Should Turkey be allowed enter the EU?

[Auditor #9]

Absolutely not when there are kebabs plotting against us.

[thebrom]

Absolutely not when there are kebabs plotting against us.

Who's this, Conor Lenihan?

[Tiernanator]

As far as I know a predominantly Muslim country namely Albania is already a member of the EU. Albania Moslem community is 70% of the population, Orthodox Christians 20% and Roman Catholics and others 10%.

I don't know how Germany will react to this but I can't see them being favourable unless they can offload the Turks to some other country before they join.

[drbob1972]

Albania is not an EU member, it is a canidate country only

[Meursault]

Firstly Sarkozy should have no right to veto anything, he is a political opportunist of the highest order and the future of the EU should not be decided by him. It also seems a bit odd that France are so viciforous in opposing Turkey's membership of the union, given that whatever their record on human rights, the Turkish state is not carrying out a campaign of violence on French soil resulting in the deaths of French citizens, as Spain was during the GAL campaign which was still continuing when Spain joined the EU.

[drbob1972]

France and its president have the right to veto anything that they want within the EU, just as we have the right to veto things we don't want like a common Corporate tax rate, or would you rather we gave up the right to do that as its economic opportunism on our behalf ?

[corkman2007]

corkman2007 wrote
redneckwally wrote:
Turkey should not be allowed to join. It is not in Europe. If Turkey joins what next? Iraq? In addition we don't need a huge influx of moslems into Europe. There are too many here already. For centuries Europe has fought to keep the Turks out. The admission of Turkey would result in the breakup of the E.U.


Too many Muslims? Have you got a solution for this problem? Something with a degree of finality perhaps?

P.S. Your username is spot on. You are a redneck wally.

Once again those on the left choose to ignore the substantive issues and prefer to smear those who disagree with them by making snide references to final solutions and thus branding their opponents as nazis. That is typical of their dishonest and faulty reasoning. Also typical and pathetic is the reference to my user name. No doubt corkman2007 thinks he is being clever but instead he reveals how banal and predictable his thoughts are and indeed how prejudiced he is.

You're the prejudiced one - 'too many here already' - your words, not mine.

And how do you know I'm on the left?

Other posters on this issue seem to think I'm a heartless right-winger unconcerned with human rights.

[corkman2007]

d. Ethnic cleansing? Thank God the Germans were never involved in that then. Many EU member-states have behaved abominably towards ethnic minorities. EU membership means that discrimination against such minorities would be outlawed.

Ah but the difference is that Turkey is the first country engaged in ethnic-cleansing since it first applied to join the EU. It's military are demanding an invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan - and its govt is threatening to go in aswell under the pretext of the PKK using it as a base. The EU is already large enough. When we voted on Nice, it was under the understanding that it would allow a 27 member EU. It was not a vote for Turkish entry. As such, if the member states decide to allow Turkey to join, it should be put to a referendum. Agreed?

No, the entry of no other new member-state has been put to a referendum. There's no need for Turkey's entry to be put to one either.

I voted on Nice on the understanding that it would make enlargement easier, not limit enlargement to a fixed number of new states.

Military and government sabre-rattling, posturing and rhetoric aside, what ethnic cleansing is Turkey currently engaged in?

Here's a 2002 article from the Kurdistan Observer

Turkey ends 15-year-old state of emergency in Kurdish regions
DIYARBAKIR, (Northern Kurdistan), Nov 28 (AFP)

A 15-year state of emergency, which once covered 11 war-torn provinces in mainly Kurdish southeast Turkey, is due to end this weekend in line with the country's efforts to meet European Union norms.

Emergency rule, introduced in 1987 following the break-out of a Kurdish rebellion, will end in the two remaining provinces -- Diyarbakir and Sirnak -- on Saturday under a June decision by the Turkish parliament.

The lifting of the state of emergency is among the steps the EU has asked Ankara to take as a condition for accession talks.

Turkey has been easing restrictions on its Kurdish minority since 1999 when the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) declared an end to its campaign for self-rule in favor of a democratic struggle for Kurdish rights.

The decision followed a peace appeal by PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan, who was captured and jailed the same year.

Since then, the once daily clashes in the region have almost ended.

The conflict has claimed some 36,500 lives since 1984 when the PKK launched attacks on security forces and civilians in the region, leading to the introduction of emergency rule in 1987.

A special law gave civilian and military authorities in the region enhanced powers to limit individual and press freedoms in the region, and exempted the decisions of the emergency rule governor from judicial scrutiny.

Turkey's struggle against the PKK has led to accusations of gross human rights violations, including torture, disappearances and extra-judicial killings.

The bulk of complaints filed by Turks with the European Court of Human Rights stem from human rights violations in the southeast.

In a taboo-breaking move to improve the rights of its Kurds, Turkey legalized broadcasts and language courses in the Kurdish language last August as part of a reform drive to catch up with EU democracy standards.

It also abolished capital punishment, which in turn, led to the commutation of Ocalan's death sentence to life in prison.

Here's what Human Rights Watch and the EU have said:

Turkey’s European Union (EU) candidacy remains the most effective international factor in fostering respect for human rights in the country. EU Enlargement Commissioner, Olli Rehn, repeatedly emphasized the commission’s commitment to Turkey’s integration in Europe, while frankly addressing shortcomings in reform. The EU Progress Report on Turkey published in November referred to the “significant political influence” exercised by the military and suggested that military leaders should confine public statements to military and defence matters. The report criticized continuing violations of freedom of expression and concluded that Turkey had made little progress in ensuring the rights of minorities.

Put simply, the main factor behind the ending of the military campaign against the Kurds and improvements in human rights in Turkey in the past several years has been the hope of EU membership. Turkey has a hell of a long way to go, but the best way to encourage it to continue along this road is to support its eventual membership of the EU.

If a clear timetable with clear goals is set this could be achieved within 5 years.

[Meursault]

France and its president have the right to veto anything that they want within the EU, just as we have the right to veto things we don't want like a common Corporate tax rate, or would you rather we gave up the right to do that as its economic opportunism on our behalf ?

I will admit I was being somewhat disengenous in saying that Sarkozy should not have a veto, I was just reacting to the posters on this thread who seem to view him as the chevalier who will save Europe from the Turkish hordes. What Sarkozy is doing is taking a calculated populist move of one who believes Turkish admission to the union is unlikely. When said admission does not take place he will be able to take credit for it in a dog whistle way.

[corkman2007]

Corkman2007, like it or not there are a lot people whom feel this way, and a raising tide of anti-islam in Europe, especially in france, netherlands and other countries, its not been an issue here as numerically they are a very small community and most are productive members of society, however this cannot be said in many other countries where they are the largest immigrant community, highest unemployment, lowest integration, and continue to live as if back in Morocco, Pakistan, where ever.

Europe needs to work on integrating its existing Islamic communities (and i don't mean multiculturalism) before considering allowing turkey and its 90 million citizens join, otherwise there will only continue to be ever increasing problems and tensions

So we give in to anti-Islamic feeling prejudice?

In any case, I'll repeat again. Turkey is not a fundamentalist Islamic state. It's a secular democracy with a large proportion of nominal 'Muslims'. Turkey, along with any other potential new member-states, will have to meet the Copenhagen Criteria before it can join the EU.

Read this:

'To join the EU an applicant country must meet the following Copenhagen criteria established by the European Council in 1993:

Stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.

The existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union.

The ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.

In December 1995, the Madrid European Council revised the membership criteria to include conditions for member country integration through the appropriate adjustment of its administrative structures: since it is important that European Community legislation be reflected in national legislation, it is critical that the revised national legislation be implemented effectively through appropriate administrative and judicial structures.'

Wikipedia: Enlargement of the European Union.