4 ms·

It's in the process of joining the EU (a process that started in 1959, had various setbacks and then restarted in 2004): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession

by darkr 11y ago

It's in the process of joining the EU (a process that started in 1959, had various setbacks and then restarted in 2004): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_Eur... As to whether it's "European" is another question. You could argue that Portland is European, but it's a long way from Brussels.

nairboon 11y ago
Joining the EU does not make it a part of Europe. Turkey is used as the definition of where Europe ends. While Istanbul is an exception, being a transcontinental city.
- enraged_camel 11y ago
  >>Turkey is used as the definition of where Europe ends. By whom? Because it's also the definition of where the Middle East ends, culturally speaking.
  - nairboon 11y ago
    Well that adds up, Middle East ends with Turkey, where after Europe it begins. Now we could debate which "border" is inclusive in respect to Turkey. The pragmatic answer would be, after looking at the map, to put Turkey to the ME side. If you don't agree to the pragmatic argument and take Turkey to the European side, you don't really have an answer yet. It'd just modify the question slightly: Suppose you "include" Turkey to "Europe", now what borders should we use for Turkey? The current border that arbitrarily cuts across the map? They're mostly the result of the Treaty of Lausanne (1923). That's akin to saying: we reject the current (arbitrary) definition of Europe (mostly a consensus among "Europeans"), in favor for an arbitrary definition made by the Europe's "big boys" to chill a bit after WWI. Also I wouldn't call Turkey's current borders completely uncontroversial, a big part of eastern Turkey could as well be part again of a future resurrected Kurdistan. Would you then include the Kurdish parts also to Europe? So you'll end up anyways to draw borders around cultural or ethnical "regions". Thus to get back to my original point, given that we still subscribe to the line-drawing-game, I'd suggest to draw it before Turkey and call it a day.

by darkr 11y ago

nairboon 11y ago

Joining the EU does not make it a part of Europe. Turkey is used as the definition of where Europe ends. While Istanbul is an exception, being a transcontinental city.

enraged_camel 11y ago
>>Turkey is used as the definition of where Europe ends. By whom? Because it's also the definition of where the Middle East ends, culturally speaking.
- nairboon 11y ago
  Well that adds up, Middle East ends with Turkey, where after Europe it begins. Now we could debate which "border" is inclusive in respect to Turkey. The pragmatic answer would be, after looking at the map, to put Turkey to the ME side. If you don't agree to the pragmatic argument and take Turkey to the European side, you don't really have an answer yet. It'd just modify the question slightly: Suppose you "include" Turkey to "Europe", now what borders should we use for Turkey? The current border that arbitrarily cuts across the map? They're mostly the result of the Treaty of Lausanne (1923). That's akin to saying: we reject the current (arbitrary) definition of Europe (mostly a consensus among "Europeans"), in favor for an arbitrary definition made by the Europe's "big boys" to chill a bit after WWI. Also I wouldn't call Turkey's current borders completely uncontroversial, a big part of eastern Turkey could as well be part again of a future resurrected Kurdistan. Would you then include the Kurdish parts also to Europe? So you'll end up anyways to draw borders around cultural or ethnical "regions". Thus to get back to my original point, given that we still subscribe to the line-drawing-game, I'd suggest to draw it before Turkey and call it a day.