Stockholm is the capital of Scandinavia. Over the last couple of days the beautiful city of Stockholm not only hosted a high-level meeting between Turks, Europeans and Americans, but also demonstrated how graciously it can host a gathering organized by the German Marshall Fund and its partners.

The “Trilateral Strategy Group” discussed regional and global issues at Stockholm and attempted to facilitate a better understanding between Turks, Europeans and Americans. Undoubtedly, the Trilateral Strategy Group meetings constitute a very useful platform as no such fora exist where such candid exchanges can take place.

The debate on Turkey amply demonstrated that the primary fundamentals about Turkey still remain unresolved. Turkey’s EU drive remains fraught by the inability of the European Union to say anything but pacta sunt servanda, which has become a catchword to buy time and preserve the status quo. Unfortunately, even maintaining the status quo, namely, preventing a slow or sudden death of the negotiations, has become an end in itself. The obvious impediments to a more accelerated process are known by all, but what we hear from the EU is the commonly known demand for Turkey to open its ports to South Cyprus.

Unfortunately, the “broken promise” of 2004 gets rare mention and increasingly confirms the commonly felt Turkish sentiment that European credibility is shaky at best. Let us remind us all once again that the European Union has failed to fulfill the promises it made during and after the 2004 referendum on the island. These “broken promises” remain a key element in shaping Turkey’s perceptions on the Ankara Protocol and remain the primary reason why we are not extending it to South Cyprus. Either EU officials should stay true to their promises or they should not make promises they cannot keep. In our part of the world such things matter. We actually take promises seriously. Failure to stay true to them does not reflect well on the counterpart.

True, there are many areas where Turkey could and should act and press for reforms. Indeed, a number of chapters could be opened that way, but that does not solve the current issue. Turks understand very well, even if Turkey would embark on a complicated political reform processes and open a couple more chapters, that the Cyprus issue will remain on the table. Hence, the fundamentals remain. It is often privately whispered into our ears by friendly EU diplomats that it was a mistake to take South Cyprus into the EU in 2004. It was also a grave mistake to make promises about direct trade and aid to northern Cyprus and then not deliver on them. What is now being requested from Turkey is that we should swallow these mistakes and get on with that reality. That is not going to happen.

The good news is that by the fall of this year we will have a better picture on whether the negotiations in Cyprus will produce a deal or not. At last, there will be more clarity on where we are vis-à-vis the EU. Most Turks have lost interest and are tired by the ongoing uncertainty about the EU process. The current snail pace of negotiations will condemn Turkey to negotiate for the next two decades. There is neither appetite nor enough geopolitical patience to wait that long. We need a clear perspective and to get on with it.

Should the Cyprus talks fail, Ankara will engage in a comprehensive reassessment of the Cyprus and EU files. Like most Turks do, I too welcome the approaching of this crossroad, which signifies an inevitable lessening of uncertainty in our foreign policy portfolio.