 |
|
Wycoff
|
|
Why should Turkey be in the EU?
It seems that the U.S. is pushing that with hopes that Turkish membership would weaken the structure as a whole. If I were an EU member, I'd be wary about the EU doing anything membershipwise that the US pushes for. THe US certainly isn't looking out for the EU's best interests.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
I think the Kiel canal should be expanded.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maniac
|
 |
Gent, Belgium
Jul 1999
time: 06:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asmodean
- Turkish human rights still leave a lot to be desired |
In order to apply for the European Union, Turkey has made tremendous and by everyone unexpected progress on the matter of human rights. When do you think this evolution is most likely to continue? When we give them the prospect of EU membership in the future, or when we say them outright: "We don't want you here! Go away!"
quote:
- The whole Kurdish question. (Can we really have a memberstate that continuously harrasses and even makes war on a minority) |
Once again, the EU is urging Turkey to give the Kurds more and more rights - we're being even stricter towards Turkey (and all other new C- & E-Eur members for that matter) about minority rights than we are with the orinigal EU15. So when do you think the Kurds are most likely to get their desired rights? When Turkey has the prospect of joining the EU when they fulfill certain criteria, or when we just turn them away?
Playing the troll here, I'd say, would one be really interested in human rights, one would applaude the Turkish efforts to join the EU, and not use human rights as an excuse to hide one's racism. 
That being said, if it weren't for the fact that we had already made clear promises to Turkey, I wouldn't mind that much if they didn't join the EU. I'm for a strong and social Europe, and the more poor countries join before we do our own necessary homework, the less likely that social Europe's going to happen of course. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wycoff
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asmodean
So why anybody would want Turkey in the EU, is simply beyond me.
Asmodean |
The US political leaderships wants it, because they see admiting Turkey would weaken the EU as a whole. An unstable EU would pose less of a threat to the US.
Admitting Turkey into the EU would be like adding Mexico to the US.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wycoff
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
That's silly... and very, paranoid. The US government doesn't want Turkey in to weaken the EU! Turkey has the best military of any country not named Britain and France. it is poorer, per capita, than any EU member, but has an incredibly high growth rate.
I don't see how Turkey weakens the organization. It's military, in fact, would make it better. |
It may be strong militarily, but I'm talking socially and politically. First of all, its population size would automatically make it one of the most influential members of the EU. I doubt that Germany or France would be very pleased with a further erosion of their relative power.
Second, to go along with the first argument, the US and Turkey have historically close ties. A powerful, pro-US state in the EU would be a benefit for the US, but a blow to current members like France and Germany. I think that that's the primary reason that the US supports their membership.
Third, Turkey doesn't mesh well culturally with the rest of Europe. There are a variety of important differences, but the most prominent reason is that Turkey is far more religious than Europe, and its Muslim. That wouldn't appear to mesh well with Europe. Furthermore, those countries in Europe that are more relgious (like Poland) are Catholic and more intolerant of Islam. Tossing a large Muslim nation in the mix wouldn't be the best way to keep EU stability.
Fourth, many EU members are having probelms with Turks in their populations. Would it be appreciated if Turkey were given open borders with the rest of the EU? How many more Turks would flood into the rest of Europe? How would the member states' populations react to that? I'd bet that racial tensions would be exacerbated in such a situation
Fifth, how much would Turkey need in transfer payments and other EU funds? The EU is already paying to develop the Iberian states, Greece, and the new Eastern European states. How could it afford to pay for Turkey?
Sixth, there are significant historical tensions between Turkey and the rest of Europe. First of all, the Ottomans were a dangerous threat to Europe well into the Seventeenth century. While its arguable how much that would matter to Western European states, but it would probably mean more to Central European states or potential ones (like those in the Balkans), and it definately would matter to Greece and Cyprus. What would the political ramifications be if those three were all part of one entity?
This is why I think that Turkish membership would be detrimental to EU stability, at least in the short run. I think that the US is strategically benefitted by a less stable EU, as Europe is stronger as a sum of its parts.
I'm not a tinfoil hat wearing-America hater, I just think that we should keep our noses out of Europe's business. Its their union; let them decide who can and cannot join. I'd be pissed if Europe was pressuring us to add Sonora as a state.
quote:
No, it'd be more like adding Mexico to NAFTA... wait a minute!
I wonder why people think the EU is one country already |
Come on, Imran, I know you're smarter than that. The EU is much more state-like than NAFTA. NAFTA has no common currency. NAFTA doesn't have open borders (never mind how much Bush would like it to). NAFTA isn't trying to create a common foreign and defense policy. NAFTA isn't creating a Constitution. I could go on. Besides, is Mexico in NAFTA even a good thing for the US? That's debateable.
The EU isn't a state yet, but its trying to be something. It seems to be coming close to an Articles of Confederation type gray area (even the US under the articles didn't have a common currency). There must be political and social concerns taken into consideration before a state may join the EU, as its a delicate work in progress. I wouldn't advocate that Russia join the EU now either, and Russia is at least culturally more in tune with the rest of the EU (though it has historical problems with current member states rival or even dwarf those of Turkey). Bottom line is that its not our business to tell the EU who to allow to join, and if I were in a European I'd be against their accession.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
but I'm talking socially and politically. First of all, its population size would automatically make it one of the most influential members of the EU. I doubt that Germany or France would be very pleased with a further erosion of their relative power. |
Germany and France are having their relative power eroded every time more states are being added to the EU. That's not a valid argument.
quote:
the US and Turkey have historically close ties. A powerful, pro-US state in the EU would be a benefit for the US, but a blow to current members like France and Germany. I think that that's the primary reason that the US supports their membership. |
Look at the numbers again, the Iraq war has driven support for the US down very much. Turkey even decided not to back the US coalition, and even threatened to go in alone to deal with the Kurds. They are much less pro-US than they were in the Cold War period.
quote:
Turkey doesn't mesh well culturally with the rest of Europe. There are a variety of important differences, but the most prominent reason is that Turkey is far more religious than Europe, and its Muslim |
So what? England is Anglican and Italy is Catholic. They also have very different cultures. Turkey is a very European looking state. It isn't all the way there, but more European than you apparently think it is.
quote:
many EU members are having probelms with Turks in their populations. Would it be appreciated if Turkey were given open borders with the rest of the EU? How many more Turks would flood into the rest of Europe? How would the member states' populations react to that? I'd bet that racial tensions would be exacerbated in such a situation |
You mean like Asians in Britain? Are we giving a rascist veto now? Hell, you have some xenophobic parties complaining about Eastern Europeans coming in and taking jobs. There will always be complaints about the new immigrants.
quote:
how much would Turkey need in transfer payments and other EU funds? The EU is already paying to develop the Iberian states, Greece, and the new Eastern European states. How could it afford to pay for Turkey? |
I don't think Turkey would need many more transfer payments than the Eastern European countries get. It's not that much. And in the same token, Europe will soon be going through a demographic crisis. A Turkey that has high birth rates will prevent a much greater economic problem.
quote:
there are significant historical tensions between Turkey and the rest of Europe. First of all, the Ottomans were a dangerous threat to Europe well into the Seventeenth century. While its arguable how much that would matter to Western European states, but it would probably mean more to Central European states or potential ones (like those in the Balkans), and it definately would matter to Greece and Cyprus. What would the political ramifications be if those three were all part of one entity? |
Oh COME ON! There are significant historical tensions between France and Germany as well. What does that matter? It's a new age and Greece and Turkey are becoming more and more friendly by the year.
quote:
I just think that we should keep our noses out of Europe's business. Its their union; let them decide who can and cannot join. |
And when have the Europeans butted out of US's business?
quote:
The EU is much more state-like than NAFTA. |
But much less state-like than an actual nation-state. It mostly is a treaty enforcement agency and has limited powers. As for the common currency, isn't the UK part of the EU? They still use the pound. The countries that see the benefit in the Euro have taken it up. As for a common foriegn and defense policy, how much is that working? UK and Spain backed the Iraq war, France and Germany didn't. And I don't see any maps showing the EU instead of individual European countries.
Oh, and of course Mexico being in NAFTA a good thing for the US. We should expand NAFTA to other Latin American countries. Free Trade  .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wycoff
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Germany and France are having their relative power eroded every time more states are being added to the EU. |
True, but they're losing relative power to a collection of small states, state that would theoretically be easier to boss around than a large state like Turkey. I haven't read the new Constitution, but I've noticed that they've cut some of their unanimity requirements. It would be easy for the EU to pass things over the objection of Malta or Slovenia; it be easy to prevent such states from having equal say if they fervently disagreed with the rest of the members. It would be much tougher to do so with Turkey. Maybe Turkey would eventually be the "Texas" of the EU... or maybe it would be even more problematic
quote:
Look at the numbers again, the Iraq war has driven support for the US down very much. Turkey even decided not to back the US coalition, and even threatened to go in alone to deal with the Kurds. They are much less pro-US than they were in the Cold War period. |
Does that anti-US sentiment include everything, or does it only stem to US involvement in the Middle East? How much of that sentiment is Islamist sentiment, which would seem to push Turkey closer to the ME than to the EU? I think that more time needs to pass before we can accurately gauge the diplomatic repercussions of the Iraq war. (I know, that's a blinding statement of the obvious  ) If Turkey is being pushed away from the US, its not necessarily being pushed towards Europe. (as the OP arguably demonstrates)Could the EU anchor a Turkey with a large population supporting Islamism? Maybe, maybe not.
quote:
So what? England is Anglican and Italy is Catholic. They also have very different cultures. |
They have different cultures, but the differences between Turkey and Britain are greater than those of Italy and Britian. I'm not saying that it would be impossible, I'm just saying that it would be difficult.
quote:
Turkey is a very European looking state. It isn't all the way there, but more European than you apparently think it is. |
Some parts are, some parts aren't. Maybe I am underestimating Turkey's Europeaness, but maybe you're overestimating it.
quote:
You mean like Asians in Britain? Are we giving a rascist veto now? Hell, you have some xenophobic parties complaining about Eastern Europeans coming in and taking jobs. There will always be complaints about the new immigrants. |
The "racists" do have a right for their voices to be heard, and for some there are some legitimate reasons for their xenophobia. When you have double digit unemployment, I think that its reasonable to question the need for foreign workers in that country. I was going to mention the problems experienced with the Eastern Europeans. Why not let those problems be settled before throwing more gasoline on the fire?
quote:
I don't think Turkey would need many more transfer payments than the Eastern European countries get. It's not that much. And in the same token, Europe will soon be going through a demographic crisis. A Turkey that has high birth rates will prevent a much greater economic problem. |
They may not be much in actual numbers, but what are they percentage-wise to the rest of the EU budget? Its my understanding that the Easter European additions are seen as pretty expensive, and their needs won't go away if Turkey joins. It's just more burden on the remaining states.
If the demographic crunch is that bad, then they could admit Turkey at the point when it became necessary to do so. That would give Turkey more time to develop, and would prevent inflaming tensions of importing workers into states with relatively high-unemployment. If the dangerous demographic crunch isn't as bad as expected, why import excess workers without need? Why rush things? Turkey will be there, the EU will be there. If Turkey needs to be admitted to avert disaster, then it will be admitted. I don't think that that's a question, and that situation isn't really at issue here.
quote:
Oh COME ON! There are significant historical tensions between France and Germany as well. What does that matter? It's a new age and Greece and Turkey are becoming more and more friendly by the year. |
Germany and France appear to be changed countries (though who knows what would happen should each state experience extended periods of economic depression). They have made amends countless times in the past sixty years. Greece and Turkey have been at war since then, and they still are contentious over Cyprus. Again, if things are getting better, why not allow them to progress further rather than rushing them into the same structure? Is it worth the risk to that structure?
quote:
And when have the Europeans butted out of US's business? |
When have they last had any opinion of the US adding a state? Besisdes, it made me angry enough when the Europeans threatened the US over steel tariffs back in 2001. Its not our business who is in the EU, just like its not their business who is in NAFTA .
quote:
But much less state-like than an actual nation-state. It mostly is a treaty enforcement agency and has limited powers. As for the common currency, isn't the UK part of the EU? They still use the pound. The countries that see the benefit in the Euro have taken it up. As for a common foriegn and defense policy, how much is that working? UK and Spain backed the Iraq war, France and Germany didn't. And I don't see any maps showing the EU instead of individual European countries. |
I'm not arguing that the EU is a state at this time; its not. I'm arguing that its entering a gray area between association and state, thus more state-like than NAFTA. They may not be completely uniform now, but the fact that there is an effort towards uniformity speaks to the idea that there is a least some spirit of unity developing.
quote:
Oh, and of course Mexico being in NAFTA a good thing for the US. We should expand NAFTA to other Latin American countries. Free Trade . |
This topic could easily develop into a thread jack. What about Mexico in NAFTA do you consider a good thing? Free trade 
Last edited by Wycoff on 27-02-2005 at 11:21
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
True, but they're losing relative power to a collection of small states, state that would theoretically be easier to boss around than a large state like Turkey. I haven't read the new Constitution, but I've noticed that they've cut some of their unanimity requirements. It would be easy for the EU to pass things over the objection of Malta or Slovenia; it be easy to prevent such states from having equal say if they fervently disagreed with the rest of the members. It would be much tougher to do so with Turkey. Maybe Turkey would eventually be the "Texas" of the EU... or maybe it would be even more problematic |
Oh, come on... if you think France and Germany think it can boss around the Eastern European countries so its ok, then you aren't really paying attention. The new inductees won't be bullied and have made it clear. And with more Qualified Majority Voting, they are giving those smaller states more and more power.
quote:
Does that anti-US sentiment include everything, or does it only stem to US involvement in the Middle East? |
It stems to everything. People don't seperate involving in Iraq with other things. Just like Americans don't seperate France's opposition to war in Iraq with other things. Most Turks also say Europe should seperate more from the US in policy.
quote:
They have different cultures, but the differences between Turkey and Britain are greater than those of Italy and Britian. I'm not saying that it would be impossible, I'm just saying that it would be difficult. |
You mean like Slavic countries which are more Orthodox don't have a vastly different culture than Great Britain? Frankly I think they may have similar difference than Turkey and the UK. After all, Turkey was (and is) part of NATO, compared to the Warsaw Pact countries.
quote:
The "racists" do have a right for their voices to be heard, and for some there are some legitimate reasons for their xenophobia. When you have double digit unemployment, I think that its reasonable to question the need for foreign workers in that country. I was going to mention the problems experienced with the Eastern Europeans. Why not let those problems be settled before throwing more gasoline on the fire? |
Let those problems be settled? We are dealing with racists... you think they'll say Slavs are good people once the unemployment goes down? You're mad! They will always consider foriegn workers, even when there is full employment, to be wrong. Those xenophobes should not have a veto on European policy. Just like it was wrong to let the racists run the US for many years.
quote:
If the demographic crunch is that bad, then they could admit Turkey at the point when it became necessary to do so. That would give Turkey more time to develop, and would prevent inflaming tensions of importing workers into states with relatively high-unemployment. |
It's getting to be necessary very soon with plummeting birth rates. You can't just say, our economy is dying, come in Turks. Because it'll be too late then. You need them to integrate with the countries that will need workers before the bottom falls out. The best way to get Turkey to develop is to have it join the EU, which would give the country a further boost to its economy (even though its GDP growth rate is pretty high at the moment).
quote:
Greece and Turkey have been at war since then, and they still are contentious over Cyprus. Again, if things are getting better, why not allow them to progress further rather than rushing them into the same structure? Is it worth the risk to that structure? |
Putting them in the same structure WILL advance progress. Putting them together in NATO was a big boon to Greek-Turkish relations. Putting them both in the EU is even better. Keeping Turkey out isn't going to do that great for the relations. Already a lot of people feel they are doing so because Europe doesn't like Muslims, which isn't a reputation Europe needs.
quote:
I'm arguing that its entering a gray area between association and state, thus more state-like than NAFTA. |
Well DUH, it's more state-like than NAFTA, but it's closer to NAFTA than it is a state. It will not become a state anytime in the near future.
quote:
What about Mexico in NAFTA do you consider a good thing? Free trade |
Of course! The more free trade we engage in, the better. It makes us more competitive and improves our economy. Viva Free Trade . It may not be for everyone (developing countries), but for the US it makes perfect sense.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asmodean
|
 |
Aarhus, Denmark
Aug 1999
time: 06:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Odin
"Europe" is a human creation, geologically and geographically there is only Eurasia, the division between "Europe" and "Asia" is completely artificial.
IF Turkey stops violating human rights and gives the Kurds at least autonomy, they should be allowed in, but not before. |
Whether it's a human creation or not really isn't relevant. Europe is Europe, and Asia is Asia. The cultural differences are simply too large. Perhaps in 50 years or so. Perhaps.
And the question of whether they should be allowed in if they improve....I think you should leave that to us Europeans. You don't see me advocating that Nicuragua should be allowed to join the U.S., do you?
quote:
In order to apply for the European Union, Turkey has made tremendous and by everyone unexpected progress on the matter of human rights. When do you think this evolution is most likely to continue? When we give them the prospect of EU membership in the future, or when we say them outright: "We don't want you here! Go away!" |
Perhaps they have made progress on paper, but that just doesn't cut it. Things like that takes ages. What is needed isn't laws and regulations - it's a question of changing the basic attitude of all Turks to this. That akes a long time. You just don't go from medieval to enlightened in 10 years.
quote:
Playing the troll here, I'd say, would one be really interested in human rights, one would applaude the Turkish efforts to join the EU, and not use human rights as an excuse to hide one's racism. |
Winking smiley or no, I'll adress it anyway. I'm not racist. Not by a long shot. I just don't feel the need to finance Turkey's development fom my tax euros. Applaude their efforts...sure. But granting them membership - no. Why should we reward them for making changes that they should have seen the need for themselves? These changes are coming only because they hope to join the EU. So how sincere the changes are, remains to be seen, doesn't it?
quote:
That's silly... and very, paranoid. The US government doesn't want Turkey in to weaken the EU! Turkey has the best military of any country not named Britain and France. it is poorer, per capita, than any EU member, but has an incredibly high growth rate.
I don't see how Turkey weakens the organization. It's military, in fact, would make it better. |
The EU is not a military organisation. It's a socio-political one. It could evolve to a military organisation, but that would take ages. This is not like the US, where everybody has the same basic foreign political interests. This is an organisation of independent countries, each with it's own agenda. The inner row over the Iraq war clearly demonstrated that. So even with Turkey's military might, we couldn't really call ourselves stronger, since no consencus is likely to form in foreign political matters.
quote:
You don't see a problem with the EU deciding not to admit Turkey because it's MUSLIM? |
Oh come on. Everytime somebode mentions this, someone else sounds the racism alarm. This is not a matter of racial differences. It's a matter of cultural differences. And these are just too large. Especially with the current islamic awakening taking place in Turkey.
So if you want to go ahead and call it culturalism, fine with me. Just don't insult me by calling it racism.
Asmodean
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
No, it'd be more like adding Mexico to NAFTA... wait a minute! |
Does the US have an open-border policy with Mexico? Is the US forced to give very significant amounts of money as "structural funds" to Mexico? Do 70% of the US' legislation come from NAFTA's authorities? Does the US have the same currency as Mexico?
The comparison between NAFTA and the EU is wholly absurd. NAFTA is a mere free-trade zone, and an imperfect one at that. The EU is not only a common market where everyone has an absolute freedom of movement, it is also a place where plenty of things get decided, that you'd rather think are for the States to decide. The EU has considerably transcended the Free Trade Zone step. True, the EU is not a united country. But when you compare it to the US or to NAFTA, the least absurd comparison is with the US. There is a federal government out there (albeit an undemocratic one, unlike the US') that takes plenty of decisions. We do have a strong diplomatic component indeed, but it is closely intertwined with supranational institutions.
Don't take me wrong, I support Turkey's entry in the EU. But if you want to play comparisons, Wycoff's comparison is the right one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuciwalker
You don't see a problem with the EU deciding not to admit Turkey because it's MUSLIM? |
The opposition to Turkey's entry on grounds that it is Muslim, or on grounds that it isn't located in Europe is a mainstream one. I disagree with it, but I think it's worth it to understand the logic behind these arguments.
The latest enlargment of the EU, last may, was a monster. 10 new countries, 80 Million new inhabitants at once. We never made any enlargement as big. And such an undertaking prompted the question "where will Europe stop?". During the times of the USSR, the borders of the EU werefairly straightforward: it was a western European bloc. But now, it's completely different. With imaginable members such as Russia, Turkey, Israel or even Morocco, the question of where we put the border has become particularily salient.
Besides, as the EU has grown larger, and as it has grown much more important (again, it's closer to a Federal State than to a free trade area), it has become necessary to make people feel attached to it. One possible way to that effect is to put an emphasis on a common culture, so that the Europeans of Poland feel closer to the Europeans of Portugal, rather than to the non-Europeans of Bielorussia, for example*.
Christianty is an obvious choice. So far, all EU members are mostly Christian. Another choice, which is less obvious, is the map of Europe: we have a clear border with Africa (the Mediterranean) and a clear border with Asia (the Bosphorus). Much less clear is how far Europe spans eastwards through Russia. If you listen to one of our Russians (forgot if it was Serb or the Vagabond), Russia is European up to Vladivostok. Most of our European posters will disagree with such a broad definition of Europe
I think that's why there is so much attachment to religion when we say "the Muslims don't have the same culture". That's because the European culture is strongly intertwined with the Mediterranean one, and the most prominent distinction is Christianty (don't mention the fact that Islam is also a Judeo-Christian monotheism )
I personally think it is a pile of crap. Our common European culture is war, blood and hatred. Our common European achievement, our greatest pride, is to have overcome this history. Christianty never prevented us from happily gutting each other, save for the few occurences when it made us band together to happily gut the Muslims. But I can see why people are so attached to Christianty, considering that we have different languages, different political and economic values, different literatures, and even different alphabets. Christianty is pretty much the only, remote thing that we have in common, with our white skin (emphasizing on the white skin won't be PC at all, so it won't happen).
*this may sound cynical, but the "we-feeling" within a political construct is a tried and true method to raise its cohesiveness and stability. If we don't want the EU to collapse from within, we need such a stability.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-02-2005 19:11
... and is this the american santa claus that lives on the north pole or the dutch on that is living in spain?
|