More- should Turkey join the EU???

Sultan

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329

Topic: More- should Turkey join the EU???
Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 08:23

Originally posted by Leonidas

It is benificial to both sides, honestly if it wasnt benificial to greece my interest wouldnt be so high. The greek leaders can understand that the staus quo is bad, draining to maintain and no wonder, wants this to be the start of something different (even if the population doesnt see it- including you). What ive been saying is that i want the turkish govn to do the same (even if the population doesnt see it), and that otherwise it will lose allot more than it saves.

Hear hear!

The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics

Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin

Phallanx

Chieftain

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283

Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 09:33

Leonidas

Alternative for what???

What is the exact reason I must find an alternative to 'mend' relations with a country that has no intention of having any other form of relations than under their own conditions...

A country who's people for some reason don't understand that reform is what they need, not to impress nor satisfy the members of the EU but to improve their own living standards...
I say that they don't understand simply because if they did, they'd never speak of giving in to the EU's pressure and always being asked to do something while the EU does nothing in return..

Exactly what is the benefit in accepting a provocative member that makes claims on a full member's lands (Imia and Aegean from Hellas) just a couple of pages before I posted the statements of Turkey's Secretary General of the Council of National Security Gigit Alpogan (sp?).. maybe you missed them.

A member that dispite endless Resolutions by the UN continues to illegally occupy a part of an already full member that they continuously reject to acknowledge... (I wonder if in Cuprus' position we'd see a France or a Germany if they'd have any hope or even dare enter the room for the so-called membership talks)

A member that while you are beginning disarmament, which is why we support their membership, (to lower military expences).. continues to arm himself by buying nuclear subs and enforcing the 'Aegean Army' (a non-NATO division, formed to invade the Aegean as the name clearly states) with new orders of high-speed boats and Israeli high-tech guns... and claims that any change in the status of the Aegean (see: our right to enforce a 12mile air-space) is reason for war...

Sorry but I see no benefits, the US may, but all they care about it getting closer to the oil resources..

Alparslan

If you want any kind of discussion with me, you must first take back your claims of lies and manipulating news articles.. Especially since you had a very close contact with reality.. (the news articles rubbed in your face)

To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.

Komnenos

Tsar

Retired AE Administrator

Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361

Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 10:49

Last night the Turkish author Orhan Pamuk received one the most important German prizes for Literature. Although not universally loved in Turkey, for his outspoken views on some of the controversial episodes of the country�s history, he nevertheless held a passionate speech, in favour of his country�s entry in the EU, and in favour of Europe.
I have my problems with the current state of affairs inside the EU, but on the whole, I can only agree with Orhan Pamuk that the EU is the most viable project in Europe to get rid of the dangerous and anachronistic nationalism, that is still evident and especially in AE�s discussion on this topic.
I translated some of the more important passages of his acceptance speech from the German:

"It is one thing, to criticize the Turkish state because of the deficits in democracy or its economic situation, but it is entirely different thing, to criticize the entire Turkish culture or those ethnic Turks who live in Germany under far more difficult circumstances as the Germans themselves. To incite a Turkophoby in Europe, will unfortunately lead to development of a dull, Europhobic Nationalism in Turkey itself.Those who believe in the European Union must realise that the choice is between peace and nationalism. Here is a decision that we have to take. Peace or nationalism. I, for my part, am convinced, that the notion of peace is at the heart of the EU, and that the peace that the today�s Turkey is offering Europe, should not be rejected.

As I have in last years again and again, spoken out for Turkey�s entry into the EU, I have been asked repeatedly questions, born out of scepticism and rejection, which I would like to answer here and now. What Turkey and the Turks have to offer Europe, is firstly peace, it is the wish of an Islamic country to participate in Europe, and it is the security and the strength that Europe and Germany would gain, if Turkey's peaceful request is met.
In all the novels, I read in my youth, Europe wasn�t defined by Christianity, but by individualism. Europe was brought closer to me, in a very compelling way, by the heroes of the novels, who fought for their freedom and wished to realise themselves. Europe deserves recognition, for its promotion of the values of freedom, equality and brotherhood, even outside the Western World. If Europe is indeed ensouled by the spirit of enlightenment, of equality and democracy, than Turkey must find its place inside this peace loving Europe. Just like a Europe, that only relies on its Christianity, Turkey, if it gained strength only from religion, would become a fortress, misjudging reality, turning towards its past and not its future."

Original text

[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">

DayI

Sultan

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408

Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 11:49

i cant believe that guy, ONE day before he went to germany he whas on a Turkish tv (CNN T�rk). He told there that he didnt say that Turks did massacred armenians and kurds, it whas fiction that whas made by the reporter. Then a day later when he's in germany he's saying "Turks did that ive also said that bla bla bla bla"

bravo!

Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı
[IMG">http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg">

Phallanx

Chieftain

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283

Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 11:56

Originally posted by DayI

bravo!

After reading Komnenos' post I did a search on a possible link in english and found a interview here (2 pages)

Maybe you misunderstood what he said, cause he addressed the issue in the interview but it sounds quite different..:

"SPIEGEL: And you consistently avoided referring to it directly as genocide. In fact, you never even used the word.

Pamuk: Because I didn't want to. In fact, the word genocide was first used in the Turkish newspapers in an attempt to attack me, even though I didn't even use the expression. And then it was quoted by the Europeans. What could I have done? After people suddenly began talking about something that used to be taboo and a real hate campaign developed against me, I could hardly stand up and say: I never even said that!"

To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.

Beylerbeyi View Drop Down

Chieftain

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355

Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 18:30

Jazz,

Your 'simple logic' is too simple. Let's say Ayasofya is more important for Orthodox than Muslims. But there are six Muslims for each Orthodox. So how do we know if more is at least six times more so that the care is equal?

In addition to that, you say Istanbul is also holy for them. Shall we give it them as well? Are you also suggesting converting the Kaabe to a Pagan shrine? That's what it used to be. It is the holiest place for Arab pagans, Muslims have other holy places.

Besides, Ayasofya and Istanbul are not religious symbols, they are symbols of political power. Ayasofya was built by an ambitious emperor, not by pious nuns. You cannot compare them to Mecca and Kaabe, full stop. Jerusalem is the equivalent of Mecca for Christians, not Istanbul, not Rome.

Finally, we live in the 21st century, not in the middle ages. Like the Greeks love to say, if we had France or UK as neighbours, instead of Greece or Romania we'd never hear this convertion talk. Because they are post-christian, i.e. more modern.

You mention that the Turks hold Aya Sofya in special standing (ie. "it is not just a mosque")- can you please elaborate on this? I would like to know more about this current battle between secularists and Islamicists on re-instituting the Aya Sophia as a mosque.

I think you got it all wrong about Ayasofya. Ayasofya was an important mosque for the Turks. Especially in the beginning, until they built other mosques in the city. It is not just one mosque. And it is, as I wrote before, a symbol of political power from the day it was built. It is the imperial temple. It was built as a statement of power, it was converted to mosque and later to a museum as a statement of power. Islamists want to re-convert to show that they are in charge of Turkey. And you are suggesting we should turn it into a church. It will never happen, and it should not happen, unless the Christians get to call the shots in Turkey.

As to ethnic plurality of Istanbul, I agree with you, would have been nice to have more of the old ethnics around. But even today, although most people in Istanbul are Muslim, they are from all over Turkey, and the Ottoman Empire, which creates quite a mix. But you should know that this state of affairs is not solely the fault of Turks, everyone has part of the blame.

As to the name change, Kotumeyil explained it. It is too ridiculous even to discuss. Also nobody, both in Turkey and abroad, calls Istanbul anything other than Istanbul, so why change it? I personally call it Kostantiniyye when I refer to the period 323-1453. For convention, rather like calling the Eastern Roman Empire, 'Byzantium'.

Beylerbeyi View Drop Down

Chieftain

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355

Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 19:06

Leonidas,

I think I should also add that although I called the West the Latins, they have changed as well. They started to modernise after the French Revolution and the character and geographical centre of their civilisation has changed considerably (from Rome to Paris-London), possibly to the extent that it became an entirely different civilisation. The bourgeoi West, as we know it today is quite different from the Latin West.

Issues over cyprus and the aegean seem to be a military driven issues and use of old fashion gun boat policy (which i associate with a emperialist mentality) which, I dont think Erdogan himself supports. I think this helps drive the defense bugets higher than they should be, and maintians the this need of a strong military within turkish society (Greece puts theirs back in the barracks, where they belong, in the 70's and are better off for it).

I think your 'siege mentality' analysis explains all this without any need to talk of 'Ottoman nostalgia' or 'imperialist mentality'. Ottomans did not have an imperialist mentality in the modern European sense, to begin with anyway. (Note that this does not mean that they haven't oppressed anyone or haven't taken other peoples' resources by force.)

Nationalism (with militarism) was big issue in Europe around the two world wars and i think most europeans despit this overall move to the right within its politics, would never go down that nationalist +militarism path again. Yes it has a european origin, but it isnt the general european way anymore. They know how bad it can all end up better than most. Its the USA and some of these new powers (china), that havent learnt the dangers of such views and combinations, that would be (or are becoming) better examples of nationalism + militarism.

Let's hope they are dead. Militarism seems to be passe, but I see that nationalism is alive and well in the Balkans, at least.

This hasnt been seprated just yet in turkey and that is a main point in difference, moves are on their way to atleast curb the military role in politics (this is a major win turks can gain through the EU talks). I rather see a pragmatic civilain being in complete control, a defense budget set by civilains not by the military. Issues like the aegean and cyprus would be allot easier to approach under such a climate, and i think you will see ,all of a sudden, progress.

I totally agree with this.

I dont mix up my culture identiy with the "state", i love some parts of greece (people and the land) and some parts are foriegn (the way it works)..I grew up within the pluralism and isolation of australia,as a minority (with the put downs and all) and have a slightly differnt view of what works and what doesnt.

I was talking about Greeks from Greece. Most Greeks I know (and I know many) would have started shouting about how Turks have killed their grandmothers in the past, and how Turks are creatures from another planet, who cannot understand superior Hellenic culture, by now.

A friend of mine from Samos is the funniest, once she said Turks oppressed them, outlawed Christian religion and literacy, and Turkish schoolbooks brainwash us, but their schoolbooks are right. And after that she told me that there are no mosques in Samos. When I suggested that they may have been destroyed after independence, she told me there never were any because there were no Ottomans in Samos... To which I replied something like, 'yes, we oppressed you by shouting commands from Kusadasi'.

Leonidas

Tsar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613

Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 06:42

Phallanx, all those issues, agean, cyprus, etc are all things that i want resolved just as much as you. Turkish jets fly over the island of my paternal ancestry, which i still hold dear, on the maternel side most (more than 2/3) of my traceable family didnt survive the war of indepandance. If the greek army make me do my service or a conflict starts, ill should be in rhodes facing that same aegean army,

But i want it to stop and the dangers to go away. Shouting at each other about past injustices, scoring points, and flexing power over a wall will not do it. The approach taken by the greek government is pragmatic, you just have to see why it is so.

1 It gives something to the turks if they succeed, more importanty to its people.. therefore a reward for changing
2 It requires their position on all our (greek) issues to change and through legal and acceptable means..therefore a enviroment where rule of law and internationl princibles are adhered to
3 It promotes freedom in speech/opinion and politics at a level not known before..therefore a enviroment that can atleast tolerate a different version of events and logic that is more reflective or understanding of the outside world
4 It is a opportunty to break down some old rivalry and give greece/turkey a chance to spend less on defese and more on things like health and education
5 It sidelines the Turk military and the nationalist on the extreme sides ...therfore softening the turkish line to something more manageable for greece.
6 It really costs the greeks next to nothing with the emphasis being on the turks

The enemy of greece are not the turks themselves, but those within that country that play on turkish insecurites, promote the "fortress" turkey -go it alone- line, look for and promote the old fashion tools of power for prestige- a large military. I want them gone and think the EU process is the only way foward.

If it fails atleast the greece tried to break the deadlock and the opportunity was not wasted on their part. Are you saying they wont change and that there is no way forward so why bother?

Changing 50 year policies and a much older seige mentality is a long process. It is a end result not a beggining reality. You wont get far, simply "saying you are agressive, u treat paople like sht etc etc", even if their is valid reasoning to what you say. The new approach that ive been talking about for turkey also applies to greece, its change in policy is a part of that new approach

Edited by Leonidas

Leonidas

Tsar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613

Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 08:07

Beylerbeyi wtote:
" The bourgeoi West, as we know it today is quite different from the Latin West. "
Like the influence protestant nth europe and its dry capitalism/industrialism, along with the destructive emperailism towards the outside world to name a few additions.
bourgeoi , ive havent heard that word since my university years! your definatly from the left

"I think your 'siege mentality' analysis explains all this without any need to talk of 'Ottoman nostalgia' or 'imperialist mentality'. Ottomans did not have an imperialist mentality in the modern European sense, to begin with anyway"
I always thought these two are interchangable and mixed up. BUt im yet to be convinced some of the politicians and miliatry havent taken off the "master" hat yet. While ottoman emperailism was much more involved and mingled with its subjects, eurpean emperialism was more on arms length basis, more exclusive. Though im opposed to any form of emperailism, as it is always based on some sort of exclusiveness

The balkans though european i would set aside as special case with alot of unresovled emotions/conflicts. Greece has by and large moved away from this (compared to the region that is) and its EU status is something that has helped it acheive this. To be fair to the East side, the west eurpoeans took two world wars to figure it out, so are only ahead because they slaughtered each other and outsiders for so much longer.

"I was talking about Greeks from Greece. Most Greeks I know (and I know many) would have started shouting about how Turks have killed their grandmothers in the past, and how Turks are creatures from another planet, who cannot understand superior Hellenic culture, by now. "
Greeks around the world have these memories, and to be honest my cousins in athens thought i was too conservative and right wing, so its the people you met and how good they are at expressing such things. If the greeks can balance these very real memories with some understanding of the concept of "other" and how it effects our psyche , such twisting of veiws and history would be minimal. It is very human to only remember and see what suites our own assumptions, it is not done for purpose, and since we are both human and neither creatures, this applies to both sides

Edited by Leonidas

Phallanx

Chieftain

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283

Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 08:13

Leonidas, what I fail to understand is point 1.
Why on earth reward them for literally doing something in their own benefit, shouldn't the reform and thus the better way of life, (by accomplishing points 2,3,4) be demanded by the people of Turkey instead of the EU any EU, why do we see it as if they're doing us a favor ?

Something I just noticed by going through Komnenos' post/translation again.. The word peace is continuously mentioned, and what I find even more worrying, is that it is used as seen in this sentence : "the peace that the today�s Turkey is offering Europe, should not be rejected."

Makes you (well me that is) wonder what really behind this sentence..

A friend of mine from Samos is the funniest, once she said Turks oppressed them, outlawed Christian religion and literacy, and Turkish schoolbooks brainwash us, but their schoolbooks are right. And after that she told me that there are no mosques in Samos. When I suggested that they may have been destroyed after independence, she told me there never were any because there were no Ottomans in Samos... To which I replied something like, 'yes, we oppressed you by shouting commands from Kusadasi'.

Maybe Yiannis would care to give more info but as I recall, Samos was captured by the Ottomans in 1550 or 60 and won a form of independence in the 1830's (originally revolted in 1821 lead by Logothetis) only to be annexed to Hellas after the Balkan wars..

Edited by Phallanx

To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.

Beylerbeyi View Drop Down

Chieftain

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355

Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 14:57

Like the influence protestant nth europe and its dry capitalism/industrialism, along with the destructive emperailism towards the outside world to name a few additions.
bourgeoi , ive havent heard that word since my university years! your definatly from the left

Surely from the left comrade. But in this context I haven't used bourgeois as a derogatory term. French revolution created the politics of the modern world, the capitalist world, dominated by the bourgeois class. Bourgeois West was, and is better in many ways than the aristocratic, religious, crusading Latin barbarism.

I would agree that Turks have a master attitude going towards the ex-subject peoples, but I don't think how big a factor this would be in determining foreign policy.

As to the bad memories of Greeks, well, Turks have bad memories too. Most people in Turkey have a family branch who had to leave their lands in the Balkans or the Caucasus. And Greeks have killed many Turks in rebellions as well. The typical tactic of rebels in the Ottoman Empire (Greek, Armenian, Serb, Bulgarian, you name it) was:

1. forming small militias,

2. attacking local Turkish villages to provoke an intervention by the state

3. when the state crackdowns violently (as the Ottomans usually did) complaining to the Great Powers, whose newspapers would write about 'Infidels killing poor Christians by the millions', giving them excuses to attack the Ottoman Empire

4. joining forces with the invading Great Power armies to ethnically clean (killings, deportations, whatever) the Turks from the newly gained territory

In this process many people from all sides have been killed or disposed. Of course sometimes the Great Powers wouldn't intervene and the rebels (and civilians) would be massacred. Probably Turks killed more subjects than vice-versa (even excluding Armenians deportations of 1915), but it was because Turks were the ruling side- able to use state terror, not because Greeks or Serbs were nice, fluffy people...

Phallanx

Chieftain

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283

Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 21:47

Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

This is totally inaccurate the least I could say..

Where were the "Great Powers" and exactly how do we see their assistance, would it be in the face of Rigas Velinstinlis, that attempted to upraise the subjects and in return was arrested by the Austrians and handed over to the Ottomans only to be found strangled in Belgrade in 1798.

Or would it be the Great Powers assistance seen in the deeds of the Russian Tzar. The same Tzar that denounced any participation to A. Ypsilantis 'plan' and stated that the Sultan was allowed to 'handle the rebelous as he choosed', just to satisfy his reaction to Ypsilantis' involvement.
The Sultan issued an order to the Muslim religious leader to slaughter the Christians, he and two prime ministers that refused which lead to their execution. Dispite their original rejections, the persecution of several thousand Hellines throughout the land but especially in Constantinoupoli wasn't avoided.

How about the French, who were giving advice to the Ottomans as seen in Navarino with the Admiral Lieu....(something)

Or would it be the British that dispatched E.Cordington (after PM G.Canning's death) for destroying the Ottoman fleet in Navarino, which interestingly enough, they obviously didn't want...

Should I continue with the bloodsucking loans that never arrived or the ships allegedly bought with these exact loans that again were invisible..

There undoubtably was some assistance in the later part of the revolution, but not as you present it, the so-called "Great Powers" literally didn't give a damn untill Egypt got into the 'game'...

To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.

Janissary

Baron

Joined: 02-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 446

Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 23:49

yyyep, and that is why Armenian Genocide is very "famouse"

Phallanx

Chieftain

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283

Posted: 26-Oct-2005 at 00:50

Janissary

Com'on, that's low.. believe it or not there was a large amount of people killed.. It would be similar to saying that the Jewish holocaust is promoted/has became famous, because of cirtain circles and not because we don't want to see anything remotely similar to it ever again....
--------------

Anyway, for all those that have continuously told me I'm bashing and don't see the greater picture which is Turkey's reform...

Reform this guys...
-----

I'll translate the basic part of the article since it isn't released in english yet...

"Just three weeks after the official begining of EU membership talks with Turkey, the National counsil of our neighbor, confirmed that the Casus Belli in any circumstance of expanding the Hellinic national borders from 6 to 12 miles, constitutes an act of war...

The news release from all Turkish mass media described that the so-called "White Bible" of the Turkish National Staff doesn't have many interpretations, other than WAR !!! "

http://www.megatv.com/gegonota/shownews.asp
--------------

I guess it's time, that all those that believed in a reform or to be exact, fell for the whole fairy-tale some presented, now see the truth..

Reform for the country in question, is an uncatchable dream, the Turkish goverments have NO power, the country has been, is and obviously will be ruled by the military goons for a long time to come...

To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.

Kapikulu

Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

Posted: 26-Oct-2005 at 01:16

Orhan Pamuk's last words after he took the prize was: " It is a great pride for me that anybody hadn't to this prize ceremony from the Turkish state"

So this shows Orhan Pamuk's true identity, a probable world citizen and a real traitor who can be proud of seeing no Turks in his prize ceremony...

Another so-called Turkish intellectual bribed

We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli

Kapikulu