Turkey complains about the way the EU treats it - again

[Oerdin]

Criminalizing what one may or may not believe about history is terribly poor idea.

Bull. Genocide is always wrong. Period. End of story.

Turkey needs to follow Germany's example, they need to stop lying to the world, and own up to the horrible crimes against humanity that they have committed. Slaughtering an entire people because of their religion is completely unacceptable yet like the neo-Nazis the Turks are still trying to pretend it didn't happen. That's not the actions of a people who deserve to be in the EU.

 

[Karalysia]

The Armenians weren't targeted because of their religion, not the main reason at any rate. It was believed with good reason they would revolt in support of the Russians as they came through the region. Technically what was authorized was moving the Armenians away from the front lines.

 

[Squonk]

Karalysia.
1) yes, they were targetted for their religion. Muslim Armenians (Hemshins) live in Turkey even today, in large number.
2) Armenians were "moved" across entire Ottoman Empire. I don't think they expected Russian desant in Constantinople or Smyrna, did they?
3) If you want to move civilian population, you clearly need to have resources to do it. Ottoman Empire didn't. Even when the orders were indeed treated as an order of expulsion, and not an incentive to an outright slaughter, OE didn't provide any protection for the people it forced out, and even when it's sent soldiers, their "protections" tended to be worse than lack of it. The ultimate goal of the "resettlement", that is Syrian Desert, shows that the effort to secure the future for the expelled was a joke.

 

[xchen08]

Yes for the non-European Muslim immigrants; Roma are a special case. I want them to respect the law and live like civilized people (you know, send kids to school, have a job, don't steal from other people, things like that). If they fulfill these basic conditions that should BTW apply to everyone, they can have whatever traditions and cultural peculiarities they want, so long as they don't infringe on rights of other people.

Funny, that sounds a lot like what the Turks said back when they were actively oppressing the Kurds. You know, send their kids to (Turkish) schools, give up their pastoral lives, settle down, don't steal from people, things like that. Odd, how when the Turks do it, it's evil, but when you are advocating it, it's just something that should apply to everyone.

Are the Germans denying that it happened? Have they not apologized many times over? The same for the Czechs - do they deny that they ethnically cleansed the Germans? Have they not voiced their regret?

Turkey's denial of the Armenian genocide is tantamount to Germany refusing to accept the fact of Holocaust. If that was the case, Germany would be an international pariah, not a founding member of the EU.

Once again, false, and previously and repeatedly demonstrated false at that. First, the Czechs have not apologized for their campaign of ethnic cleansing, neither have the Poles, or any of the other nations that participated in the post WWII German expulsions. Strangely, this correlates with the fact that they were on the winning side of a war, much like Turkey won its formation wars. I haven't noticed you calling for them to be international pariahs rather than proud EU members.

Second, there remains no evidence whatsoever that the Armenian Genocide was planned and intended to kill Armenians, the way both the Holocaust and the German expulsions were planned. A lot more Turks and Kurds died than Armenians, in a climate where militias on all sides carried out warcrimes, and regulars campaigned without a great deal of concern for civilians. The regular army bears (and also lacks) blame the same as the British bear and also lack blame for all the civilian deaths resulting from their internment campaign in the Boer Republics. If you have any documentary evidence or any evidence at all showing that there was a planned campaign of genocide, please present it here. Many historians would be amazed to see it.

And of course, the Turkish government and academia hasn't disputed what is historically certain, that many Armenians died, and the Ottoman government bears a certain degree of responsibility, for decades.

And more drivel from you No, I definitely did not lose any argument regarding the position of Turkey. It usually ends with my opponents insulting me because they run out of arguments.

So, now that we are clear, you can stop spiting lies about me and crawl back wherever you came from, unless you have some useful input in store.

Odd, from what I remember, that argument ended after your belief that Israel was sufficiently "European" to join the EU yet Turkey is not was proven conclusively false with both genetic and cultural evidence. But I'm not surprised that you were able to edit your memory to preserve your worldview.

 

[Karalysia]

Karalysia.
1) yes, they were targetted for their religion. Muslim Armenians (Hemshins) live in Turkey even today, in large number.
2) Armenians were "moved" across entire Ottoman Empire. I don't think they expected Russian desant in Constantinople or Smyrna, did they?
3) If you want to move civilian population, you clearly need to have resources to do it. Ottoman Empire didn't. Even when the orders were indeed treated as an order of expulsion, and not an incentive to an outright slaughter, OE didn't provide any protection for the people it forced out, and even when it's sent soldiers, their "protections" tended to be worse than lack of it. The ultimate goal of the "resettlement", that is Syrian Desert, shows that the effort to secure the future for the expelled was a joke.

1. The issue was loyalty
2. The Russians were known to have ambitions of Constantinople
3. With the majority of resources going to the war effort not much could be spared for removing the Armenians which as usual the Ottomans did with the greatest inefficiency possible.

 

[kulade]

Eastern European nations like Turkey need to understand that the Big Boys in real Europe care about their welfare and will shake hands with them for the camera, but they have more important grown-up things to attend to rather than caring for Eastern Europe's cute little needs.

 

[Squonk]

1. The issue was loyalty

Then they should have expulsed / cleansed / genocided Turks as well. Traditionalists and liberals weren't really fond of the that-day turkish gouverment, which was created by a coup.

Anyway, if some Armenians were restless, it's because of earlier turkish policies and massacres.

2. The Russians were known to have ambitions of Constantinople

Of course they did. But they had no possibility whatsoever to realise them during this war. Also, we're not talking about the Straits region only. We're talking about entire Ottoman Empire.

3. With the majority of resources going to the war effort not much could be spared for removing the Armenians which as usual the Ottomans did with the greatest inefficiency possible.

Of course. I don't think the intent of the gouverment was to kill Armenians, but they didn't mind it if it happened. And local authorities understood the order depending on their own convictions on what should be done with Armenians.
The official turkish gouverment's website at least not so long ago boasted that it was "the most successful resettlement operation ever". Sure it was. There were Armenians - after the operation there were no Armenians. If they were resettled into the sea, into a mass grave, or, in case of the women, into some kurdish or turkish bed, that seems to have been a problem of a smaller importance than getting rid of them.

Still, it's the first time I guess when a modern state tried to get rid of some minority in an organised manner. And what is worth mention is that turkish ambitions weren't limited to modern borders - if they weren't stopped on a battlefield, Erevan and Alexandropol would be clearly turkish/kurdish cities as well.

So while the destruction of a nation may not have been a goal per se, it would have de facto happened.

 

[Winner]

I hope it doesn't take as long either to catch up. 20 years is a long time.

Well, after all the decades lost to war and Communism, you can't do miracles fast.

Did Eurostat actually publish an article recently saying that Poland would take 55 years to catch up to German GDP per capita? I saw that in one of Tekkee's threads and there was no link so I'm 99% sure its bs, but it would be an interesting report to see.

50 years doesn't seem right.

 

[aronnax]

Go Slovenia...

Winner, and all other No Turkey in EU fans.

What if people who hold provincial and City residence/Citizenship of selected Turkish Provinces/Administrative areas, are allowed to partake in the Szchengen Zone and EU Citizens Vice-versa?

Such as the rich Thrace and Istanbul Area and some Coastal Areas and cities? Especially places near Greek Tourism Islands?

 

[Winner]

So while the destruction of a nation may not have been a goal per se, it would have de facto happened.

And, most importantly, Turkish courts admitted it was a genocide (though they obviously didn't use the term since it didn't exist at that time).

Wiki:

The [Turkish] military court found that it was the will of the CUP [(Committee of Union and Progress)] to eliminate the Armenians physically, via its special organization. The 1919 pronouncement reads as follows:

The Court Martial taking into consideration the above-named crimes declares, unanimously, the culpability as principal factors of these crimes the fugitives Talat Pasha, former Grand Vizir, Enver Efendi, former War Minister, struck off the register of the Imperial Army, Cemal Efendi, former Navy Minister, struck off too from the Imperial Army, and Dr. Nazim Efendi, former Minister of Education, members of the General Council of the Union & Progress, representing the moral person of that party;... the Court Martial pronounces, in accordance with said stipulations of the Law the death penalty against Talat, Enver, Cemal, and Dr. Nazim.

– Turkish Courts-Martial of 1919-20​

The term Three Pashas, which include Mehmed Talat Pasha and Ismail Enver, refers to the triumvirate who had fled the Empire at the end of World War I. At the trials in Constantinople in 1919 they were sentenced to death in absentia. The courts-martial officially disbanded the CUP and confiscated its assets, and the assets of those found guilty

So, million or so Armenians disappeared into thin air (apparently ), there is plenty of witnesses and documents proving they were intentionally put to death by the Turkish authorities and even the Turks themselves admitted it shortly after the war.

Then the Kemalist regime came and the sins of the past became incompatible with the image of new, "Westernized" Turkey - so they erased the genocide from the national consciousness.

It's both funny and sad how many non-Turks buy this revisionism.

Go Slovenia...

Yeah, great country.

Winner, and all other No Turkey in EU fans.

What if people who hold provincial and City residence/Citizenship of selected Turkish Provinces/Administrative areas, are allowed to partake in the Szchengen Zone and EU Citizens Vice-versa?

Such as the rich Thrace and Istanbul Area and some Coastal Areas and cities? Especially places near Greek Tourism Islands?

I don't understand how something like that could be done. Heck, even some current EU members are not part of the Schengen Zone, how do you plan to allow parts of non-EU country whose citizen require visa to enter the Schengen zone to participate in it?

 

[edgelachance]

That is very funny you guys talking about things that you have no idea. Now read this post very very carefully.

After WW1, England, France, Italy, Greece, Armenia(with the help of Russia, England and France) attacked our borders. England attacked Trakya (Istanbul region). Istanbul and padishah were controlled by English. France attacked from Syria and Iraq region. Armenia attacked to Eastern Anatolia. Greece attacked Smyrna(izmir) and all western Anatolia with English. Now picture in you head. All of Turkey was under attack by the winners of WW1.

Because padishah didnt defend the country, the first fronts fell immediately. Then the Kuvai Milliye (force of the nation) forces were created by Mustafa Kemal and his friends. Kuvai Milliye battled with Greece in the Eastern Anatolia front and Russia in the Western Anatolia front.

France legionary included French, Algeriers and Armenian soldiers. The southern Kuvai Milliye forces consisted of patriot civils who were commanded by WW1 Ottoman generals. The French Forces defeated and Ankara Patch was signed.

Eastern front is complicated so i'm going to write the history of this front. During the WW1 Russians and Armenians captured some of the Ottoman cities and murdered the civils. Then the Russian Revolution began and Russia gave the territories they captured back to Ottoman. At the same time the Armenian Republic was found in Erivan. The WW1 finished, Armistice of Mudros was signed. Therefore the Ottoman was forced back to Erzurum. Treaty of Sevres was signed with Allies and Ottoman. (The Treaty of Sevres was annulled in the course of the Turkish War of Independence and the parties signed and ratified the superseding Treaty of Lausanne in 1923.) With this treaty Armenians wanted to found the Great Armenia. The Armenian forces were defeated easily by Turkish forces. Soviet Russia attacked Armenia. Armenia signed a piece treaty with Turkey giving back the territories they took by the Treaty of Sevres. Then the Soviets ended the Democratic Republic of Armenia.

During the Turkish-Armenian war, some of the Armenians revolted in big cities, some of them were moved from their homes(guess why? because some of them revolted), some of them stayed in Turkey(the Turkish people hid their Armenian friends in their own houses), some of them murdered Turkish civils during their move, some of them were murdered by Turkish gangs during their move. A lot of people died both Turkish and Armenians. But THAT IS NOT A GENOCIDE. First learn what genocide means then accuse someone for genocide. And that wasn't the "best resettlement operation ever". Guess why? Because ALL THE COUNTRY WAS IN WAR WITH ENGLAND, FRANCE, GREECE, ITALY. Our independence was more important than the Armenian resettlement. We are so sorry for that!!! But I wonder if some EU country was in the place of Turkey what would they do?

People who doesnt have any clue about both Turkish and Armenian history: why do you comment on anything you dont know? And about the Kurds... Kurds are our own people. How would you know something about them even you dont know anything about Armenians? Kurds are our friends, citizens. They have the same rights with me. They can speak Kurdish in Turkey and they are. Kurdish is not that different than Turkish. If you dont know something ASK, DONT COMMENT.

 

[Winner]

Man, where have you learned this crap? Are they teaching this stuff at schools in Turkey?

It's sad when foreigners have a better knowledge of your own history

 

[Yeekim]

Bull. Genocide is always wrong. Period. End of story.

True, but completely beside my point.
@edgelachance
And how would you comment on the ruling of Turkish court Winner quoted in a post before you?
@Winner
What he is saying isn't crap, facts in first four paragraphs are obviously true and the fifth is probably true as well - it just does not automatically absolve Turkey of responsibility for what happened as he seems to think.

 

[aronnax]

I don't understand how something like that could be done. Heck, even some current EU members are not part of the Schengen Zone, how do you plan to allow parts of non-EU country whose citizen require visa to enter the Schengen zone to participate in it?

Well the idea behind this is that if there is anyplace that is socially, economically and culturally closest to the EU-27, it would be Thrace, Istanbul and certain Coastal areas in the Aegean.

Having a "sub-Schengen Zone" would allow people and goods to easily past between the regions allowing the economy in the region to cooperate and expand. No visas, no hassles, no border checks to slow the process. Tourism can also get a boost so people from the EU to Istanbul or Turkish Tourist sights from Greece, Bulgaria and so on. The Greeks and Turkic Tourism board can cooperate within the Aegean to promote tourism.

But in order to limit the wave of immigrants that might take advantage of the Schengen Zone situation and travel to Europe (scarring right wingers) limit the people who can travel there to more economically sensible zones like Istanbul. So only people with residencies in Istanbul, Thrace and other specific areas, just need to flash an Identification Card stating the Residence at the border and be let through quickly. Similary, EU citizens just need to flash a passport or ID to get into specific areas.

This is not only economically beneficial but also allows a certain degree of cooperation with between the Turks and the EU that says "I don't love you enough to be in the same union, but I care for you as a friend to prosper together."

 

[Winner]

Well the idea behind this is that if there is anyplace that is socially, economically and culturally closest to the EU-27, it would be Thrace, Istanbul and certain Coastal areas in the Aegean.

Having a "sub-Schengen Zone" would allow people and goods to easily past between the regions allowing the economy in the region to cooperate and expand. No visas, no hassles, no border checks to slow the process. Tourism can also get a boost so people from the EU to Istanbul or Turkish Tourist sights from Greece, Bulgaria and so on. The Greeks and Turkic Tourism board can cooperate within the Aegean to promote tourism.

But in order to limit the wave of immigrants that might take advantage of the Schengen Zone situation and travel to Europe (scarring right wingers) limit the people who can travel there to more economically sensible zones like Istanbul. So only people with residencies in Istanbul, Thrace and other specific areas, just need to flash an Identification Card stating the Residence at the border and be let through quickly. Similary, EU citizens just need to flash a passport or ID to get into specific areas.

This is not only economically beneficial but also allows a certain degree of cooperation with between the Turks and the EU that says "I don't love you enough to be in the same union, but I care for you as a friend to prosper together."

I see, but it can't be done like you said previously (I understand you meant partial membership in Schengen Zone). The Schengen Border is heavily guarded, so in practice the Turks would have to separate the most productive parts of their country from the rest.

Other than that, what you propose would open a can of worms - how would you justify such a clearly discriminatory policy?

@Winner
What he is saying isn't crap, facts in first four paragraphs are obviously true and the fifth is probably true as well - it just does not automatically absolve Turkey of responsibility for what happened as he seems to think.

The 'facts' are covered with tons of nationalistic nonsense.

 

[Kyriakos]

Well i do not plan to really post much in this thread, since i dont like the subject, but really i must agree that education in Turkey seems to be a joke regarding history.
First of all the kurds are not your "friends". You used them to attack Greece in the 1920-1922 war since they feared they would be named as genocidal killers along with turks if the war was lost. Then you killed them, and keep doing that, which is why they are not happy as part of that country.
The ottoman empire was an artificial creation holding lands of slavs, greeks, armenians etc. Like Austria-Hungary it too was meant to be disbanded post ww1. However the nations were tired of war, so their attempt to carry the plan was not that well-executed and they didnt want conflict. Later on only Greece was willing to fight for lands where greeks lived, but Italy, France, and most importantly the Soviet Union gave weapons en masse to the turkish rebels and helped them, all for their own reasons, so Greece ended up losing the war.

 

[aronnax]

I see, but it can't be done like you said previously (I understand you meant partial membership in Schengen Zone). The Schengen Border is heavily guarded, so in practice the Turks would have to separate the most productive parts of their country from the rest.

Other than that, what you propose would open a can of worms - how would you justify such a clearly discriminatory policy?

You don't have to build a wall between rich and poor Turkey.

You can keep the original Schengen border at Greece and Bulgaria, but other wise process certain Turkish citizens like normal EU citizens at checkpoints and customs.
Though I can see how discriminatory that can be. But the idea here is to support economic growth while limiting illegal immigration. And German Turks would get a kick out of it too. Though Schengen membership areas should be limited to areas that matter, not just rich areas. The EU is also partly an Economic Union and excluding Istanbul, which has been a major part of the Mediterranean economy for the last 1500 years seems silly. Maybe just Thrace, Izmir, Ankara and maybe a scattering of Turkish resorts and tourist sights along the Aegean.

Or call it a Special Cooperation and Hegemony of European Nations Generating an Economical Mediterranean Zone. It sounds like a Free Trade Agreement then.

 

[Camikaze]

Personally, if being a Holocaust denier is a criminal offense in numerous countries then I completely believe that denying the Armenian genocide should also be a criminal offense. We're talking about Turks brutally slaughtering millions of people because of their religion and to these day these monsters try to use the same tactics as the neo-Nazis who deny the Holocaust.

This ignores the fact that being a Holocaust denier shouldn't be a criminal offence. Two wrongs don't make a right, so criminalising denial of the Armenian genocide isn't a good thing just because Holocaust denial is also a crime in places.

 

[Shekwan]

You don't have to build a wall between rich and poor Turkey.

You can keep the original Schengen border at Greece and Bulgaria, but other wise process certain Turkish citizens like normal EU citizens at checkpoints and customs.
Though I can see how discriminatory that can be. But the idea here is to support economic growth while limiting illegal immigration. And German Turks would get a kick out of it too. Though Schengen membership areas should be limited to areas that matter, not just rich areas. The EU is also partly an Economic Union and excluding Istanbul, which has been a major part of the Mediterranean economy for the last 1500 years seems silly. Maybe just Thrace, Izmir, Ankara and maybe a scattering of Turkish resorts and tourist sights along the Aegean.

Or call it a Special Cooperation and Hegemony of European Nations Generating an Economical Mediterranean Zone. It sounds like a Free Trade Agreement then.

That is a very discriminatory policy. It would be totally counterproductive for an organisation like the EU, that tries to promote human rights at every opportunity, to enter into an agreement like that.

 

[Winner]

I think the future of EU-Turkey relations should look like this:

- make it clear that the accession talks will not end in full membership. Create a category of associated member state enjoying some of the benefits of full membership without full participation.

- gradually abolish the visa regime and switch to a system similar to the one that exist between the US and Europe (in order to reduce bureaucracy and make travel easier).

- continue providing development assistance to Turkey in exchange for continuing political and social liberalization of Turkish society and its cooperation concerning other issues (gas/oil supply, immigration, combating terrorism, Middle East diplomacy, trade relations with the rest of the world, environmental policy, science & technology, etc).


In short, let's try to maintain above-standard relations without giving them full membership. It will be mutually beneficial and it will avoid continued conflict over the membership prospects.