EU Today publisher Gary Cartwright interviewed Mehmet Göktürk İplikçioğlu, CEO of TEOMAN Corp., Representative of the Polish Chamber of National Defence Manufacturers, during his visit to Brussels this week.
G.C.: When you look at today’s landscape, how would you describe the state of Türkiye– EU economic relations?
M.G.I.: The relationship is much deeper and more structured than daily politics sometimes suggests. The EU remains Türkiye’s largest trading partner, and Türkiye is one of the EU’s most important neighbours in economic terms. Supply chains in sectors like automotive, machinery, textiles, white goods and increasingly services are tightly integrated.
What we are seeing is not a simple buyer–seller relationship, but a dense web of long-term contracts, joint ventures, production platforms and logistics networks. Even when there are political tensions, companies on both sides continue to cooperate because the economic logic is very strong. In that sense, Türkiye–EU economic ties are both resilient and, at the same time, in need of an update to match today’s global realities.
GC: Why do you say they need an update? What has changed since the early days of this relationship?
M.G.I.: The framework of the relationship was designed in a different era, when trade in goods was the main focus. Since then, the global economy has been transformed by services, digitalization, e-commerce, data, green transition policies and much more complex supply chains.
Türkiye has also changed: it is no longer just an export platform for basic products, but a country with sophisticated manufacturing, growing technology sectors and its own regional and global ambitions. The EU, meanwhile, is rethinking strategic dependencies and resilience. The original architecture didn’t fully anticipate these shifts. So there is a broad recognition that the legal and political framework should better reflect the actual depth and diversity of what companies are already doing on the ground.
G.C.: Where do you see the strongest areas of interdependence between Türkiye and Europe?
M.G.I.: Manufacturing is still the backbone. European firms rely on Turkish partners for components, sub-assemblies and finished goods in sectors like automotive, machinery, home appliances, textiles and defence-related industries. At the same time, Turkish exporters depend heavily on European demand and standards.
But interdependence is also growing in energy transition technologies, logistics, tourism and services. European companies use Türkiye not only as a production base but also as a regional hub for markets in the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Asia. In the other direction, Turkish companies increasingly invest in Europe to be closer to customers and participate more directly in innovation ecosystems.
G.C.: TEOMAN Corp. has been advising both Turkish companies investing in Europe and European companies investing in Türkiye. From this vantage point, what are the main motivations driving business in both directions?
M.G.I.: From the Turkish side, the main motivations are access to the single market, proximity to key customers, and the desire to move up the value chain. Companies want to be seen not just as external suppliers but as local partners in Europe, involved in design, engineering and after-sales services. They also use European investments to strengthen their brand and learn from advanced regulatory and technological environments.
From the European side, the attraction of Türkiye is a combination of location, capabilities and adaptability. Investors find a deep industrial base, skilled labour, and an ecosystem that understands European quality and compliance standards. They also appreciate the speed with which Turkish partners can respond to changes in demand or supply-chain disruptions. For many, Türkiye is a way to make their own European supply networks more resilient and more competitive.
G.C.: What are the main obstacles that companies face when they try to deepen this economic relationship?
M.G.I.: The first is regulatory and political uncertainty. Businesses can work with high standards and complex rules, but they need predictability. When there is ambiguity about the future direction of trade policy, green regulation, digital rules or market access, investment decisions are delayed or scaled down.
The second obstacle is practical: mobility of people. Senior managers, engineers and technical staff often struggle with visa and work-permit procedures, even when projects are clearly beneficial for both sides. This slows down integration, acquisitions and joint ventures. A third challenge is perception. In some parts of Europe, there is still an outdated view of the Turkish economy and business culture; in parts of Türkiye, expectations about how easy it is to operate in the EU can be unrealistic. Closing these perception gaps is essential.
G.C.: How could Türkiye–EU economic ties be made more balanced and sustainable in the long run?
M.G.I.: Balance and sustainability come from three things: predictability, reciprocity and shared value creation. Predictability means clearer and more stable frameworks for trade, investment and standards, so that companies can plan beyond the next election cycle. Reciprocity means making sure that market access and opportunities are perceived as fair on both sides, which requires ongoing dialogue rather than one-off negotiations.
Shared value creation is perhaps the most important. Instead of focusing only on trade flows, the emphasis should be on joint projects, co-investment and co-innovation. When firms see that working together allows them to develop new technologies, reach new markets and manage risks better than they could alone, the relationship becomes self-reinforcing.
G.C.: In practical terms, what would you like policymakers in Europe and Türkiye to focus on to support this?
M.G.I.: First, they should maintain and deepen technical dialogue on trade and regulatory issues. Even when political discussions are difficult, working-level cooperation on customs, standards, digital trade and green transition policies can prevent misunderstandings and reduce friction for companies.
Second, more attention should be given to mobility frameworks for businesspeople and experts. Efficient, transparent procedures for visas and work permits for genuine business travellers would remove a major operational barrier. Third, there is room to expand programmes that encourage joint research, innovation and industrial projects, especially in areas like clean energy, digital technologies and advanced manufacturing. These are fields where both sides have strong capacities and shared interests.
G.C.: Looking ahead, why do you say that Türkiye and Europe need each other more than ever?
M.G.I.: Because the challenges they face are increasingly shared. Both are dealing with geopolitical uncertainty, supply-chain vulnerabilities, the climate transition and rapid technological change. Neither side can address these issues effectively in isolation.
Europe benefits from Türkiye’s industrial capacity, strategic location and demographic dynamism; Türkiye benefits from Europe’s market size, technological base and regulatory influence. When they work together, they can diversify supply chains, accelerate innovation and strengthen economic resilience on both sides.
In that sense, the question is no longer whether cooperation is useful, but how quickly and intelligently both sides can adapt their relationship to reflect the reality that their economic futures are deeply intertwined.
Click here for more News & Current Affairs at EU Today
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
