Europe and Turkey Essay Example for Free

atomic number 63 and misfire EssayDiscussions intimately Euro-Turkish relations dependable away would unremarkably hover around flops application for genus Phallusship to the atomic number 63an due north which has been pending since the mid(prenominal) 1900s. Turkey, a predominantly Muslim country situated in southeastern Europe and southwestern Asia, has been an lad member of the European Community (the forerunner of the European Union) since 1964, but is still working for a bounteous membership forty-two years later. (Turkey. The World Fact Book. Para 1) The union, which started as a regional scotch 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 innovative members for the head start 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 19 86. The year 1995 accounted for triad additional members, and, finally, in 2004, ten more countries were granted full membership to wrap up todays final roster of twenty-five member-countries.The European Union, in a recruitment process which spanned 31 years, accepted a total of nineteen additional members since 1951. (European Union. The World Fact Book. para.2) This fairly robust appendage in the union membership compels us to ask the obvious questions What happened to Turkeys 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- unitary years, does Turkey still stand a chance for that debatable 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 in concert after the fall of Napoleon in 1814 in what has been known as the co itus of capital of Austria to literally remake the map of Europe, every country was represented except Turkey. The reason for this was never explicitly wedded in any historical account. However, this discriminatory act prompted Turkey to adopt the view that Europe was fit a Christian association, packing the fact that it was the but predominantly Muslim country in the region. at that place were attempts to brush aside this Turkish claim by referring to numerous incidents of slaughterhouse and claims of corruption in the puff (Turkish) Empire practices which were said to be intolerable for Europeans. (Gerolymatos, para.5) Looking indorse at that point in history, however, we atomic number 18 left to wonder whether these reasons were real, fabricated, or take down morally suitable to warrant much(prenominal) 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 profitless 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 unauthorised task of reestablishing the European political order was the 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 surround France should be controlled by allied crams 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, th e four major players in that shock were Lord Castlereagh of Great Britain, Tsar Alexander I of Russia, Prince von Metternich of Austria, and Talleyrand of France1 (Wallbank, Taylor, Carson. 1960) What a way for a France-wary Europe to acknowledge 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 18152 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 set-apart from the continent by the English Channel, and was, in fact, protected by the about advanced navy during those times.The Austrian Empire and the Ottoman Empire were almost equidistant from, and were two separated from France, by the Germanic Federation , the Kingdom of Hungary, Switzerland, and the Kingdom of Sardinia. Tsarist Russia was remotethest, because it is situated behind the Empire of Austria. (Wallbank, et al. 1960) If the fear of nurture 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 permit us look at the allegations of massacres and corruption involving Turkey which were just too much for Europeans to stomach, and which, apparently, was make an excuse for not inviting Turkey to the conference. (Gerolymatos, para.5) Again, we beget to bear in mind that those were periods of instability and violent struggles for bureau 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 traffic pattern that governed France in 1793, put it, What constitutes t he Republic is the complete destruction of everything that is opposed to it. And so it was that in France, historians believe that the decree of terror, which reached its peak in 1793, might generate accounted for as much as twenty-thousand people execute simply because they were considered royalists, and counted among its victims Queen Marie Antoinette and the great orator Danton, because he wished to end the policy of terror. It must besides 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 juridical 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 histo rical evidence of massacres during the period in question.However, what I did find were the massacre of all Greeks in Constantinople in 1821 and the 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 intelligence, 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 geological formation (NATO) in 1952. (Turkey. The World Fact Book. para.1) It appears that joining a military machine 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 formed the northern tier of the horse opera gross profit against the encroaching Soviet Union. (Gerolymatos, para.6) It did not matter then that Turkey was not well-equipped militarily.The United States lavished their newfound ally 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 military cooperation, a subsidized Turkey was considered an ally, treated as 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. paltry 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 quali fy.3 Its 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 emollient of their position and again to brush aside Turkeys allegations of the existence of a Christian Club in Europe (remember 1814?), agreed to consider Turkeys application 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 its all right to pour billions of dollars into Turkeys 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 cant seem to accept her, are both based in Brussels, Belgium.Islamization of Europe. There are fears among scholars and independent observers alike, that the Islamization of Europe is imminent in the coming years. Mr. Pipes, the director of the Middle eastern Forum, cites two contributory factors, namely the hollowing out of Christianity in Europe, and an anemic birth rate among Europeans. (Moslem Europe. Para. 2 3) Mr. Pipes explains this twin phenomenon as the falling 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 o ther hand. (Para. 3)Following up on this argument being advanced by Mr. Pipe, the world will one day see a Europe populate 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 nonchalance to procreation and taking note of the Moslems predilection for large families, the future demographic characteristic of Europe sure 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 Eu rope and restore it to the Christian society that it once was first, Christian trustingness 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 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 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 bet ter opportunities in life, as well as their resentment towards official policies which they feel are harmful 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 sce nt of unexplained awkwardness and even mistrust among Christian European countries towards the predominantly Muslim Turkey since the 19th century. The recent developments associating Muslims with terrorism in Europe are more likely to widen this rift amid 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 some other decade or two. REFERENCESEuropean Union. The World FactBook. Central Intelligence Agency. United StatesDepartment of State. Retrieved from h ttps//www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ec.htmlGerolymatos, A. Turkey and Europe A Political and Historical Conundrum. Diogenes. Retrieved from http//www.omogenia.com/diogenis/turkeyandeurope.htmlPipes, Mr. Moslem Europe. Retrieved from http//www.falange.us/moslem5a.htmPowell, B. (26 Sept. 2005).Generation Jihad. Time Magazine online. Retrieved fromhttp//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=229Turkey. The World FactBook. Central Intelligence Agency. United States Department of State. Retrieved from https//www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/tu.htmlWallbank, 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.