See disclaimer at page bottom
The EU Can Go To Hell
Why Are Turks Groveling To Something
That Wants to Be Their Parasite?
Turkey has waited for membership in the EU longer than many of the nations only recently admitted, and it continues to have its face slapped by the EU as a whole, whose members seem to think that the only thing worth having in this life is membership in the EU.
Well guess what: I put the desire for membership in the EU somewhere in between my desire to have my toenails extracted with anesthesia and my toenails extracted without anesthesia. On the list of the top 100 priorities in my day or my month or my year, I put “getting into the EU” as item number 101. In other words, getting into the fucking EU is not on the list of my priorities, and never will be.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is taking a rather sensible, and certainly diplomatic, attitude toward the EU. It is diplomatic because Erdoğan, like myself, would like to tell the EU to go stuff itself.
But while I do not have to mind my contempt for the EU, Erdoğan certainly does. Lots of Turks—powerful Turks—stand to make money off the EU. Moreover, the Turkish military probably wants EU membership, despite the risks to Turkish nationalism and sovereignty.
As for the powerful Turks mentioned above, they already got part of what they wanted by selling out the less influential and poorer majority of Turks in forming a customs union with the EU. In case you are unaware, a customs union is essentially an unfair deal in which EU goods can be exported to Turkey with pretty much little or no import duty attached to it, but Turkish goods cannot be exported to the EU because the EU sets up non-tariff barriers such as laws that “protect the public health and safety” against goods whose products do not get the rigorous and unnecessary laboratory testing for nutritional information, and so on. It does not matter that Turks have been eating and drinking this stuff for years without apparent ill effects, but if the EU is good at anything, it is good at keeping out the competition. It is also apparently good at buying off Turkish politicians, at least the ones who more than a decade ago agreed to this “customs union.”
And speaking of who is good at what, that’s something Turkish politicians are good at: corruption. Oh, certainly you the reader are saying “Sure, tell me what politician is not good at corruption?” Well, what makes the Turkish politician good at it is that he is completely brazen about (perhaps it reflects his incompetence at being unable to hide it). And despite the politician flaunting his crimes in front of the voter, the voter puts his party back in power at the next election. Usually. I suppose that has something to do with the patronage job that the voter and all his brothers and sisters and cousins got. You know, the government job where you pretend to show up at work (often they don't even do that) and sit around all day and drink tea and talk about soccer, and bitch and moan about the token government salary you draw despite the fact you do not do any work at all. As if having sold your vote was work enough.
(Sheesh. Is this any way to go from being a developing country to being a developed country? But that's the subject of another web page I have yet to finish on Turkey.)
The issues are familiar to anyone who even pretends to read a newspaper (or otherwise follow the news), but let's go down the list anyway, just as a reminder. (This list is not in any order of importance of the issues.)
It is important to understand the historical plight of the Kurds though. The Kurds are a large ethnic minority in Turkey (and minorities in all the Middle East nations they inhabit) who got short-changed at the World War I peace talks when European nations were drawing meaningless and artificial national boundaries in the Middle East after the Ottoman Empire was disintegrated. By rights the Kurds should have been given their own nation but somehow no one heard their voices or they were late getting to the table. More than a few Kurds are actively separatist. Some are trying to forge a new Kurdistan peacefully, through diplomacy. Others are more impatient and have guns and figure violence gets results too, since surely no nation would actually ever cede land and territory to make the Kurdish dream come true (these Kurds who have decided on violence are likely being more realistic).
Today, if a new Kurdistan were to be established, a part of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and a huge chunk of Turkey would have to give up its territory to accomodate the new Kurdistan. Of course, anyone who calls himself a card-carrying member of human civilization knows that is likely never to happen...ever. In the past nations were often (and perhaps should be) created through fighting for one's independence. The Turks bore the brunt of the Kurdish separatist violence since their territory had more Kurds.
The problem for the Kurds is, they are once again late getting to the table. Concepts such as “world peace” and “international law” have emerged since then, and these make it very hard for nations to forge themselves from independence movements that involve the spilling of blood. If the independence movement is not a clear case of a colony trying to get rid of an imperial invader, then an independence movement gets a dim view from the international community. And so the Kurdish independence groups that resort to violence get labeled as “terrorist groups” by the many nations that are friendly to Turkey. And in return, Turkey calls the groups that commit violence in other nations for the purpose of revolution or ethnic group independence “terrorist groups.”[1]
The people who assert or support Kurdish independence have a problem with hypocrisy however (as do most people who tolerate political violence, by the way). In one moment, they uphold an ideal that we are all human beings, a common humanity, and we should all of us find a way to get along with each other. Then in the next moment, they are saying “Yeah! Right on!” to Kurdish separatism and nationalism! Talk about having your priorities out of whack! How can anyone hold the contradictory view that togetherness is an ideal to which we should all aspire and then strongly support nationalist separatism?
Does anyone think that Hispanics, blacks, and Asians should try to carve up the United States because groups in the majority and minority will never find a way to get along with each other, so why try? Would the French be okay with a large part of their Arab minority wanting to cut out part of the hide of France for a new Arabia? Or would the Germans like the idea of ceding part of their territory to the large minority of Turks? Of course not. And both the Arabs and Turks are trying to integrate themselves into the French and German cultures for the most part, while offering the traditional French and Germans a part of their own culture.
Should it not be the same for the Turks and Kurds inside the Republic of Turkey?
To be fair to the Kurds, Turkish nationalism has been as repressive of Kurdish cultural expression inside Turkey as the white men of the United States were repressive of the native Americans (the preferred term for American Indians) and of blacks.
But Turks are coming around. It has always been the case that Kurds could integrate into Turkish society. They were never shunned. However, Turks did try to ban the speaking and thinking in Kurdish. They banned schools and radio broadcasts where the language spoken was Kurdish. They jailed non-violent protesters of Turkish policy concerning Kurds. Turkish police and military were corrupt and brutal agents of violent Turkish nationalism.
This is all supposed to be in the past now, and Turkey and the Turks have received the new religion. Sure, there are exceptions: anyone can find the one in 10,000 Turks who is an incorrigible bigot and violent nationalist. But we do not condemn the lot for the one bad apple we find. One finds racism in the United States too, but does anyone think the EU would exclude the United States from membership if the U.S. wanted to join?
The Greeks are essentially a rock around the EU neck, parasites on the welfare system set up by the EU economic union. The Greeks are probably a major reason why the United Kingdom refused to join the monetary union and why the English probably do a re-think about whether they should be in the Union at all. The more fully fledged productive members of the EU (Germany, for example) probably wonder what they have got themselves into when they join a club that includes Greece as its member. The Greeks set new standards in official laziness and incompetence in both government and the private sector.
Well, to get to the point, Cyprus has been a thorn in Turkey's side ever since it invaded some 30 years ago the northern part of the island where mostly ethnic Turks lived. Prior to that, a nasty Greek nationalism had taken over the island, and the Greek Cypriots had the power, since they had the voting majority. The Greek Cypriots had been talking about unifying the island with the Greek motherland itself, and worse, were making plans for ethnic cleansing of the island well before the term was popularized by Serbs (who happen to be kissing cousins of the Greeks, as are the Russians). A civil war had basically started in the 1960s and 1970s, with Greek Cypriots killing Turkish Cypriots, and the Turkish Cypriots retaliating.
Of course, the Turkish minority was likely to lose. They were only about 10% of the population. They had a choice to be killed off or abandon the island, despite the fact that their ancestors had lived on the island for centuries (and had settled the land without having killed off Greek ancestors to do so). A third option came into play instead: a big brother in the form of the powerful Turkish army (the 2nd largest in NATO after the United States military, mind you) would even up the odds by putting troops in the Turkish parts of the island and protecting the populace against murdering Greek nationalists. So the prime minister at the time, Bulent Ecevit (who took a turn again as prime minister as recently as a few years ago) sent in the Turkish army and told the world that ethnic majorities who murder and commit genocide against ethnic minorities was wrong and needed to be stopped, even if by force. (Do you sense irony here, by the way? See below.)
Well, the United Nations took a dim view of Turkey's action. Certainly the Greeks, both from the motherland and on the island, were screaming in all the diplomatic forums about the fact that they had their genocide and ethnic cleansing put to a stop. The nerve! The biggest complaint was that the Turkish army had took too much territory actually: the Turkish Cypriots were only 10% of the population, which was rather intermixed with Greek Cypriot communities, but that the Turkish Army had taken much more than 10% of the territory (I think it's about 30% they took).
Well, the United Nations recently came up with a plan that pretty much all the world saw as a good compromise. It would essentially re-unify the island and get the Turkish military out. But it also put forth a Bill of Rights of sort which at the very least demanded that the Greek Cypriots not engage in any ethnic cleansing or genocide of the Turkish Cypriots. Even the motherland Greece was for the plan, at least officially. And so was the EU overwhelmingly.
So the plan was put to a vote on the island. Only a few Turkish nationalists were against it, wanting the Turkish military to stay put and the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus, a country only recognized by Turkey, to persist. But 99% of the Turkish Cypriots voted for the plan. They wanted a peaceful settlement, and no more sanctions and punishment.
The Greek Cypriots had a different idea. Apparently the violent, brutal, murdering nationalists never left the island, or told their descendants to carry on the bigotry and hate. And so they did. An overwhelming majority voted to reject the United Nations/EU/Greece-backed plan for a reunified and peaceful Cyprus for both Turks and Greeks. For the Greek Cypriots they saw this as a win-win situation (a situation in which they lose nothing). Greek Cyprus (the official Cyprus) was already guaranteed entry with full membership rights into the EU. They had fully adapted to a divided island anyway. Moreover, as long as the island remained divided, they could use the question of division to punish and sanction both the Turkish Cypriots and the Turks. The EU already has total sanctions policy (no trade, no diplomatic relations) with the northern Cyprus government, and Turkey's own entry into the EU was being held up by the Cyprus division problem. There was no penalty by saying “No” to the reunification plan for the Greek Cypriots, and so the Greek Cypriots took the typical road of the brute and said “No.”
Of course, there was a minor penalty, or rather irritation, to the Greek Cypriots for having given in to their bigotry. One was that a small bone was thrown to the TRNC in the form of relaxation of trading sanctions by the EU, but it was hardly anything meaningful, and likely has no impact, economic or otherwise.
This issue is so significant as of this writing that it deserves its own treatment in a separate article. For the details read here
But what is a person who says he is a Muslim? Is that a person like one of the nutty ayatollahs of Iran who preach the Koran with one hand while using the other hand to make gestures emphasizing that it is every Muslim's duty to kill Americans and non-Muslims? Is it the militant Islam of Osama bin Laden?
This is all absurd. There are the same proportion of militant religious extremists in the Muslim world as you would find in the Christian world. Surely there are Christian extremists who advocate the rounding up and/or summary execution of Muslims and non-Christians, but do these people represent 99% of society?
And so it is with the Turks. Most of the urban adult Turks—and we are talking about a little more than half of the nation's adult population—have complete primary and secondary school educations, and many have university and postgraduate degrees. A lot of them embrace the fanaticism of Muhammed as much as their counterparts in the Christian world embrace the fanaticism of Jesus Christ. It is true that pork is not eaten at all (and finding a good ham in Turkey is next to impossible for foreigners), but these Turks have no such inhibitions when it comes to drinking alcohol and tossing back—with pride, mind you—Turkey's “national drink”, rıka (an anisette drink). Moreover, there is a greater relaxation about consenting unmarried adults engaging in sex. Turkish men have always winked at each other about fornicating and even committing adultery, but hypocritically resorted to “honor killings” to force their sisters and daughters to remain “pure” at all costs: today more Turkish women choose to enter and exit relationships without fear of being murdered, persecuted, or shunned (or at least not caring about the intolerance of the pathetically ignorant people who attempt to moralize to them).
But too many large populations consider too many other large populations to be “different” from each other. These differences lead to the groups growing up in separation and later wanting to maintain that separation. Ignorance of each of the groups about each of the other groups is the primary cause of bigotry and xenophobia. If, after all, our groups and cliques came into this world without knowing or seemingly having to learn about others, then why not continue in that way?
Of course, the world has progressed much since the times when geographic isolation was both possible and real. Transport vehicles of all kinds make it possible for people half a world away to come into contact with people on the other side. A native Californian with little knowledge of and not much caring about the history and culture of the Turks one day meets one and marries her, and suddenly finds himself speaking a language of which only about 200 million people speak one form or type. He learns about the things that were never mentioned in American public schools. He also learns that Turks know much more about and take an interest in United States than people in the United States learn about Turks (or anyone else for that matter).
Is it truly necessary to learn so much about the history and culture of another group or nation?
Yes, if learning about them puts an end to the hateful bigotry and pervasive influence of nationalists and demogogues who create bogeymen upon which these cretins gain brutal power, then it is necessary to learn about the people one intends to kill before they set about killing them.
The blind bigotry and hate of Turks can be fully appreciated in how English mothers and fathers warn their children to behave, or “we're going to let the Turk come and get ya.”
The Christian nations of the EU still talk with pride about “...how the Turk was stopped at the gates of Vienna.”
With this kind of cultural upbringing, is it any wonder that the EU has been playing games with Turkish membership since well before the EU was an EC? [2]
The December talks that have just concluded still show more game playing by the EU. The only reason that the EU talks to Turkey at all is because Turkish agricultural products are very cheap and of sufficiently quality for European eaters, who can otherwise pay for exclusively priced EU-made goods if they consider them the only quality goods. The EU also wants to sell their exports to the 70 million Turks who are willing to buy imported goods at a premium (and at a sacrifice), and with the customs union they have, EU goods get preferential treatment compared to all other imports.
It's time that the Turkish government put an end to this special treatment they give to and the game playing they get from the EU. The customs union should be dissolved, and the member states of the EU treated like all other nations trading with Turkey without preference or favored status.
Now critics of this arm's-length stance will say that Turkey stands to lose more than the EU, if only for the reason that Turkey will be isolated. The talk will be that Turkey is (still) a developing country, and that a great deal of trade being exports to the EU will dry up.
This is laughable upon its very utterance.
First, Turkey is not putting up a barrier to trade with the EU: it is only restoring the status quo on trade that existed less than a decade ago. Turks will continue to buy EU imports and EU member states will continue to buy Turkish imports. Moreover, the Turks can indicate their willingness to make fair bilateral agreements with individual states of the EU, assuming the EU permits its sovereign members to do exactly that. If the Turks decide to reduce trade barriers (import duties, etc.) outside of a customs union, then nothing is stopping anyone from doing that. The idea behind removing the customs union and any other special trade preferences is for the Turks and the EU to stop presenting the fiction of a special friendly relationship. If the relationship is that special and friendly, then why isn't Turkey a full-fledged member of the EU, and more importantly, why did this not happen more than a decade ago, when it should have??
Second, Turkey will do quite well without the EU. Turkey has extensive trading activity with Russia, which is pleasantly adapting to capitalism and still a force to be reckoned with in the world. The former Soviet states in Central Asia are populated by people who have common ancestors with the Turks, and they speak languages that are derivative of the ancestral language of Turkish. They also have significant natural resources, including petroleum, and are progressing rapidly with respect to industrial development. Turkey also has a good relationship with the United States and Israel. Indeed its relationship with Israel is proof that Turks are not virulently Jew-hating Muslims, a common misperception of anti-Islamic bigots.
Turkey hardly needs the EU to sustain it. If there were a bitter divorce and trade cut-off between the Turks and the EU member states, it is quite doubtful that the Turks would be sorely affected by it. The snobs and bigots of the EU like to comment about how unwashed the Turkish masses are and how their standard of living is far below that of the EU: well if so, then that means that the Turks are quite accustomed to going without, and so any stop of the flow of goods from the EU to Turkey will mean nothing for people who are already doing fine without, isn't that so?
No, the look of worry that you will see if the EU and Turkey decide to part ways is not that on the faces of the Turks...it is on the faces of the people who live in the EU. Those who survive on cheap Turkish-made imports will be in a real economic bind as they look despairingly at the reality of having to buy impossibly priced domestic goods. Turkish exports will in turn have to sell domestically, and while huge profit margins will be cut, their businesses will nonetheless survive as Turks gobble up the windfall of quality export goods they get to consume compared to the leftover second-rates they had to put up with as a sacrifice.
Or is it inevitable that Turkey be a member of the EU? Certainly not. If Turkey can get its act a bit more together, it can be the seed and nucleus of another economic union, such as one in the Middle East. Israel's normalization with the Muslim/Arab world can in fact proceed faster through Turkey than it can through Egypt. Formation of an economic union between the two states can entice other members to join. Lebanon has rejuvenated Beirut and is trying to attract tourism, an industry already well developed in Turkey and in Israel. If Arab Lebanon can get past its bigotry of non-Arabs and non-Muslims, it can join Turkey and Israel to form an East Mediterranean Trade Association. This would eventually include Egypt, which badly needs hard cash.
Arabs are not born to be terrorists, especially when everyone can prosper in peace. Where justice and fairness and prosperity are found, the influence of extremists to exort the mob to commit politically or religiously related violence is absent. People who fear no government because they have full knowledge of their civil and human rights do not take desperate measures.
As long as the Turks take care of business at home and work to improve themselves from within—for it is surely an illusion for anyone to believe that joining the European Union means instant prosperity for Turks—they never need feel insulted that they cannot be a part of any club of snobs and bigots. A good work ethic put into practice, and not a natural born genius or talent, is what makes citizens and a nation strong. There is no strength in relying on or trying to swindle others out of the product of their own hard work. Both the members of the EU and the Turks would do well to remember that.
If Turkey does not live up to the EU's standards, so be it.
There is serious doubt whether Turkey will ever be able to live up the EU's standards, certainly within the next century.
It's time for Turks to turn their back on the EU, and not tomorrow, but today.
Now we see Austria wanting Turkey to knuckle under to something called “privileged membership.”
Yes, Austria! Now let me tell you that I once met an Austrian doing a technical service call to the clinical laboratory where I once worked, and after doing some small talk with him, I came away fully convinced that a majority of Austrians are bigots completely unaware that their intolerant views horrify most everyone else outside of Austria. When we are talking about Austria, birthplace of Adolf Hitler, we are talking about the bigot of all bigots. Seriously!
So it was only appropriate that the Austrians of all Europeans tell an excluded group of Europeans, the Turks, that they were not good enough to have full membership in an exclusively Christian club called the EU. Not much different than seeing a white man in Alabama somewhat grudgingly tell a black man that while he was forced to let the black man have status in a country club, it would be access to a room in the back where the boiler heating the building was located.
The good news is that there are rumors that the Turks have had enough of this game playing, both the man on the street and the prime minister too. Should the EU dawdle or procrastinate any further and propose anything less than full membership within a reasonable time frame, then the whole deal is off and the Turks are picking up their ball and going home.
As it should be. The EU has an aging population that wants to retire and be supported by the sweat of a youthful Turkish population who will pay taxes to the central EU state...taxes to become paid-out pensions Europeans in Germany and Austria retirees who consider Turks to be so much scum. Why should Turks be willing to support those who would want to be their parasites?
Mavi Gözler
American Patriot
13 February 2004
revised 30 September 2005
——Notes——
[1] But not always: there is bit of hypocrisy seen in nationalist Turks and in the officially quiet stance of the Turkish government, who condemn—and expect world condemnation of—Kurdish separatism, but at the same time, these Turkish nationalists praise Chechen violence to show solidarity with their “Muslim brothers.” [return to text]
[2] EC as in European Community, not European Commission. [return to text]
All errors in content and style are mine. Remarks, compliments, criticisms, suggestions, and even proofreader's comments are all welcome; any revisions made to the text suggested by a proofreader will be credited on this page with name of proofreader, unless an explicit request not to do so is submitted.
