<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace Site Server v4.1.2 (http://www.squarespace.com/) on Mon, 12 May 2008 11:03:10 GMT--><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0"><channel><title>Turkey's Europeness</title><link>http://hprsite.squarespace.com/turkeys-europeness-042007/</link><description></description><copyright></copyright><language>en-US</language><generator>Squarespace Site Server v4.1.2 (http://www.squarespace.com/)</generator><item><title>Turkey's Europeness</title><dc:creator>HPR</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 21:48:45 +0000</pubDate><link>http://hprsite.squarespace.com/turkeys-europeness-042007/2007/5/2/turkeys-europeness.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">54562:1279407:1037241</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>I was looking at the Times today and happened upon this article on the latest
development in Turkey, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/world/europe/02turkey.html?hp" target="_blank">a judge banned an openly Islamic candidate from
running.</a>  Well, what really amused me and got me thinking was that Turkish news was
obviously filed in the World section, and also, if you look at the top of the
article, in the Europe section.  I feel like the Times has implicitly already
made its decision regarding Turkey's Europeanness or lack thereof (if only
prompted by the paper's format forcing them to).
<p>        It is an interesting question, that of Europeanness, and it really makes one
wonder what the criteria for inclusion are.  It is almost certainly not
linguistic, comprising Indo-European, Finno-Ugric, and Semitic languages.  If
one posits common bonds of history, one must note that the greatest portion of
the EU is outside the bounds of the Roman Empire which really was the
foundational culture of Britain, Iberia, France, and Italy.  It is clearly not
ethnic, comprising a large variety of ethnically-diverse states.  Nor is it
wealth, when one looks at the huge disparities between western Europe and the
former Soviet states.
<p> The question becomes under what criteria may the Turkish legitimately be kept
out.  One certainly cannot appeal to a “common culture”; what, precisely, do
the Danes share with the Greeks, or the Spanish with the Latvians?  Not to
mention that any “common culture” broadly construed enough to justify the
current members would call for the admission of the North African nations
(Morocco's application was already rejected) and could even be taken to include
Israel or Canada.  The closely-related idea of a “common history” is also
clearly so much hogwash, for the same reasons.  If it is a matter of geography,
Turkey does in fact bridge Asia and Europe, so it seems kind of silly.
<p>        Given the untenability of the aforementioned criteria for Europeanness, one
wonders if it really is a religious one.  For all the differences between
“Europe”, they are all predominantly and historically Christian nations (be
they Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox).  In fact, if one looks at a map of
dominant religions in Europe, one will see that the only nations with strong
historical Muslim populations are exactly the ones not in the EU (Turkey and
the western Balkans).  Granted, this is by no means a guarantee that this is
the reason (the western Balkans have disqualifying problems enough), but it is
a possibility that I think has some legitimacy.  It is not a matter of strong
anti-Muslim views, but perhaps a desire  of moderate or liberal middle-class
citizens to keep Muslims out of their neighborhoods; it is a form of
discrimination very familiar to Americans.
<p>        In that context, one must appreciate the bind that the Turkish government finds itself in.  In suppressing its Muslim identity, it hopes to bring itself closer
to Europe, however uncertain the hope of membership might be.  However, the
more it does so, the less democratic and thus less acceptable it becomes as a
candidate state.  Furthermore, there is the obvious danger of alienating its
own population.  All in all, an unenviable situation.

<p> -Alex Copulsky, Layout Editor]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://hprsite.squarespace.com/turkeys-europeness-042007/rss-comments-entry-1037241.xml</wfw:commentRss></item></channel></rss>