middle East and Central Asia holds such long-term advantages.

Expansion is running into the sand before it happens. The political leaders of Europe need to rediscover the vision with which expansion was first pursued when they meet at Copenhagen in December. And to rebalance the future with a date for the Turks to start negotiations.

a.hamilton@independent.co.uk