Turkey got a date from the EU!

[klinastrom]

But I think the "caring part", which is the opening of negotiations which will squarely set Turkey under the microscope of the EU and maybe force it to become "more european" is based much more on realpolitik reasons than any other vague humanitarian concept. However it will hopefully help improving some of its terrible shortcomings. Saying flat out no now would mean destabilizing Turkey and plunging it even deeper in human right abuses and wider geopolitical instability. I believe the EU made the best possible decision.

[VetLegion]

How about some history?

Turkey had an agreement with EU back in the sixties which said it would eventually join it.

It's not like EU was taken by surprise

[Pekka]

No no no and no. Turkey has to change more BEFORE it enters the EU. I agree, EU would change Turkey more than vice versa, however, there are some standards for everyone who enter, and those must be met BEFORE anything happens.

Human rights issues are IMO the most important to be fixed first. There can be no situations like possible torture happening inside EU borders and be acceptable by officials. These things must be sorted out BEFORE anything happens. It can't be 'ooops, well these things still happens but we're trying'. No.. it has to be settled before that.

However, I see no harm with open discussion during it. So... I suppose talking with Turkey could be happening now, because in the future, when these things are sorted out, I see no reason why Turkey shouldn't be in if they still want to. EU is not a charity. It's a Union.

The other thing is the economy. It has to keep growing first, and a lot. But like said, I suppose these will be going to better direction so there's no harm talking already. They seem to be committed, and they're setting their minds to it so they'll likely succeed in the future as well, and at that point it would be good if they could join faster than wait another decade or so. So things should be more ready and it could be just a formality, the joining, making it official.

And yes, Turkey is a big place so it's a threat to big EU countries. Turkey is not likely to align themselves with the current powerhouses, if their interests are conflicted and they are full members. Is this good or not, it depends. It can be good, and it can be bad. We'll have to see about that.

It is, however, undeniable that there is lots of potential in there and EU and Turkey could both benefit greatly from it. So it should be explored..

So my vote is currently NO with an option of YES when things change more. But if they don't change, it'll stay as a NO.

[BeBMan]

Well, nobody speaks of a full membership for Turkey today or tomorrow, but (maybe) in several years, so I don't understand the panic....

And if the Turks appear near Vienna we still have the Poles in the EU

[Eli]

What is wrong with having Australia or New Zealand in the EU? It looks weird on the map, but any practical reasons?

[lightblue]

What benefit do current members from it? I'd rather have New Zealand and Australia in than Turkey. My main qualm is that they're poor, I personally think that any new country joining should have a GDP/capita that's greater than the EU average, and if they can't do that then they shouldn't be let in.

[BeBMan]

Ireland was relatively poor. Portugal was relatively poor. Most of the east european countries were/are relatively poor. If it was only about money we should ask the Saudis if they join......but it isn't

[alva]

Yeah, but tht proves that we've done the poor thing, maybe could try for something different ey.

Wy doesn't Turkey join the US??? They are the biggest supporter of joining us afterall.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Eli
What is wrong with having Australia or New Zealand in the EU? It looks weird on the map, but any practical reasons?

The EU is about bringing former foes together by bringing the traditional disputes under a common/mutual banner. As there is no beef between any European state on the one, and any Oceanic state on the other side, there is no incentive to merge.

We allready cooporate.

[Heresson]

One thing I don't like is that my Muslim co-locator celebrates it as a birth of new, Muslim, Europe

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Heresson
One thing I don't like is that my Muslim co-locator celebrates it as a birth of new, Muslim, Europe

Maybe he is as stuck in his conception that Europe must be a religious entity as you are?

[Ancyrean]

Originally posted by laurentius
1) Turkeys military still overlooks its government. Military juntas, even if semi have no future in EU.

It does not anymore the way your stereotype prompts you to write this. Turkish laws have been changed to remove the army's influence in decision making procedures, which was found satisfactory enough by the European Commission to start negotiations.

2) Turkey has huge human rights issues. The state is officially monocultural despite the fact that millions of Kurds live in the Eastern parts of the country. A whole people are denied from using their language freely and to their cultural self-esteem. There are reports of torture coming up on a regular basis. And forced marriages are still a huge problem.

In the recent wave of changes in laws and constitution itself, Kurds are granted the right to broadcast and publish in their language. Kurdish radio stations, news and magazines, etc are already on. Of the 10 million or so of Kurds in Turkey around 60 percent live in Western Turkey, fully integrated with the rest of the country, having jobs, businesses, etc. Changes in this area was found sincere enough by the EU commission to start negotiations.

Systematic torture is over and outlawed and prosecuted. Cases of torture still happen, but sporadic and now is a crime. Changes in this area were found satisfactory by the EU commission to start the negotiations.

3) Turkeys freedom of speech is a joke. Non mainstream Turkish media and things considered "harmful" by the military are silenced. Human rights organizations have pictures of activists who have been clubbed to death by the authorities on their walls.

They sure have those pictures, pictures from a few years ago. No magazine or publication is "silenced" anymore, much less "by the military". Changes in this area was found satisfactory by the EU Commision to start negotiations.

4) The haunting past. Turkey has some nasty skeletons in its closet. The Armenian genocide is still unrecognised. The deal with the Cyprus is still unsettled.

You have no idea what the tragedies of 1915 are, how the Turks see it and the Turkish suffering in that episode. Armenian issue is not a condition nor anywhere near a requirement for Turkey and its EU membership, which is time and again confirmed by EU officials. Armenian issue gets no serious mention in any EU-Turkish dealings.

Cyprus would be settled by now had the Greek Cypriots voted yes for the UN plan supported in whole by the very EU we are talking about here. The accession deal for "Cyprus" was based on the understanding that "Cyprus" will accept the UN plan, it did not but still got in the EU. Stop blaming Turkey for other people's parochialisms.

5) Turkey is culturally definately not European and does not (yet) share European values. For example Turkish nations accross the ME have a tendency of worshipping their leaders. In other Turkish states people worship their authoritarian presidents like Turkmenistans "Tukmenbashi". in Turkey people worship General Ataturk. I myself think its just the nature of their culture. How would you like to see the Russians worshipping Stalin or the Spanish Gen. Franco? Perhaps you'd feel good if the Germans would worship Hitler because he "restored the national pride and unity". I think its disgusting, and doesnt belong to the modern EU.

Flashnews:
- Turkish culture is different than and it will remain different from the European culture.
- Turkey is a Muslim country.
- EU is not a cultural union.

If you'd like to change the nature of EU, go ahead and do it, it's Europe's prerogative. Until then though, the culture argument is irrelevant at best, at least as far as EU's own definiton of itself is concerned. Of course, citizens of EU might imagine the EU differently, they certainly have that much freedom.

On Ataturk and the scum of mankind: First of all, maybe you have not noticed but Ataturk is dead for like 66 years, and his memory and his ideals are cherished. And for your information, Ataturk resigned from his Army Chief position to become the president of the Republic and enacted laws to make sure any army officer to enter politics are to leave the army for good.

Turkmenbashi? "Nature of their culture?" Oh, man....

Your comparison of Ataturk with Hitler and Stalin is downright ugly and uninformed. Ataturk was not a dictator, Hitler and Stalin were. Ataturk was an advocate of peace at a time when fascism and irredentism was the norm. Ataturk aimed to modernise Turkey, transform the Turkish society, fought fundementalism, secularised a country which had the seat of the caliphate for the good part of the previous millenium, gave women the right to vote before many European countries, etc. etc etc. Hitler and Stalin had state police, state intelligence and a whole state apparatus to control and terrorise their societies, Ataturk did not. Hitler and Stalin served extreme and ruthless ideologies that took the lives of millions, Ataturk was a reformer.

This list goes on so long, I suggest you get a decent biography of Ataturk (like Andrew Mango's) instead of entrusting yourself to half-informed, half-concoted, distorted, funny quasi-opinions on him.

Other issues include forced marriages as mentioned before, womens rights, gay rights, war-resisters rights, minority oppression...
There are tons of issues Turks got to deal with, in my opinion starting negotiations now is just premature.

Forced marriage is not the norm but the exception, and just to remind you, when Spain, Portugal and Greece entered the EU, they were not exactly shining beacons of European values and lifestyle, or were they?

6) Turkey has terrorism. The lack of democracy and freedom of speech in the form of banning islamic parties is making some people frustrated and radicalised. The results are seen as bombing of both Western and domestic targets. Turkeys membership opens the borders for these radicalised islamists as well as normal people.

So in your idea Turkey is a place infested with Islamic and seperatist terrorists, bombs going off everywhere , population living in anxiety and fear? Terrorism is no more serious an issue in Turkey than anywhere in Europe.

[Ancyrean]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
So what's going to happen now? 15 years of negotiations and then 20-odd referendums? I reckon most of them would produce a "no" vote.

It's not clear that every member of the EU will hold referenda on Turkey. The choice is people's of course, but wouldn't it look really bad in the world for any country if they voted no in a popular referendum?

Why should Turkey be let in? What's in it for me

The phone number of Deniz, perhaps?

[Ancyrean]

Originally posted by laurentius

I didnt know George Washington was a military dictator. You say EU nations havent producer military dictators? Sure they have, remember Mussolini, Franco, Hitler...? Or nation builders? Oh we've got plenty. Great Generals perhaps? Germans had about dozen greater in WW2. That is if you mean those by your "such figure". But if you mean people who are openly being worshipped even after their death, the answer is no.

Instead of having all those lessons about the life of your Father Ataturk, perhaps you should have some real history lessons instead.

Rufus T. Firefly:

Laurentius, although I answered your ideas in my above post, I guess I have to repeat that Ataturk was not a military dictator but was one of the greatest statesman of the 20th century for a variety of reasons some of which I barely mentioned in my above post. I have no idea where you get these fallacious misperceptions about Ataturk.

Again, get a decent biography of him, go talk to your nearest history professor asking him how would Ataturk compare with Hitler, Stalin, Franco, etc, and see if your (entrenched?) allegations hold water.

No, because they dont force their muslims to go radical.

There's no such radicalisation in Turkey, people going underground like, say, Algeria. For God's sake, there's a Muslim-Democrat government in power in Turkey now (a la Christian Democrats).

[Ancyrean]

Originally posted by Drogue
If I was to decide if Britain votes for them to join, I'd vote no. It's clearly against Britain's interests. If I was to vote on whether it's theoretically a good idea, I'd vote yes, as it's clearly in the world's interest.

Actually, some commentators say the reason Britain so fervently supports Turkish membership is because with Turkey it's harder to turn the EU into a federal superstate. But I'm not sure how things would proceed in the long run in the federalisation department if Turkey were a member.