Turkey Thread

[Husar]

Sums it up lol, sadly eurpopeans are addicted to compromise, they are like housemoms negotiating with their annoying kids.

Yeah, if only they were more like Saudi Arabians or North Koreans, the world could be a better place.
Oh wait, too absurd? So what do you mean then?

[Fragony]

Yeah, if only they were more like Saudi Arabians or North Koreans, the world could be a better place.
Oh wait, too absurd? So what do you mean then?

Would distract as that is a different discussion.

[Gilrandir]

Could this be a part of the EU-Turkey deal?
http://www.dw.com/en/cypriot-leaders...016/a-19259686

[Husar]

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/tur...&NewsCatID=338

Erdogan leaves the US and does not attend Muhammad Ali's funeral because the organizers do not allow him to perform what I assume are muslim rituals. Laying a quran verse onto the coffin or reading it during the speech, apparently both requests were denied and he was taken off the list of speakers in favor of someone else as well.

What will be next? Erdogan threatens the US with sanctions?

[AE Bravo]

He was denied because somebody had already done those rituals, he's not needed.

[Fragony]

From what I understand he wasn't denied to attend, but was not allowed to speak. I wouldn't want that supermarketrolltoddler anyway. Constantly offended and getting increasingly creepy

[Elmetiacos]

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/tur...&NewsCatID=338

Erdogan leaves the US and does not attend Muhammad Ali's funeral because the organizers do not allow him to perform what I assume are muslim rituals. Laying a quran verse onto the coffin or reading it during the speech, apparently both requests were denied and he was taken off the list of speakers in favor of someone else as well.

What will be next? Erdogan threatens the US with sanctions?

Recep Tayib Erdoğan: for when Kim Jong Un just isn't egomaniacal enough...

[Fragony]

I wouldn't want to be near him when he heard it. He was welcome at the funeral, says a lot about his character that he didn't. The guy is a walking steotype of a Turk with honour

[Furunculus]

if turkey has turned away from western liberal democracy then it is in part the eu's fault.

this was not the attitude taken with the balkans, and turkey earned its place in the eu with 40 years on nato's front line.

[Pannonian]

if turkey has turned away from western liberal democracy then it is in part the eu's fault.

this was not the attitude taken with the balkans, and turkey earned its place in the eu with 40 years on nato's front line.

Turkey has turned away from the liberal bit because it's embraced the democratic bit. AFAIK Kemalism was firmly established only in the metropolitan areas, where people like LEN embraced the western civilisation that Kemal loved. In the rural areas, which was a majority of the country's population, religion still held sway. So a Turkish government that reflects the will of the majority of the country won't be liberal. If we want Turkey to be more liberal, it'll have to be less democratic.

Nowt to do with the EU, which didn't exist when Kemal saw the problems that modernising Turkey would face, and still faces.

[Husar]

turkey earned its place in the eu with 40 years on nato's front line.

Strange on 2 levels:

1) Why would 40 years of being a military ally alone qualify a country to join what some also call a "value community" if their values are completely different in many dimensions? Would you always advocate choosing long-term partners based on one-dimensional criteria?

2) For someone who wants his own country out of the EU, that's just a very funny statement and not to be taken very seriously. Unless you want to say that you wouldn't support a Brexit if they had let Turkey in?

[Kralizec]

if turkey has turned away from western liberal democracy then it is in part the eu's fault.

this was not the attitude taken with the balkans, and turkey earned its place in the eu with 40 years on nato's front line.

Yes and no. If you said this 8-10 years ago it would have been an understandable sentiment. Erdogan actually showed a lot of promise in his early years, and still leaders like Sarkozy ruled out Turkey's membership. Many reasons for that, but it's safe to say that changing perceptions of islam had a lot to do with it.

But meanwhile, Erdogan has convincingly shown himself to be a thug. And arguably, Turkey's membership should not even have been seriously considered 10 years ago for reasons that are often forgotten. I'm thinking about the Cyprus dispute mostly, something that most people are dimly aware of but which I have an peculiar interest in. As it stands, Turkey doesn't recognise one of the EU's members as a sovereign state, and it's extremely easy to argue that Turkey is the largest obstacle for a permanent solution for the dispute.

Incidentally, the 2004 unification plan that the (Greek) Cypriots rejected was a completely one-sided deal engineered to placate Turkey. The United States and the United Kingdom strongly argued in favor of the deal because, as you said, Turkey is an important NATO ally.

[AE Bravo]

He said it is in part the eu's fault, which is hard to argue.

The moment the EU showed its willful concessions, support for the EU in Turkey increased. According to one poll 62% of Turks want to join the EU, up from 42% in last year. About 7/10 believe Turkey will never be allowed in (http://www.economist.com/news/europe...ky-deal-turkey). Whether Turkey fits into this "value community" or not, you could argue that Turkey has been backing these values in an international scale for decades and by right deserve to have their allies search for a middle ground as they are now.

Don't pretend that Turkey's aggressive diplomacy and bullying of low profile countries isn't shared by a handful of EU states.

Would you always advocate choosing long-term partners based on one-dimensional criteria?

Wow, how one-dimensional is it that you granted the Arab Gulf visa-free travel before your own neighbor, who is closer to your own "values," doesn't sabotage your interests as much, and pulls out its ambassadors from you the same way?

[Pannonian]

He said it is in part the eu's fault, which is hard to argue.

The moment the EU showed its willful concessions, support for the EU in Turkey increased. According to one poll 62% of Turks want to join the EU, up from 42% in last year. About 7/10 believe Turkey will never be allowed in (http://www.economist.com/news/europe...ky-deal-turkey). Whether Turkey fits into this "value community" or not, you could argue that Turkey has been backing these values in an international scale for decades and by right deserve to have their allies search for a middle ground as they are now.

Don't pretend that Turkey's aggressive diplomacy and bullying of low profile countries isn't shared by a handful of EU states.

Wow, how one-dimensional is it that you granted the Arab Gulf visa-free travel before your own neighbor, who is closer to your own "values," doesn't sabotage your interests as much, and pulls out its ambassadors from you the same way?

Kemal would have said that these values are worth attaining, in and of themselves, without needing validation by others.

[Gilrandir]

if turkey has turned away from western liberal democracy then it is in part the eu's fault.

Internal policy of a country doesn't and shouldn't depend on what someone thinks. If a country favors dictatorship, it is its own prefrence/fault.

1) Why would 40 years of being a military ally alone qualify a country to join what some also call a "value community" if their values are completely different in many dimensions?

Being a military ally presupposes intense cooperation and adapting to common standards at least in some sphere(s). Which promotes mutual understanding and makes it easier to cooperate on in other fields.

[Husar]

The moment the EU showed its willful concessions, support for the EU in Turkey increased. According to one poll 62% of Turks want to join the EU, up from 42% in last year. About 7/10 believe Turkey will never be allowed in (http://www.economist.com/news/europe...ky-deal-turkey). Whether Turkey fits into this "value community" or not, you could argue that Turkey has been backing these values in an international scale for decades and by right deserve to have their allies search for a middle ground as they are now.

Don't pretend that Turkey's aggressive diplomacy and bullying of low profile countries isn't shared by a handful of EU states.

Erdogan goes against a whole lot of democratic values, the whole torturing in prisons and other human rights abuses are still not out of the way, then you have the unwillingness to even aknowledge past crimes, new crimes against the Kurdish population, possible ties to ISIS and so on. Where in this do you see a backing of liberal European values?
You can tell me all day how some EU countries do or at least support similar things but none of that is mainstream public perception and that is what counts. Politicians don't get elected based on the truth but on the mainstream public perception. Or you could say it is about how Europeans want to see their countries even if they fail to be like that and Turkey does not fit this at all.

Wow, how one-dimensional is it that you granted the Arab Gulf visa-free travel before your own neighbor, who is closer to your own "values," doesn't sabotage your interests as much, and pulls out its ambassadors from you the same way?

I have absolutely no idea on what grounds visa-free travel is given and there is usually about zero public discussion on the topic when it happens. In fact I did not even know that, you bring about the least relevant point here when it comes to public perception of other countries because visa restrictions do not seem to reflect public perception at all in this case.
And please explain how this visa-situation is one-dimensional, do you know they used only one criterium to decide this or are you just making this up?

Being a military ally presupposes intense cooperation and adapting to common standards at least in some sphere(s). Which promotes mutual understanding and makes it easier to cooperate on in other fields.

Turkey is a military ally of NATO and NATO is not the EU. Being in a good position to nuke the USSR is not the same as having a good human rights record or promising future in that regard. Saddam Hussein and Gaddhafi were also military allies at one point and Egypt has a lot of US tanks. Does that make all these countries eligible to join NATO or the EU? If Russia sells us gas for 40 years, did they earn their right to be in the EU for having been such a reliable business partner for 40 years? They kept millions of Germans warm in the winter for 40 years after all!
We also have more common basic standards with Russia than the US: the meter, the liter, the gram...

[AE Bravo]

Erdogan goes against a whole lot of democratic values, the whole torturing in prisons and other human rights abuses are still not out of the way, then you have the unwillingness to even aknowledge past crimes, new crimes against the Kurdish population, possible ties to ISIS and so on. Where in this do you see a backing of liberal European values?
You can tell me all day how some EU countries do or at least support similar things but none of that is mainstream public perception and that is what counts. Politicians don't get elected based on the truth but on the mainstream public perception. Or you could say it is about how Europeans want to see their countries even if they fail to be like that and Turkey does not fit this at all.

So being one of the top three (?) trade partners, supporting European interests in the frontline of the most sensitive region, and having a potential democratic future isn’t enough to be promised something in the next few decades. You do realize that one of the initial aims of this whole thing was to provide incentive for reform? It’s torn between two worlds, and it basically got told to f off for not committing to anything at the doorstep right off the bat.

Maybe you should decide first whether the EU is a "value community" or a security community. I don't see Turkey totally abandoning its political Islam tendencies as that undermines its interesting position in the middle east.

I have absolutely no idea on what grounds visa-free travel is given and there is usually about zero public discussion on the topic when it happens. In fact I did not even know that, you bring about the least relevant point here when it comes to public perception of other countries because visa restrictions do not seem to reflect public perception at all in this case.
And please explain how this visa-situation is one-dimensional, do you know they used only one criterium to decide this or are you just making this up?

Counterterrorism legislation was one of the two criterium used, which in Turkey is virtually identical to the other states that were granted this. I don’t think it’s as irrelevant as you make it out to be because 1) This was one of the first things to be implemented, so obviously a priority in that regard and 2) for the reason that arbitrary, and in some cases discriminatory, travel restrictions affect public perception.

[Kralizec]

As far as I can tell, the only other countries in the region that have EU Visa waivers are Israel and the UAE. I didn't know about the last one, but then again it's fairly recent.

I would wager that the EU makes Visa deals with countries on a case-by-case basis. The UAE is smaller (certainly in terms of nationals, the ones to which a Visa waiver would apply) and much further away. There would be much fewer security considerations in that case.

There are many other "benchmarks" that are unfulfilled, out of more than 70 that were originally set out years ago. One issue being the reliability of their passport system, for example. The only reason we focus on the anti-terrorism bit is because Erdogan has given us the finger on that one.

[AE Bravo]

Fair enough. I actually thought it wasn't just the UAE.

[Husar]

So being one of the top three (?) trade partners, supporting European interests in the frontline of the most sensitive region, and having a potential democratic future isn’t enough to be promised something in the next few decades. You do realize that one of the initial aims of this whole thing was to provide incentive for reform? It’s torn between two worlds, and it basically got told to f off for not committing to anything at the doorstep right off the bat.

Eh, they were promised membership IF they would fulfill certain European values. You can't just promise something no matter what, where's the incentive then? Obviously even the incentive of membership was not big enough to make them stop the human rights abuses or to stop Erdogan from wanting more power for himself. When was it told to f off? It is already in the early stages of a membership process, it's just not progressing a lot because it's not willing to fulfill the criteria.

You can read more about it here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access...European_Union

Negotiations were started on 3 October 2005[6] and out of 35 Chapters necessary to complete the accession process, 15 have been opened and 1 has been closed.[7]

Maybe you should decide first whether the EU is a "value community" or a security community. I don't see Turkey totally abandoning its political Islam tendencies as that undermines its interesting position in the middle east.

That's already decided, you may have already noticed that Turkey is not in yet because providing security and money is not enough.
Several member states have had more or less undemocratic tendencies over the years and have been shunned or scolded for them just as well.
Turkey can keep whatever tendencies it wants, it may just never become an EU member then.

[Furunculus]

Strange on 2 levels:

1) Why would 40 years of being a military ally alone qualify a country to join what some also call a "value community" if their values are completely different in many dimensions? Would you always advocate choosing long-term partners based on one-dimensional criteria?

2) For someone who wants his own country out of the EU, that's just a very funny statement and not to be taken very seriously. Unless you want to say that you wouldn't support a Brexit if they had let Turkey in?

A 'value community', eh? I don't think we're too bothered about that, maybe that's why we are having a referendum.

Why? If a club treats a potential member badly, why would i not reconsider the value of club membership?

[Husar]

A 'value community', eh? I don't think we're too bothered about that, maybe that's why we are having a referendum.

Why? If a club treats a potential member badly, why would i not reconsider the value of club membership?

Are you still whining about a wannabe dictator/conservative muslim not getting in?
I seriously don't get that at all.

I would understand your argument if the EU were a military club, then the purely military support could be grounds to let someone in, but the EU is (supposed to be) much more than that. Turkey simply does not behave in any way that would make them a good member at this time because it does not share our democratic values for example. Closing all the press outlets your president does not like is not something an EU member country should do, neither is torturing prisoners or bombing a part of the population the president doesn't like...

They are free not to accept that, but they will have to if they want to become an EU member.

[AE Bravo]

That’s something I’m sure everyone can agree on, but it’s not what this is about. Turkey is being driven away and it naturally reverts to its own values to ensure its own security. Saying Turkey should reform one way or another isn't realistic. There’s not enough trust from both sides to outright commit to sudden reforms, Turkey has to ease in and have incremental shifts.

Diplomatic shortcomings from both sides. You’re not acknowledging that it’s a vicious circle.

[Fragony]

It's Erdogan who is a F5 vicious circle. Turkey is getting isolated yes, I feel sorry for modern Turks

[Furunculus]

Are you still whining about a wannabe dictator/conservative muslim not getting in?
I seriously don't get that at all.

I would understand your argument if the EU were a military club, then the purely military support could be grounds to let someone in, but the EU is (supposed to be) much more than that. Turkey simply does not behave in any way that would make them a good member at this time because it does not share our democratic values for example. Closing all the press outlets your president does not like is not something an EU member country should do, neither is torturing prisoners or bombing a part of the population the president doesn't like...

They are free not to accept that, but they will have to if they want to become an EU member.

Whining? I'm replying, and it's only my second(?) post in this thread. When did you become so thin skinned?

I don't argue that Turkey is[n't] going in the wrong direction, I merely submit that europe is in part responsible for this change in direction as a result of europe not wanting a non 'european' nation inside the tent.

I repeat, they did not take this attitude to bosnia.

[Fragony]

Why do people speak of europe, it's a continent. The EU is something entirely different. Europe can't want anything it's just land that's higher than the sea (well in our case it isn't but alas). The EU is NOT europe.

[Gilrandir]

Turkey is a military ally of NATO and NATO is not the EU. Being in a good position to nuke the USSR is not the same as having a good human rights record or promising future in that regard.

Technically. Yet both consist of almost the same countries (Norway is in NATO, but not in the EU, and some others -vice versa). Thus values of both neatly match.

If Russia sells us gas for 40 years, did they earn their right to be in the EU for having been such a reliable business partner for 40 years?

Since Putin has fully embraced power business is subordinated to politics. He is prone to overlook agreements (including the business ones - look at his anti-Turky sanctions) or use business to promote his political agenda (like his gas blackmailing Ukraine - and Europe suffered that winter, btw).

They kept millions of Germans warm in the winter for 40 years after all!

It is atonement for freezing millions (?) of Germans in 1941.

Generally, you should ween yourself off this and diversify. When business intertwines with state policy it doesn't bode well for any business partner.

We also have more common basic standards with Russia than the US: the meter, the liter, the gram...

The British also have a wrongly-placed steering wheel in their cars... Wait, they do have to Brexit and join Japan or something.

Saying Turkey should reform one way or another isn't realistic.

It's Erdogan who is a F5 vicious circle. Turkey is getting isolated yes, I feel sorry for modern Turks

Are we still discussing Turkey or Russia?

[Fragony]

Do Turks live in Russia

[Husar]

That’s something I’m sure everyone can agree on, but it’s not what this is about. Turkey is being driven away and it naturally reverts to its own values to ensure its own security. Saying Turkey should reform one way or another isn't realistic. There’s not enough trust from both sides to outright commit to sudden reforms, Turkey has to ease in and have incremental shifts.

Diplomatic shortcomings from both sides. You’re not acknowledging that it’s a vicious circle.

If demanding someone not to torture prisoners is driving them away, then I'll happily drive them away.
Cry me a river if you don't like that, maybe we can compare it to the rivers the torture victims are crying.

Whining? I'm replying, and it's only my second(?) post in this thread. When did you become so thin skinned?

Your first post seemed very much like a complaint and I may have exaggerated a bit.

I don't argue that Turkey is going in the wrong direction, I merely submit that europe is in part responsible for this change in direction as a result of europe not wanting a non 'european' nation inside the tent.

I repeat, they did not take this attitude to bosnia.

It's not Bosnia's fault that it is more European than Turkey. I also never complained that we are not in NAFTA despite our near spotless record of cooperation with the US since WW2. If it is so easy to annoy Turkey and make it go off into a more islamistic direction then it just proves the point that Turkey doesn't belong into the EU.
Saying that Europe is in part responsible may be true, but the state of Turkey is responsible to a far larger degree given how fast it turned away once it didn't get what it wanted. That's childish and dangerous behavior of the kind we shouldn't let into the EU. You could also turn it around an d say Turkey is blackmailing the EU by saying it will either get in or turn into an islamist dictatorship. Blackmailing countries like that should also not be in the EU. I haven't heard about Bosnians electing an islamist wannabe dictator to spite the EU. But even then, Bosnia is much smaller and easier to influence should it take a wrong turn, influencing Turkey once it joins would seem much harder, especially with such a temper...
It has to show that it fits into the EU before it joins and not afterwards. Most EU politicians seem to think just the same.

Technically. Yet both consist of almost the same countries (Norway is in NATO, but not in the EU, and some others -vice versa). Thus values of both neatly match.

NATO is built on the value of how much does someone hate Russia, NATO countries also have military alliances or dealings with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, etc. Would you say that means these countries also share values with the EU and should be considered as members?
Shouldn't be so hard to see the difference between a nation being a "valuable" military ally and it sharing the same democratic and liberal values. That you mention Norway as an example is actually hilarious, don't tell me you'd compare it to Turkey in terms of democratic values.

The British also have a wrongly-placed steering wheel in their cars... Wait, they do have to Brexit and join Japan or something.

If the Brexits leave, we can finally enforce driving on the right side across the EU, so they can't get in again until they adapt to our values.

[Gilrandir]

NATO is built on the value of how much does someone hate Russia, NATO countries also have military alliances or dealings with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, etc.
Would you say that means these countries also share values with the EU and should be considered as members?
Shouldn't be so hard to see the difference between a nation being a "valuable" military ally and it sharing the same democratic and liberal values. That you mention Norway as an example is actually hilarious, don't tell me you'd compare it to Turkey in terms of democratic values.

We can argue back and forth on the values NATO is built around - I could call it trust in joining forces for defending against anyone (including Russia). But there is no denying the fact that the core NATO members are the core EU members. So whatever their values are (trust in democracy or common hatred of Russia), NATO and EU are a blurred entity (let's call it EUNATO, shall we?) that when focusing on different things - economy or defense - is formalized in two types of institutions.

Norway is in no way compared to Turkey, I just mentioned it as a country that is a member of one and out of the other institution. But it acts together with the EU when the common values are an issue (like sanctions against Russia).

Do Turks live in Russia

Where do they not live?