The target is closer and i dont see why eurocrats/politicians will not allow Turkey to be european before 2013 (tomorrow). we ve seen with all previous enlargements that the process is fast and criterias do not matter.

Fortunately the NO slow down a bit the process.

unfortunately we ve seen with bulgaria/romania cases that criterias are quite flexible and when there is a political will, criterias do really not matter.

without the NO at the constitution i am pretty sure, Turkey would have qualified quite fast.

there is no guaranty that criterias will be respected, past enlargements did not.

The problem there, as nanne points out, is NATO. If regional war flares up around Kurdistan we'll probably have to get involved.

On which side? US armed and backed Iraqi Kurds (+Turkish Kurds + Other Kurds). or NATO member Turkey (which might actually initiate the conflict?)

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake

Before Turkey enters, the EU will hopefully have changed its Common Agricultural Policy so that it can deal more flexibly with newcomers. The arrangement for the 2004 entrants can otherwise be replicated here: they are being fased in very slowly, they now get funding at about 25% which will slowly climb to full funding in 2013. The EU will also need to reform its institutional architecture, so that we will have only double majority voting in the Council (voting by a majority of states representing a majority of the population).

First of all, it seems to me the CAP was just re-negotiated. 'Course, Tony, little more than a year later, wanted to re-negotiate that further, but that didn't get anywhere then, and it won't now. 'Course, what does the land of mad cows know about agriculture, one might ask.

Secondly, double majority voting was to have been put into effect with the Constitution, if I am not mistaken, but then, we know where the constitution went, and arguably it went there precisely because of hasty neo-liberal reforms in anticipation of equally hasty enlargement which were not supported by the people. (In France, the most effective opponent to the Oui campaign was a Dutchman and neo-liberal by the unfortunately name of Bolkenstein.)

I think all of this is exactly putting the cart before the proverbial horse. Europe is far too important than this. All this causes is a predictable backlash against further reform and further enlargement, in this case not only to Turkey, but also the rest of the non-EU Balkans.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

This is of course exactly the sort of thing the English would love to bring to Europe as well, they've bought the American model, arguably in fact they taught it to the Americans.

For my part, I suspect Turkey will hold its own in the present environment; it is converging already, in more ways than one. This being said, why force the issue by hastily integrating it into EU institutions? So firms can make a few bucks more?

Europe, a real Europe, is far too important for that, and has already been enlarged too much, imho threatening the project. Time to take it slow. I submit, humbly, that if your currency isn't yet ready to be integrated into the Eurozone more or less harmoniously, and your regimes with respect to tax policy, human rights and social insurance are not within a margin of error or so of the EU mean, it's not your time yet.

Not to say there won't be a time in the near future.

Of course, this perspective likely would require that England be invited to leave as well, but Wales and Scotland would no doubt be welcome to stay.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill