Politics Should Turkey Join The EU?

The overwhelming majority of Turks are not European; in social values, mores or ethnicity. Including Turkey in the E.U. is akin to putting a round peg in a square hole. Membership in the E.U. will never happen for Turkey.
 
I have come across an article that could change my opinion on Turkey's admission to the EU if it is confirmed to be true.

The most secular Islamic country is Creationist

It explains that Turkey is more friendly to Creationism and more religious than the United States.

Historically and genetically there is every reason to see Turkish people as Europeans. In fact, Y-DNA studies have shown that a big part of the European population descend from ancient Anatolian (most of haplogroups G2a, J2 and R1b - and some E1b1b).

The geographic issue (saying that Turkey is not physically part of Europe) is just nonsense as it is just a matter of definition. Why should Cyprus or Georgia be seen as part of Europe if Turkey isn't ?

The human rights issue is hypocritical because many EU countries also violate them frequently (notably by having compulsory religion classes at school effectively proselytising one particular form of Christianity).

I thought that the Turkish government's general secularism was good enough to assure it a place in the EU. But if Creationism is the official view of the Turkish government, then this should disqualify them from any EU admission talk. This is just too backward an opinion to be acceptable. A belief in Creationism automatically rule out the theory of evolution and places Earth at the centre of the Universe (usually as a flat entity, not a round planet). Creationists therefore have no understanding of genetics, astronomy and physics. As all sciences are linked, a Creationist government would be unable to provide a proper scientific education to its population, unable to fairly support scientific research, and fail to have a compatible world view with non-Creationist nations.
 
The Turkey into EU debate is rubbish, they aren't an european country. Period.

He has to be a solid ally but not a member of the EU.
 
They are not european culturally, geographically, ethnically, religiosly and a large etc.
They are not European, and there should be no debate. But, as we all know, the EU is just a business, nothing more nothing less.
 
I have come across an article that could change my opinion on Turkey's admission to the EU if it is confirmed to be true.
The most secular Islamic country is Creationist
It explains that Turkey is more friendly to Creationism and more religious than the United States.
Historically and genetically there is every reason to see Turkish people as Europeans. In fact, Y-DNA studies have shown that a big part of the European population descend from ancient Anatolian (most of haplogroups G2a, J2 and R1b - and some E1b1b).
The geographic issue (saying that Turkey is not physically part of Europe) is just nonsense as it is just a matter of definition. Why should Cyprus or Georgia be seen as part of Europe if Turkey isn't ?
The human rights issue is hypocritical because many EU countries also violate them frequently (notably by having compulsory religion classes at school effectively proselytising one particular form of Christianity).
I thought that the Turkish government's general secularism was good enough to assure it a place in the EU. But if Creationism is the official view of the Turkish government, then this should disqualify them from any EU admission talk. This is just too backward an opinion to be acceptable. A belief in Creationism automatically rule out the theory of evolution and places Earth at the centre of the Universe (usually as a flat entity, not a round planet). Creationists therefore have no understanding of genetics, astronomy and physics. As all sciences are linked, a Creationist government would be unable to provide a proper scientific education to its population, unable to fairly support scientific research, and fail to have a compatible world view with non-Creationist nations.

I don't view Cyprus or Georgia as European either.
 
I don't view Cyprus or Georgia as European either.

True that Cyprus and Georgia do not have a typically European genetic make-up, but more of a Middle-Eastern one. But be careful that with that kind of reasoning, you could say that if Cyprus isn't European, then Greece isn't either, and if Greece isn't well South Italy isn't, and if it isn't then southern France isn't that European either, and so on... Until you realise that our ancestors all came from the Middle East after all.

Now if you just mean purely geographically, Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guyana, New Caledonia and French Polynesia are all part of the EU and use the euro (except the two latter). Their populations are overwhelmingly non-European too. The Canary Islands are part of Spain and the EU although they are geographically in Africa.

The EU is first and foremost an economic and political union, not a genetic or cultural one. Cultural diversity and expressed in the regions of Europe, not even at the member-state level.

It may not be entirely consistent that French overseas possessions are in the EU, while Dutch and British ones aren't (not even those that are in Europe, like Jersey & Guernsey or Gibraltar !). But that's politics !

Consequently, the decision of Turkey joining the EU will be, after all, a political one, not one based on geography, language, genetics or history. Needless to say that religion has a big impact on politics, though.
 
True that Cyprus and Georgia do not have a typically European genetic make-up, but more of a Middle-Eastern one. But be careful that with that kind of reasoning, you could say that if Cyprus isn't European, then Greece isn't either, and if Greece isn't well South Italy isn't, and if it isn't then southern France isn't that European either, and so on... Until you realise that our ancestors all came from the Middle East after all.
Now if you just mean purely geographically, Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guyana, New Caledonia and French Polynesia are all part of the EU and use the euro (except the two latter). Their populations are overwhelmingly non-European too. The Canary Islands are part of Spain and the EU although they are geographically in Africa.
The EU is first and foremost an economic and political union, not a genetic or cultural one. Cultural diversity and expressed in the regions of Europe, not even at the member-state level.
It may not be entirely consistent that French overseas possessions are in the EU, while Dutch and British ones aren't (not even those that are in Europe, like Jersey & Guernsey or Gibraltar !). But that's politics !
Consequently, the decision of Turkey joining the EU will be, after all, a political one, not one based on geography, language, genetics or history. Needless to say that religion has a big impact on politics, though.

I understand what you are saying, but we need to draw a LOGICAL line somewhere that accounts for both culture and geography, at the very least.
 
You can't compare the Canary Islands or Martinique with Cyprus or Georgia. Cyprus and Georgia are sovereign states while the Canary Islands and Martinique are just a former part of two european states (Spain and France respectively).
 
Hmmm, there is a way for them to join if they really want to.

They have to attack Greece or Bulgaria, when they fight back Turkey surrenders and becomes a province of Greece or Bulgaria. Therefore they'll be eligible to join EU as such. It's like a back door way in.
 
For certain, Turkey does not fit in culturally. I won't even deal with the ethnic / racial aspects...
 
For certain, Turkey does not fit in culturally. I won't even deal with the ethnic / racial aspects...

Then you complain that I call some Iberian of this forum "vulgar racists" :confused:
 
In my opinion it shouldn't. In fact I think it should give up some of its European, such as Istanbul and the lands West of it. Most of its land is in the Middle East and it would be better if they were to join the Middle Eastern or West Asian Union if such a union takes place. I don't even think it should be a candidate.

What do you think?

I voted "NO"... not so much for the "benefit" of Europe (I will not discuss that here), but for the benefit of Turkey.

In the last years, the CIA, Mossad and Bundesnachrichtendienst have been trying to promote a Coup in Turkey. They failed in 2008, with the arrest of a Israeli spy.

Since then, Erdogan have been trying to improve relationship with Iran (a decent neighbor that doesn't try to topple him), Russia, and all its neighbours.

No, Turkey should give up to continue to approach the EU (maybe it should try to keep more or less the gains of the current relationship), and try to make more business with China, Iran, Russia (recently they created a joint venture in space exploration).

If the Turkish get adventurous, they have the whole Central Asia, that culturally have a lot in common with Turkey.

Regards.
 
It was true, that for a long time the Turks didn't really know where they belonged. They really really belived they would be admited in Europe, and many though as European themselves.
However, I am surprised how fast, as soon as the evidence was clear about the attitude of the European right and right wing against Turkey, many of them take immediate conciousness of themselves, at least, the most educated Turks, and many of those living in Germany.
Example...

In this German Forum, a western spy tries to create hate against the Goverment of Turkey...
http://forum.politik.de/forum/mitte...e-akp-mit-tayip-erdogan-fuer-die-tuerkei.html


Wie gefährlich ist die AKP mit tayip erdogan für die Türkei ?
Die türkei betreib momentan ein undurchsichtige politik, sowohl innen als auch aussenpolitisch. Ist die politische Zukunft der Türkei gefährdet?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How dangerous is the AKP with Tayip Erdongan for Turkey? Turkey operates right now a non-transparent policy, as much in inside Turkey and in diplomacy. Is the politic future of Turkey in danger?

Sagt wer? Sarkozy, Lieberman und Merkel?
Keine sorge, eine EU Mitgliedschaft wird nicht zustande kommen
+++++++++++++++++++++
Who says that? Sarkozy, Lieberman or Merkel? No problem, a membership in the EU will never happen.

Undurchsichtige? Die Politik der jetzigen Regierung ist klar und deutlich, sich vom der tückischen westlichen Klammer befreien und eigene Interessen verfolgen. Die einzige Gefahr kommt von innen. Einige Holzköpfe glauben immer noch, dem Westen anzugehören aber gottseidank werden sie immer weniger. Eine neue Ära hat begonnen, lass es uns genießen,während andere uns beneiden.
++++++++++++++++++++
Non-transparent? The policy of the current government is clear and precise, to liberate from the western constrains and follow our own interests. The only dangers are internal, from some "wood-heads" that still believe, that we belong to the West, but thank god, they are less and less. A new Era has dawned, we should rejoice, while others envy us.
 
New approachment Turkey - Iran:

'Iran is our friend,' says Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan

• We have no difficulty with Ahmadinejad – Erdogan
• Warning to Europe not to ignore Turkey's strengths

With its stunning vistas and former Ottoman palaces, the banks of the Bosphorus – the strategic waterway that cuts Istanbul in half and divides Europe from Asia – may be the perfect place to distinguish friend from foe and establish where your country's interests lie.

And sitting in his grandiose headquarters beside the strait, long the symbol of Turkey's supposed role as bridge between east and west, Recep Tayyip Erdogan had little doubt about who was a friend and who wasn't.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's radical president whose fiery rhetoric has made him a bête noire of the west? "There is no doubt he is our friend," said Erdogan, Turkey's prime minister for the last six years. "As a friend so far we have very good relations and have had no difficulty at all."
What about Nicolas Sarkozy, president of France, who has led European opposition to Turkey's bid to join the EU and, coincidentally, adopted a belligerent tone towards Iran's nuclear programme? Not a friend?

"Among leaders in Europe there are those who have prejudices against Turkey, like France and Germany.

... Previously under Mr Chirac, we had excellent relations [with France] and he was very positive towards Turkey. But during the time of Mr Sarkozy, this is not the case. It is an unfair attitude. The European Union is violating its own rules.

"Being in the European Union we would be building bridges between the 1.5bn people of Muslim world to the non-Muslim world. They have to see this. If they ignore it, it brings weakness to the EU."

Friendly towards a religious theocratic Iran, covetous and increasingly resentful of a secular but maddeningly dismissive Europe: it seems the perfect summary of Turkey's east-west dichotomy.

Erdogan's partiality towards Ahmadinejad may surprise some in the west who see Turkey as a western-oriented democracy firmly grounded inside Nato. It has been a member of the alliance since 1952. It will be less surprising to Erdogan's secular domestic critics, who believe the prime minister's heart lies in the east and have long suspected his Islamist-rooted Justice and Development party (AKP) government of plotting to transform Turkey into a religious state resembling Iran.

Erdogan vigorously denies the latter charge, but to his critics he and Ahmadinejad are birds of a feather: devout religious conservatives from humble backgrounds who court popular support by talking the language of the street. After Ahmadinejad's disputed presidential election in June, Erdogan and his ally, the Turkish president, Abdullah Gul, were among the first foreign leaders to make congratulatory phone calls, ignoring the mass demonstrations and concerns of western leaders over the result's legitimacy.
Talking to the Guardian, Erdogan called the move a "necessity of bilateral relations". "Mr Ahmadinejad was declared to be the winner, not officially, but with a large vote difference, and since he is someone we have met before, we called to congratulate him," he said.

"Later it was officially declared that he was elected, he got a vote of confidence and we pay special attention to something like this. It is a basic principle of our foreign policy."

The gesture will be remembered when Erdogan arrives in Tehran this week for talks with Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, that will focus on commercial ties, including Turkey's need for Iranian natural gas. Ahmadinejad has voiced his admiration for Erdogan, praising Turkey's recent decision to ban Israel from a planned Nato manoeuvre in protest at last winter's bombardment of Gaza.

Since the election, Iran has witnessed a fierce crackdown on opposition figures that has resulted in activists, students and journalists being imprisoned and publicly tried. Detainees have died in prison, and there have been allegations of torture and rape. Some of those alleging mistreatment have sought refuge in Turkey.

But Erdogan said he would not raise the post-election crackdown with his hosts, saying it would represent "interference" in Iranian domestic affairs.
He poured cold water on western accusations that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon, saying: "Iran does not accept it is building a weapon. They are working on nuclear power for the purposes of energy only."

Erdogan has overseen a dramatic improvement in the previously frigid relations between Turkey and Iran, which was viewed with suspicion by the pro-secularist high command of the powerful Turkish military. Trade between the two countries last year was worth an estimated £5.5bn as Iran has developed into a major market for Turkish exports.

Erdogan's views will interest US foreign policy makers, who have long seen his AKP government as a model of a pro-western "moderate Islam" that could be adopted in other Muslim countries. They will also find an audience with President Barack Obama, who signalled Turkey's strategic importance in a visit last April and has invited the prime minister to visit Washington. They are unlikely to impress Israel, which has warned that Erdogan's criticisms risk harming Turkey's relations with the US.

Erdogan dismissed the notion, saying: "I don't think there is any possibility of that. America's policy in this region is not dictated by Israel."
He insisted that the Turkey-Israel strategic alliance – which some AKP insiders have said privately is over – remains alive but chided the Israeli foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, who he said had threatened to use nuclear weapons against Gaza.

Massive anti-Israeli demonstrations in Istambul:

http://video.google.com.mx/videopla...q=Anti+israeli+demonstrations+in+Turkey&hl=es

http://video.google.com.mx/videopla...q=Anti+israeli+demonstrations+in+Turkey&hl=es

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In this forum it has been discussed the adecuacy of Turkey in Europe on a basis of Racial or Religious matters... its ok.

I try to give the political situation, and try to do so, from a "Turkish" point of view. Really, its a theme I have been following for some years.

Its a discussion that really interest me.
 
Then you complain that I call some Iberian of this forum "vulgar racists" :confused:
Why it is racist to say Turks are not ethnically European ??
 
Why it is racist to say Turks are not ethnically European ??

I saw written the word "racial"... but OK, even if I read the statement of Cambria Red a little hastly... but some of the posts in this thread, try to use as argument "genetic compatibility" with the Turks. No matter how much you try to "embelish" that, it is about plain racism.

Really, it surprises me that is the argument and not simply "religion and culture".

On the other hand, I think that it is obcene that the EU have promised for 30 or more years the possibility of joining of Turkey, only to end up that Turkey is not worthy on racial, cultural and religious grounds. Because if the thing is about development and economic argument, the joining of Turkey is more defensible as some other countries that did enter.

On the other hand, I want to stress I am deeply satisfied, the sportmanship with which the Turks see the matter.

I think it is admirable.
 
I for one, find very illustrative the attitude of the turkish users that entered this thread…

The first one, @Coze, enters immediatly defending the possibility of entrance of Turkey in the EU, and for that, following the spirit of the previous posts, he claims that there is “white/european” blood in the turkish too… and besides, he claims that this “blood” has its influence in how the different turkish people vote:

I would say it's little bit racist assumption to make. Though the cultural and political differences between coastline and mainland Turkish people kind of verifies this assumption. Just have a look at this map of the 2009 local elections in Turkey ...

800px-2009turkeyelections.jpg


aside from istanbul (which has been flooded by migrants from the mainland) most coastlines have been taken by the opposition

+++++++++++++++++++++

The other user, @Sfanky, enters immediatly putting forward a kind of turkish patriotism… refusing to play the "European game", and plainly refusing to see himself through European eyes…

i believe europe dont want turkey because europe is not democratic enough..
EU is just a new name of holy crusade in this years.

thats why if they accept turkey there will be no more holy crusade;
it will became open for every religion every people, so the real democracy will come:)

i dont believe any other needles reasons that eu tells turkey.
turkey is 10times better then so many countrys in EU.

EU can accept turkey or not; its realy not important for me,because i know we are in europe since 1453, and no one can chance this...

I don’t agree with him, that “Europe do not accept Turkey because it is not democratic”, and some other things.

However, my sympathies are for this last user. He has the attitude that I recommend for every Turk and for Turkey itself: Do not play the European game.

Now, it may sound as “radical” and “offensive” to some European readers. Here, I will say that the issue of Turkey IS NOT WHAT YOU THINK.

You may think, that whats going on is simply if Turkey enters or not the EU.

In reality, the issue is not if Turkey will enter the EU (it will not), but if the regime of Turkey, could be used as a tool to create problems to Russia, Iran and others… and for that, the regimes of Germany, Israel and the USA (I am not sure if France too), require a mafiosi regime in Turkey.

That is whats going on. And only a strong Turkish nationalism, not deluded with the “European illusion” will prevent that to happen.

@Sfanky is concious of that, and @Cozy, is not.

Regards.
 
For certain, Turkey does not fit in culturally. I won't even deal with the ethnic / racial aspects...

In my experience, many Aegean-coast (upper-middle class) Turks could just pass for Europeans physically, as well as in their behaviour and values. Many of them don't care much about religion, dress scantily at the beach, drink alcohol and are more secular than many Poles or Irish. Eastern Turks are quite different though. Had Morocco been part of Spain like the Canaries, I don't think it would have been accepted as an EU member. If there was a way for Western Turkey only to join the EU, I am pretty sure they'd already be in. But that's not possible. Turkey's problem is that it has people who would qualify as EU members and others who certainly wouldn't. It's not really the same, but how would you feel about granting visa exemption to South African citizens ? I am sure nobody here would have any problem with the rich, educated Anglo-Dutch part of the population. But what about the rest ? Many Europeans opposed Romania's accession to the EU because of the gypsies. They were a minority, so they were overlooked for the benefit of the larger Romanian population. Now there are gypsies begging at every traffic light in Brussels. lol
 
baddy baddy spaniards and portugueses racists :rolleyes:

Here it comes europhobia/spanishphobia and harassment... some latinamericans just can't let go their traumas.

I voted "NO"... not so much for the "benefit" of Europe (I will not discuss that here), but for the benefit of Turkey.

Excuse me but why did you vote? Is Mexico part of the EU now? :indifferent:

This is not your problem. Just like Ciudad Juarez or Chiapas is not an european problem. :disappointed:
 

This thread has been viewed 235749 times.

Back
Top