Saturday, September 21, 2019
Europe and Turkey Essay Example for Free
Europe and Turkey Essay Discussions about Euro-Turkish relations today would normally hover around Turkey’s application for membership to the European Union which has been pending since the mid 1900s. Turkey, a predominantly Muslim country situated in southeastern Europe and southwestern Asia, has been an associate member of the European Community (the forerunner of the European Union) since 1964, but is still working for a full membership forty-two years later. (Turkey. The World Fact Book. Para 1) The union, which started as a regional economic grouping in 1951, counted among its six original members the countries of Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. It opened its doors for new members for the first time in 1973 when it welcomed into its folds Denmark, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. Another country joined in 1981(Greece) and two more countries enlisted in 1986.  The year 1995 accounted for three additional members, and, finally, in 2004, ten more countries were granted full membership to wrap up today’s final roster of twenty-five member-countries. The European Union, in a recruitment process which spanned thirty-one years, accepted a total of nineteen additional members since 1951. (European Union. The World Fact Book.  para.2)  This fairly robust growth in the union membership compels us to ask the obvious questions: What happened to Turkey’s application for membership which was filed forty-two years ago – nine years before the union first opened its doors for new members? Bypassed five times in thirty-one years, does Turkey still stand a chance for that elusive membership?            .  Historical Background. The conundrum that characterizes the Euro-Turkish relationship has its historical roots in the 1800s. When the heads of states of the European countries gathered together after the fall of Napoleon in 1814 in what has been known as the â€Å"Congress of Vienna†to literally remake the map of Europe, every country was represented except Turkey. The reason for this was never explicitly given in any historical account. However, this discriminatory act prompted Turkey to adopt the view that Europe was becoming a â€Å"Christian Club†, considering the fact that it was the only predominantly Muslim country in the region. There were attempts to brush aside this Turkish claim by referring to numerous incidents of massacre and claims of corruption in the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire – practices which were said to be intolerable for Europeans. (Gerolymatos, para.5) Looking back at that point in history, however, we are left to wonder whether these reasons were real, fabricated, or even morally adequate to warrant such an exclusionary action on the part of the congress initiators. In fairness to Turkey, could the rest of Europe claim absolute innocence of such offences during those turbulent years in European history?            The Congress of Vienna. A careful reading of the intents of the Congress of Vienna would show us that the Turkish claim might not be as baseless as congress organizers wanted it to appear. The primary goal of the gathering was to restore political boundaries in Europe which were abolished by the expansionist wars waged by Napoleon. One of the four principles that guided the Congress of Vienna in that self-appointed task of reestablishing the European political order was the â€Å"encirclement of France†. At the time, the Congress of Vienna considered the task of adopting adequate measures to guard against future aggressions by France so urgent that it decided that fortresses situated in strategic points surrounding France should be controlled by allied forces for up to a period of five years. It is clear, therefore, that what was commonly at the back of every congress delegates’ minds at that time was what to do to contain France. Yet, it interestingly, the four major players in that meeting were Lord Castlereagh of Great Britain, Tsar Alexander I of Russia, Prince von Metternich of Austria, and Talleyrand of France![1] (Wallbank, Taylor, Carson. 1960) What a way for a France-wary Europe to include a French representative in concocting anti-French plans! Was it not ironical, therefore, that while France appeared to be the bad guy of the day, it was Turkey who got excluded from the congress? The Right of Turkey. Let us look at the map of Europe in 1815[2] and consider the geographical locations of the three European countries who figured prominently in that conference with relevance to their proximity to France, vis a vis Turkey. Great Britain is nearest, but it is an island separated from the continent by the English Channel, and was, in fact, protected by the most advanced navy during those times.  The Austrian Empire and the Ottoman Empire were almost equidistant from, and were both separated from France, by the Germanic Federation, the Kingdom of Hungary, Switzerland, and the Kingdom of Sardinia.  Tsarist Russia was farthest, because it is situated behind the Empire of Austria. (Wallbank, et al. 1960)  If the fear of further threats from France was what forced these three nations to exert undue influence on the Congress of Vienna to do something about France, then Turkey had as much right as they had to be in that meeting.  Now let us look at the allegations of massacres and corruption involving Turkey which â€Å"were just too much for Europeans to stomach†, and which, apparently, was made an excuse for not inviting Turkey to the conference. (Gerolymatos, para.5)  Again, we have to bear in mind that those were periods of instability and violent struggles for power and survival. Governments and monarchies were scurrying to consolidate their influence and control over their domains.  As the Jacobins, who were at the helm of the National Convention that governed France in 1793, put it, â€Å"What constitutes the Republic is the complete destruction of everything that is opposed to it.† And so it was that in France, historians believe that the â€Å"reign of terror†, which reached its peak in 1793, might have accounted for as much as twenty-thousand people executed simply because they were considered royalists, and counted among its victims Queen Marie Antoinette and the great orator Danton, â€Å"because he wished to end the policy of terror†. It must also be pointed out that during the rule of the monarchy in France (the Bourbon House, represented by Louis XVIII, was restored in France by the Congress of Vienna), the judicial and municipal offices, among others, were for sale. (Wallbank, et al. 1960) So why are they (apparently including the French), being so righteous about these questions of massacres and corruption? In my research in the subject, although I have found reports of maltreatment by the minority Turks over the Christians in the Balkan Peninsula, I failed to obtain hard historical evidence of â€Å"massacres†during the period in question. However, what I did find were the â€Å"massacre of all Greeks in Constantinople†in 1821 and the â€Å"Turkish massacre of the entire Greek population of the island of Chios in 1822†, both events happening in connection with the Greek uprising of 1821. (Wallbank, et al. 1960) Incidentally, these events happened seven years after the Congress of Vienna and could not have been the ones referred to by the congress delegates. However, for purposes of discussion, granting that the Turks were as guilty as the French, why condemn the first and exonerate the latter? The Present Situation. Turkey became a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1952. (Turkey. The World Fact Book.  para.1) It appears that joining a military organization composed mostly of European countries several years after the Second World War did not present much of a problem for Turkey. In my analysis, this was because Turkey was valuable to NATO at the time. Together with Greece and Iran, it â€Å"formed the northern tier of the Western perimeter against the encroaching Soviet Union.† (Gerolymatos, para.6) It did not matter then that Turkey was not well-equipped militarily. The United States â€Å"lavished their newfound all[y] with billions of dollars worth of weapons systems†(apparently without any objections coming from her European friends), so that Turkey can perform the functions of a perimeter guard satisfactorily. (para.7). And so the truth was laid out for everyone to see: that in the name of â€Å"military cooperation†, a subsidized Turkey was considered an ally, treated as â€Å"one of the boys†. Perhaps even a member of the European family of nations? Anything just to encourage Turkey to help in the defense of Europe against Russian advances. The European Union. Moving into the field of economics, everything takes on a very different shape and color. In this area, according to the Europeans, Turkey undeniably failed to qualify.[3] It’s as simple as that. The European Union, despite having considered Turkey as an associate member since 1964, did not lift a finger to help her make the grade.  Instead, the union bureaucrats, in claiming a softening of their position and again to brush aside Turkey’s allegations of the existence of a â€Å"Christian Club†in Europe (remember 1814?), agreed to consider Turkey’s application â€Å"provided that Turkey bring into force several pieces of reform legislation†, then stepped back and waited for results. (Turkey and Europe: An Invitation to Dance? Para.2) No more billions (with no strings attached) to bolster her economy to qualify the country for union membership. Not like with NATO. Indeed, it was a far cry from the billions of dollars worth of military hardware which turned Turkey into a worthy member of NATO. Do I detect a double standard here? Does it mean that it’s all right to pour billions of dollars into Turkey’s arsenal to help in defending Europe, but it could not be acceptable to help it economically so that it could be eligible for European Union membership? Interestingly, the military strategists who welcomed Turkey with open arms, and the economists who can’t seem to accept her, are both based in Brussels, Belgium. â€Å"Islamization†of Europe. There are fears among scholars and independent observers alike, that the â€Å"Islamization†of Europe is imminent in the coming years. Mr. Pipes, the director of the Middle East Forum, cites two contributory factors, namely: â€Å"the hollowing out of Christianity†[in Europe], and â€Å"an anemic birth rate [among Europeans].†(Moslem Europe. Para. 2 3) Mr. Pipes explains this twin phenomenon as the diminishing number of Europeans who remain to be practicing Christians compared to the fewer, but ever committed and devout Islam followers, on the one hand, and the very low incident of births among Europeans (many of whom do not want to have children), against the unhindered reproduction among Moslems who do not practice birth control, on the other hand. (Para. 3) Following up on this argument being advanced by Mr. Pipe, the world will one day see a Europe populated by a Moslem majority and a Christian minority. The logic in his reasoning is simple. First, even if the Christian population remains the numerical majority, if the mainstream Christians are no longer interested in practicing Christianity, Islam, although preached by the minority, has an outside chance of becoming the dominant religious persuasion in the region. Second, given the Europeans’ seeming indifference to procreation and taking note of the Moslems’ predilection for large families, the future demographic characteristic of Europe certainly favors the Moslem community. The situation, though, is not that hopeless if Mr. Pipe is to be believed. According to him, although a remote possibility considering things as they are now developing in Europe, this trend towards Islamization could still be thwarted. Three developments working in concert could still revitalize Europe and restore it to the Christian society that it once was: first, Christian faith must be restored among the majority of Europeans and birthrate should be increased; second, the Moslem countries has to be modernized (effectively reducing unemployment) to cut down Moslem migration to Europe; and, third, migration to Europe should be diversified, with greater efforts directed at attracting more immigrants from the Christian regions such as the Latin American countries.  Mr. Pipe, however, seems to urge Europe to act with urgency because â€Å"the prospects diminish with time.†(Moslem Europe. Para. 7) Islamic terrorism. There now exists in Europe what is called the Generation Jihad.[4] Powell (2005) describes it as the â€Å"restive, rootless young Muslims who have spent their lives in Europe but now find themselves alienated from their societies and the policies of their governments.† Powell believes that this alienation resulted from frustrations among the ranks of young Muslims to have better opportunities in life, as well as their resentment towards official policies which they feel are prejudicial to Muslims. (Generation Jihad. Page.2) To underscore the danger posed by Islamic terrorism in Europe, Powell cited estimates done by the French police which revealed that out of the recorded 1,600 mosques in France as of 2004, around 150 were controlled by extremist elements.  He also referred to a study which showed that 23% of the 1,160 French nationals who recently converted to Islam admitted to being Salafists, or members of a violent extremist sect. (Generation Jihad. Page 2)  He also argued that the occupation of Iraq by the United States and her allies has influenced the Muslims in Europe into believing that these western countries are determined to destroy Islam. This belief somewhat radicalized the Muslims and convinced them that their only recourse is to fight and defend Islam. (Page 4) Conclusion. As had been shown earlier in this paper, there undeniably exists a feeling of unexplained awkwardness and even mistrust among Christian European countries towards the predominantly Muslim Turkey since the nineteenth century. The recent developments associating Muslims with terrorism in Europe are more likely to widen this rift between Turkey and the rest of the continent. Moreover, the fear of the Islamization of Europe voiced by some observers does absolutely nothing to bridge this gap. Considering the poor economic conditions in Turkey which have already fallen short of the European Union standards, the aforementioned factors might prove fatal to the chances of Turkey for a full membership in the European Union. Unless drastic economic and political measures are implemented, coupled with a complete turnaround in the European attitude towards Turkey, the wait for the much coveted EU membership might well take another decade or two.                     REFERENCES European Union. The World FactBook. Central Intelligence Agency. United States Department of State. Retrieved from: https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ec.html Gerolymatos, A. Turkey and Europe: A Political and Historical Conundrum. Diogenes.            Retrieved from: http://www.omogenia.com/~diogenis/turkeyandeurope.html Pipes, Mr. Moslem Europe. Retrieved from: http://www.falange.us/moslem5a.htm Powell, B. (26 Sept. 2005).Generation Jihad. Time Magazine online. Retrieved from:  http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1109334-1,00.html            Satiroglu, H.T.(03 October 2006). Turkey and Europe: An Invitation to Dance? WorldPoliticsWatch. Retieved from: http://worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=229 Turkey. The World FactBook. Central Intelligence Agency. United States Department of                        State. Retrieved from: https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/tu.html Wallbank, T.W., Taylor, A.M., Carson, G.B.Jr. (1960) Civilization. (Vol. Two). Glenview, Illinois. Scott, Foresman and Company. [1] See Wallbank, et al, pages 110-113, for an insightful discussion of the events in the Congress of Vienna. [2] See Wallbank, et al, page 193 for the map of the Ottoman Empire 1815. [3] Refer to the section on Turkey of The World Fact Book for the economic statistics on Turkey. [4] Read Generation Jihad by Bill Powell, pages 1-6, for a detailed discussion of this phenomenon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.