Europe-Turkey : a matter of coherence (4)

Discussions about European identity and the accession of Turkey to the EU are frequently based on selected traits of historical and/or ideological developments. And so it is with respect to the precarious self-definition of Turkey as a nation-state, too. But both may be based on material grounds as well, which in turn may shift the arrangement of ideas about the meaning of specific historical events.
Hans-Peter Geissen offers to TE’s readers a very specific reflection on the course of the Europe-Turkey relationship throughout centuries.
In order to better understand the fate of the Ottoman Empire in a European context, and to draw some conclusions about useful steps in the near future, he draws a sketch of European history ; very coarse for the deeper past and denser for recent history.

 Hans-Peter Geissen lives in Koblenz (Germany), at the confluence of the Rhine and Moselle rivers.
Interested in all what concerns faunistics (data about animal species) of the Midrhine region, he is the author of many scientific publications on these issues. He bent on the Turkish issue with a very specific approach so as « to prevent a self-definition of Europe on the grounds of historical or religious mythologies. »

[...]

Meanwhile, we may look on the developments in other parts of Europe. The blending (!!) of nationalism and imperialism led to two World Wars with incredible losses in every respect. The spark on the gunpowder-keg was stroke in Serbia and Bosnia again, but the keg was build of imperial rivalries and filled with nationalisms. Then, communist dogmatism and imperialism was to follow. On the other hand we have seen that democracy is dependent on nation states, too, if however not necessarily on ethnicity (remember Switzerland). Third, we have seen that the destruction of empires also caused heavy losses by itself. The fate of post-Ottoman economies is quite instructive. Fourth, communism was caused by social problems, but wasn’t able to resolve them (irrespective some limited success) and instead caused further human losses.

So the invention of the European Communities was quite brilliant : to make a community of nation states, formerly the heartlands of competing empires, and build a common market like the ones that formerly existed inside the respective empires only. To minimize economic and social problems, and avoid communist rule, by cooperations. The idea proved to be attractive. States that had for quite some period lived in some isolation, like Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Austria joined, as well as three of the Nordic countries (the remaining two, like Switzerland, became largely integrated without being full members). Then, formerly communist countries followed.

EU and old empires

We may look to former Habsburgian empire of Austria-Hungary in Central Europe : Austria, Hungary, Czechya, Slovakia, and Slovenia are already members of the European Union. A few regions of the Austrian-Habsburg empire now belong to Italy and Poland, also in the Union. This is by far the major part of the former empire. And Romania and Croatia are scheduled to follow soon. There we have quite some overlap with the former Ottoman Empire.

Now we may look to the former Ottoman (and « Byzantine ») heartlands. Istanbul is still the center, geographically and economically. The straits are still of prime importance for European security and trade. As pipelines, rails, and highways replace the caravans, also Anatolian harbours increase in significance again. On the other hand, economic prospects largely depend on hinterlands that are already in the EU or are scheduled to be, on transit functions and tourism and the common European market. Intensive cooperation in economic and security issues, traffic and environment, is a must. Finally meaning the reunification of the Ottoman heartlands in their European context, just like the old Habsburgian and Baltic regions, or the Adriatic. It includes at least Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia (the links between southeastern, eastern, and central Europe), and may include Armenia and Azerbaijan as well.

However, a hypothetical Cypriote state has joined the EU, but is governed against its own constitution and poisoning the EU with a fierce ethnic nationalism. We see Greek nationalism at work in the ridiculous official name of Macedonia (which I refuse to write down or speak out) as well as harassment of the Turkish minority in Western Thrace. We still see a disturbing antiislamism (and antijudaism) in much of Europe, with quite recent events in Bosnia and Kosovo. At the same time we have painfully one-sided, and indeed shameful campaigns about so-called genocides. But there is also the Turkish policy of eradicating Kurdishness, attempts to reeducate Alevi youth into Sunnis, and harassment of Christian minorities.

A larger historical view

These and other effects, like widespread neglect and destruction of Ottoman architectural monuments, are results of « deep history », of historical propagandas, religion policies (rather than religion as such), and nationalisms. Common work is needed on those historical stresses, both in historical investigations and inter-religious and inter-ethnic cultural exchange.

In that context it must be clear that the history of these lands can in no way be written without the various Ottoman archives, chronicles, and local Kadi registers, nor without the rich archaeological record, nor without the Greek-language sources, like those of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Nor without the West-European or Russian sources. Even investigation of folklore may be important, as is the case in other parts of Europe and the world at large, and the geographical and ecological setting.

Modern economic, social, cultural, and administrative structures have developed through different systems, in Greece and Turkey, perhaps, somewhat more than in formerly communist states of the Balkans and Black Sea region. But much remains to be done in either case.

But now, too, the long-term ideological problem of Europe (since some 17 centuries) is on test again, namely wether different creeds and world-views, including Islamic sects, can live together as equals. The test subjects are both Turkey and the EU. So far, the test results haven’t really been favorable for any of the two. Still there is hope. But this is a field where the future of Europe in a « global » world will be determined (and that of Turkey anyway). Thus, what is needed is not hope, but determination to succeed.

The end