Starting membership negotiations with Turkey is a sensitive issue facing EU leaders and poses a haunting spectre to the EU as in December 2004, at the climax of the Dutch Presidency of the EU, it would be decided whether or not to start accession negotiations with Turkey and if Turkey has met EU's criteria for human rights and democracy.
If agreed, within a decade or so Turkey's population of nearly 70 million would make it the second largest country in the European bloc and the first mainly Muslim nation.
With a new voting system based in part on the size of population due to come into effect under Europe's constitution, the Turkish membership would have profound impact on EU's power balance.
For almost four decades, Turkey has sought membership in the European club, which has changed names, forms and objectives since its creation in the 1950s. It first applied to join the EU, then known as the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1959. It signed a customs agreement with the bloc in 1995 and became a candidate for membership in 1999.
Over the years, Turkey has taken a number of steps to meet the political accession criterion, especially in the areas of democratisation and human rights. The raft of constitutional changes included the introduction of a national security court, the abolition of death penalty, the removal of all military representatives from higher education organisations and a free press. It has also lifted some curbs on freedom of expression, association and religion. It reduced the influence of the military in politics and increased cultural rights for Turkey's 12 million Kurds.
Turkey also played an important role in urging the populace of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) to back the United Nations plan to reunify the island of Cyprus.
The reunification plan was accepted by the Turkish Cypriots but rejected by a majority of Greek Cypriots, which led to the latter joining the EU alone in May 2004. Over the past two decades the Turks have patiently worked on a package of economic reforms, starting with a large dose of liberalisation under Turgot Ozal.
The process has continued under the current center-right government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan with great determination.
The EU concern is that Turkey is not doing enough to stamp out use of torture by police in jails, harassment of human rights activists and violations of the rights of non-Muslim minorities.
To disqualify Turkey as a member, the EU has mentioned certain reasons, including its weak economy, inefficient bureaucracy, rampant corruption and a poor record of human rights. Countries with similar problems, such as Eastern European states, joined the EU on May 1, 2004.
One argument is that Turkey has a large peasantry that can bankrupt the union by demanding subsidies under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). But that argument fades when one notes that CAP has already reached a dead-end with the admission of new members from Central and Eastern Europe and mounting pressure for the removal of farm subsidies as the last impediment to global free trade. Another argument is that Turkey is not democratic enough to enter the union, even though it has adopted reforms.
This is true. It may take Turkey many more decades before it can be regarded as a full-fledged democracy. But one must also note that membership of the EU could accelerate the process of democratisation as in Portugal and Greece and in the former Communist states.
The positive and negative points of Turkey's inclusion in the EU have to be studied in detail in this regard. One cannot ignore the fact that for almost half a century Turkey has served as Europe's first line of defence against Soviet imperialism.
(The Turkish Army was, and remains, the second largest within the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) after the United States.)
If the EU aspires to have a strong military muscle to complement its political weight on international stage, Turkey's inclusion would be a necessity and would help complement the European defence.
Now that Nato's European members regard Afghanistan as their top priority, Turkey can play an important role.
On the economic front, Turkey has now reached the stage where more economic improvement is to a certain extent dependent on the launch of formal EU accession talks. The beginning of negotiations would itself provide a "stabilising anchor" for Turkey's economic policy.
Turkey is the only non-EU country with a full Customs Union agreement with the EU. Full membership would enhance its trade and investment opportunities even further, boosting Europe's competitiveness at the same time.
The start of accession negotiations would draw foreign investment to the country and help lower the nation's $204 billion debt.
For the EU, access to energy sources from the Caspian Sea basin can solve a lot of energy problems for the European continent.
Also the ideological argument advanced by some in Europe against inclusion of an Islamic State in a Christian club does not hold water.
This argument is rooted in the historical experience of the Europeans but then if historical experience is the driving force the Franco-German alliance would not have been possible for that matter.
To start with the claim that the EU is a Christian club is both untenable and dangerous. In the 25-member union, no more than 30% of the population describes itself as practising Christians.
If the religion of one's birth is the yardstick, the union is home to some 20 million Muslims.
In fact, Islam is the second largest religion throughout the union. There are also almost two million Jews and millions of European converts to a variety of other creeds, from Buddhism to the many other sects.
Europe today is one big supermarket of religions and political ideologies. Europe is secular in state practice. On the other hand, the Turkish republic has been a secular State for almost eight decades, much longer than many of the members of the EU.
Turkish entry to the EU seems to be more of a power-sharing problem than an ideological one because once Turkey becomes a member of EU would have the same if not more votes than Germany, given that its population could rise to 80 million over the next decade.
This signifies that Turkey would have a big say in European matters. So at the end of the day it is all about power-sharing. It will depend on how the ideological card is going to be played in this regard to keep Turkey away from the EU.
There is a whole spectrum for Turkey's membership to the EU ranging from full support from European leaders like Tony Blair (British PM), Silvio Berlusconi (Italian PM), Jan Peter Balkenende (Dutch PM) to resistant approach from Jacques Chirac (French President), Gerhard Schroeder (German Chancellor), to fears experienced particularly among the smaller countries, who believe that European integration could become paralysed if such a country as large as Turkey is admitted to the other extreme with countries like Austria who believe that Europe would lose its Christian identity.
The recent EU parliamentary elections gave the majority of 732 seats to conservatives and Euroskeptics, both of which do not want Turkey in the EU. The 732 MEPs will vote in December on Turkey's accession date.
After that votes from individual countries will be taken into account. Austria is already threatening a veto, since no party there wants Turkey in EU. Opposition is also visible in other countries like France and Germany and a Cyprus veto is also a possibility and probably there would be others in line to adopt the same approach against Turkey.
Internal opposition in most of the European countries and the coming into power of conservatives show a bleak chance for Turkish membership to the EU.
The hunch is that the October report would not give a positive picture regarding Turkey. But if it is the other way round, it would be a big achievement for the Dutch Presidency to be able to convince the European leaders to agree on starting negotiations with Turkey. It will be a win-win situation for both sides.
(The writer is a research fellow at the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad.)