Are you really suggesting that this is equivalent to what Bush said?
“Fix” isn’t the right word. The report in the link said that Mr Bush had told reporters “My administration is working hard on Turkey’s behalf”, and I believe the USA wouldn’t like to hear that from an EU member’s HoS if the tables were turned. Do you disagree?
It isn’t the same as making a favourable remark about Puerto Rico’s relationship with the USA because there’s no comparable controversy about that.
Of course we shouldn’t see any kind of EU/US split on the horizon over this. It doesn’t take much imagination to work out why Bush has become a Turkey fan all of a sudden, or how much “work on their behalf” will get done. Turkey always becomes a valued member of NATO whenever there’s trouble in the Middle East and is that Kurd-bashing scumbag country the rest of the time.
Just politicking. He keeps Turkey from getting pissed at the US for lack of support for something important to them, while not really pissing off the EU (who aren’t going to be pissed, really, anyway).
Brush it off. It didn’t mean anything.
I read it as: We’ll encourage the EU to accept Turkey into the union.
I doubt the US would be concerned at all about a European nation encouraging us to add another state to our union. Especially if the US was actively looking for more members, and even more so if the nation in question was already being considered for membership.
Bingo! And what’s wrong with putting a good word in?
Maybe you need to study some more about why Turkey is not already a member? Here’s a recent summary from the BBC. The EU has recently accepted applications in principle from Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia, but although Turkey has applied for membership numerous times since 1959, this application has always been turned down.
Not all EU nations are opposed to Turkey joining (Greece is in favour for example). But I have to repeat that it isn’t just a case of lobbying in favour of a likely outcome. Instead it’s much more like supporting a country that wants to join the USA in spite of repeatedly-stated opposition from the existing 50 states.
Nevertheless, I’m confident that Mr Bush’s remarks are mainly for Turkish consumption because of the Iraqi situation, and that he’s unlikely to interfere very much in practice into an internal EU decision.
I never want to hear again from Europeans that Americans don’t know anything about world affairs. everton just about every single thing you wrote in this bit was dead wrong.
-
Turkey’s application to join the EU has never been turned down. In fact, Turkey is considered an applicant nation. What the EU has said is that Turkey has yet to meet the criteria for the next step in the process - accession negotiations.
-
Rather than Greece being in favor, Greece has long been the primary opponent of Turkish membership in the EU. As you might or might not know, Turkey and Greece are historical enemies, who even up to and through the 90s, despite their mutual membership in NATO, were often at the brink of war.
In the past few years, after both nations suffered earthquakes that the other provided emergency help for, there has been a bit of a thaw; but Greece ain’t in favor yet; -
The EU has never stated their opposition to Turkish membership; indeed, as I noted, they have accepted the Turk’s application. So Bush’s statement is absolutely nothing like supporting a country that the US has told we don’t want for statehood.
:rolleyes:
Sua
You are aware that Turkey is a N.A.T.O. member, right?
everton, I said two things:
- The EU is recruiting new members.
Cite.
2. Turkey is being considered for membership.
Cite. Turkey is an official EU candidate, and while they won’t get in this time, they likely will sometime in the next few decades. Germany and France are sending “strong message[s] of encouragement” to Turkey, why would they be doing that if Turkey isn’t being considered?
And yet even though Turkey first applied to join in 1959 it still isn’t a member. It’s not a matter of contention that the EU and its predecessor organisations have considered Turkey’s canidature during this period.
Have a look at this article, dated 10 October, 2002, which contains these comments:
*Greece has said there is no reason why the European Union should not set a date to start accession talks with Turkey at its December summit in Copenhagen.
…“I believe a positive message to Turkey must be sent from [the EU summit in] Copenhagen,” Mr Papandreou told Greek radio.*
Of course I’m perfectly well aware of the traditional enmity between Greece and Turkey - it’s not as if it’s a recent development after all.
And yet, as I’ve said, Turkey remain outside. There’s more than one way to skin a cat, and perpetual delay has the same effect in practice as outright refusal.
So, you claim that the EU is going to mislead Turkey into thinking they have a chance when, in fact, they’re dismissing Turkey without any consideration whatsoever?
That’s pretty underhanded, even by European standards.
In the past Turkey has felt it has been misled, but it has never reached the human rights standard required or shown enough economic stability to be admitted.
Ahh crap. Well colour me stupid. :o
It’s surprising how many ways the concept of Freedom of Speech can be misunderstood. Nobody is saying that there should be a UN mandate banning Bush from international travel if he ever says such a thing again.
Bush is an important international politician and as such he must consider factors such as diplomacy, potential political repercussions, logic, precedent and consistency before he opens his mouth. That is what is being debated here. Whether or not you agree with Bush here, this is, as lawyers would put it, a “nice case”, and there is a case to answer.
Of course we can argue for as long as you like about the semantic difference between “refusal to admit” and “failure to admit for 42 years”, but the practical consequences are the same either way. The fact that Turkey has not been admitted to the European group of countries for all this time, coupled to that fact that it will have been passed over by more than a dozen other countries by 2004 (even including Cyprus, perhaps) ought to be enough to convince you that Turkey’s relationship with the EU has been, and continues to be, a special case of some sensitivity.
The reasons why Turkey hasn’t been admitted yet are various and complex, but of course I’m not saying that the EU has no intention of allowing Turkey membership while telling the Turks a different story.
It may come to pass that Turkey joins the EU sooner or later; it is by no means a foregone conclusion at the present time. It’s nonsense to suggest, as some people here are doing, that Turkey fits seamlessly into the EU’s general expansion plans. If President Bush was currently visiting Hungary and merely said that he wished that country well with its EU membership application it probably would not even get reported anywhere outside Hungary.
There is no comparable real-life case of the USA expanding beyond 50 states, and so imagining how a US government would respond to persuasion about such an expansion depends on a lot of hypothesising. But let’s agree, at least, that perhaps an EU member country “working on behalf of” an applicant state to achieve such an expansion might be thought of as an unwelcome intrusion into a domestic American concern. I fail to see why that’s a controversial point of view.
As an EU citizen, I think Guam should become the 51st state.
(BTW, none of the above explains why Israel competes in the Eurovision Song Contest).
Dear sir:
We thank you for your recommendation, and agree that Guam has many factors in its favor towards admission into the Union.
May we contact for further information and endorsement after we receive Guam’s application for admission?
Best regards,
Senate Standing Committee
for Union Admission
Thank you!
For the same reason it competes in the European Football Championship and not the Asian. Problems with the neighbours.
What I want to know is - will all of Turkey join the European Union, or just the European bit? After all, you could hardly describe the country as European. 