 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Rufus T. Firefly
|
 |
is one way of saying it, though I prefer "mensch"
Sep 2000
time: 07:24
|
|
Jeez, 128 posts by the time I saw this; I hate it when these threads start when I'm asleep. Anyway...
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
I don't get the Turk impulse to join the EU. I thought they might want to form a Turkish Federation that is composed of all Turkish-speaking peoples, including, of course, East Turkestan. |
Not all of Turkey does. The nationalists (a/k/a crypto-fascists) don't, and they're still a powerful presence (they were part of the last government, and only missed being in the current parliament because their votes were split betwen 2 parties).
Other Turks do, for one or more of the following reasons:
1) A stable currency would be a welcome relief
2) A free-trade zone with W. Europe would lower the price of European goods here
3) Membership in the EU may be the only thing that finally disempowersTurkey's military, and curbs its authoritarian streak in general.
The thing to understand is that most Turks are dismayed, to at least some extent, at the failure of the Turkish power structure to live out the European values they pay lip-service to; they ar equally dismayed at their inability to change things from within, thanks to the heavy hand of the military, the exclusionist nature of Turkish politics, and widespread systemic corruption. They see EU membership as a way to save Turkey from itself.
That may not be the EU's problem. But it is why ordinary Turks want in. And it bears repeating: nothing about Turkey right now -- its economy, its recent flirtation with military dictatorship, its horrendous human rights record -- is actually that much different from the case of Greece at the moment it was admitted.
I think the EU is right to be suspicious of Turkey's commitment to the Copenhagen criteria; Turkey's passed the requisite laws, but not enough time has lapsed to judge their implementation. But I think the same can be said of many E. European countries who will be given definite dates today and tomorrow, while Turkey will not; that's causing a lot of resentment here, and rightly.
Finally, why should the EU want Turkey? The biggest reason is that Turkey is a big, underdeveloped market that currently isn't freely trading with Europe, and that makes foreign investment maddeningly difficult. Turkey joining the EU, and opening its markets fully to both European consumer goods and European investment, would be a lot like having Mexico in NAFTA -- something the US has benefitted from enourmously.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
I agree mostly with you Rufus but 2 things:
"...is actually that much different from the case of Greece at the moment it was admitted."
What ? The only one that holds is about the economy.
"Turkey joining the EU, and opening its markets fully to both European consumer goods and European investment, would be a lot like having Mexico in NAFTA -- something the US has benefitted from enourmously."
The present EU-Turkey agreements go beyond what NAFTA has to offer.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"Greece was a military dictatorship -- The Colonel's Junta, remember? -- a scant six years before they were admitted to the EU."
In 1981 the military was neither politically nor constitutionally in a similar position as it is in today's Turkey.
"European consumer goods cost a fortune here, because Turkey's allowed to slap on ultra-high tariffs. They would not be able to do that in the EU."
They are not allowed to do this under the customs union.
"Similarly, European business -- especially manufacturers -- have to contend with so much red tape to set up a "foreign" business that many do not bother; that, too, would be different under the EU."
Would be different, but first part of that is covered by the customs union, second it would not or just barely be covered under NAFTA. NAFTA is a simple free trade area with some free capital movement - even present Turkey-EU relations go way beyond that.
http://www.deltur.cec.eu.int/english/ei-gumruk-faq.html
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Nope, the pararelism of today's Turkey with Greece at the moment of ascession doesn't hold water.
The "democratic defficiencies" of Turkey are deeply ingraned and culturally fueled, whereas the military regime in Greece was an "abnormality" (won't mention "outside influences" here...) that lasted a mere 7 years.
Turkey's democratic defficiency has lasted since its creation in the 18th century.
Unfortunately the economy during the Greek jutan was very powerful. In the 60's economists talked about the "Greek miracle". We were 2nd in GDP growth after Japan in the world...
Comparing Greece's position after it reeled itself out of a dictatorship of a mere 7 years (the shortest compared with other med countries actually) with Turkey's "chronic illness" simply is misleading.
Also bare in mind that Greece was to join the EU in the 60s but the dictatorship put an end to the date we had already agreed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"can't explain it, but I can assure you that something is jacking up the price of European consumer goods in Turkey"
There are non-tariff trade barriers for sure, lack of competition/collusion in retailing maybe or what else. But what I would suspect might be the Lira having lost 50 % of its value perhabs ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
They are illegal already, the enforcement meachanism would be more effective under EU membership though.
One explanation could be that Turkey might still have a sort of luxury tax on those goods.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
That will be more Wilson than Truman....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Heresson
|
 |
of frogs
Jun 2000
time: 06:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
You could force them to grant independence to Kurdistan and Armenia as a condition of joining. That should cut down on their population somewhat. |
I'm touched that You remembered about Armenia.
However, the situation isn't like this. Of 3mln Armenians
living in the territory that was given to them, 1,5 was murdered, and 1,5 was thrown out. There are not many Armenians left there. In fact, much of the territories Kurds claim to are former Armenian ones. There's no question of granting independance to Armenia, because there's no-one there to grant independance to now.
Of course, You could throw out the Turks and Kurds and invite Armenians back, but...
Still, that's a question. Turks never admitted doing anything to Armenians. In fact I heard that in Van, former Armenian capital, there is a museum in which it is said that it were the Armenians to murder the Turks here... Up to today, Turkish attitude is very anti-Armenian. The boarder is closed I think (because Turkey plays on their brotherly Azerbaygan side in their conflict),
the holocaust of Armenians isn't mentioned no-where...
You don't need no big research to see the hostility towards Armenians. In library of turkology in my orientalistics, there are quite some works about Armenians like "Armenian lie" etc. My (very pro-Turkish, Muslim) friend told me that in the official net site of Turkey, there are only three parts in English. About some main political and economical stuff - and about Armenians... Some time ago Armenian parliament issued
a plea to the Turkish one in which it resigned of any territorial claims in exchange for admitting what happened. i think there was no response.
I claim that EU should force out some change of politics (this would be very very hard and perhaps improbable)
in politics here. When it comes to the territory, there's
no bigger possibility of any changes today. Perhaps except for one. Ani, one of ancient Armenian capitals that are today in Turkey, is located just over Armenian boarder. There were propositions to exchange it for some other ground. Ani has no meaning to the Turks or Kurds... But it is on UNESCO list and it may be a big tourist attaraction... I don't know...
Except for that, Turkey is in very very very bad economical situation and it isn't fully democratical.
On the other hand, democratisation, even such, should be supported. The question is will the neverending growth of Turkish population (from 12mln at the start of last century to about 60 now) end after entrance to UE?
And is it, or isn't that a threat...?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
By Scandinavian proposition I mean Denmark, Sweden and Finland.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Rufus T. Firefly
|
|
is one way of saying it, though I prefer "mensch"
Sep 2000
time: 07:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
number 1 and 2 are basically same, but number 2 gives a certain date for next chance to start? But it's pretty much the same. |
It depends on how you define "fulfill the criteria." Technically, #1 & 3 are the same -- Turkey has fulfilled the Copenhagen criteria by passing all the requisite laws last summer, and thus should have been given a start date. What remains to be seen,however, is whether and to what extent these laws will be implemented and enforced. The EU is frankly right to be suspicious; there's a history of Turkey ignoring its own laws, especially when those laws are reformist in nature. Thus the Franco-German proposal, which passed. But, having passed the EU legal package as requested (and, as the legal history of the Turkish Republic goes, this was probably the most significant event since the creation of the first constitution), Turks nevertheless feel that they've been screwed. Personally, I think the EU's reasoning is justifiable, but procedurally I still think they jerked Turkey around on this.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2002 12:19
.
(for EU ascession talks).
|