The Reflection Cafe October-November-December 2006

Most Favorite Posts in 2006, The Reflection Cafe
The EU and Turkey: Call For A Virtuous Circle of Credible Commitment, Olli Rehn
AHR Forum: Historical Perspectives on Anti-Americanism, American Historial Review
When Islam and Democracy Meet: Muslims in Europe and in the United States, Jocelyne Cesari
Humanistic Texts
Economy, Politics and Culture in the Global World (IV), The Reflection Cafe
The Idea of Human Rights as Perceived in the Ottoman Empire, Berdal Aral
War is Too Important to Be Left to Ideological Amateurs, Robert Gilpin
Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century, Sheri Berman
.

Most Favorite Posts in 2006

1. Historical Sounds in Mp3 Format
2. America at the Crossroads
3. Alchemy of Love
4. Some Sociologists and Their Ideas
5. Women and Sufism
6. The Diffusion of Islam: Its Influence on Our Culture
7. Neoliberalism, Globalization and Ethnic Hatred
8. Pearls of Wisdom III
9. Being Modern in the Middle East
10. Ottoman Orientalism

11. Attitudes Toward Muslims and Islam the United States
12. Middle East, Central Asia, Balkans, Russia II
13. Rose Garden of Love
14. Miscellaneous Conversations II
15. Islam and Peace: A Sufi Perspective
16. Pearls of Wisdom IV
17. When Religion Brings Peace Not War
18. Islam and the West: How Great a Divide?
19. Islam, Islam-the West Relations II
20. Social Watch Report 2005: Roars and Whispers

21. Some Ideas on Turkey's Bid for the EU Membership II
22. Why Hasn't the World's Lone Superpower Stopped Tragedy in Lebanon?
23. All Through Eternity
24. An Emerging Consensus About World History
25. Humanistic Texts
26. Internet Classics Archive
27. Rethinking the World: Great Power Strategies and International Order
28. Some Ideas on Turkey's Bid for the EU Membership I
29. Secularism: The Turkish Experience
30. The Idea of Human Rights as Perceived in the Ottoman Empire
.

Most Favorite Posts in 2007

.

The EU and Turkey: Call For A Virtuous Circle of Credible Commitment

Olli Rehn, The European Commission (Responsible for Enlargement)

Lecture at Helsinki University (Nov 27, 2006)

"Turkey's accession process to the EU"

.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am glad to address such a key contemporary challenge as Turkey’s EU accession process here at my alma mater, the University of Helsinki. To say that you have chosen the right date to discuss topical current affairs of EU-Turkey relations might qualify as the understatement of the week.

The seminar series on Turkey and Europe, organised jointly by the European Studies Centre of the University of Helsinki and the Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is an excellent initiative to tackle this formidable endeavour on the intellectual front. We need more of these.

Some years ago, Turkey rushed into the public debate in Europe when the EU began considering whether to begin accession negotiations with Turkey or not. The effect on public perception was similar to the landing of a giant flying saucer from outer space. Many commentators reacted as if Turkey was an alien completely unknown to Europe.

Yet in fact the EU’s relations with Turkey are almost as old as the creation of the European Community itself. As early as 1959, the EU began negotiations with Turkey on an Association Agreement, which became the first ever contractual arrangement with a third country, signed in November 1963 in Ankara – and hence called the "Ankara Agreement". The preamble and article 28 of this agreement clearly mention the prospect of Turkey eventually becoming a member of the European Community.

Since 1963, our relations have steadily developed, through more than 30 legal acts and agreements to further strengthen our bilateral links, most of them under the Ankara Agreement. Among the most significant is the establishment of the Customs Union in 1995, which has facilitated a fivefold increase in our bilateral trade.

In 1999, the EU Heads of State and governments decided here in Helsinki, under the Finnish Presidency, to grant Turkey the status of a candidate country – I quote – "destined to join the Union on the basis of the same criteria as applied to the other candidate States".

Finally, on 3 October 2005, the EU and Turkey agreed on the terms of the accession negotiations, which started officially the very same day. We also agreed that the objective of this process is accession.

To cut a long story short, Turkey has been part of the history of European integration for the past half century. Since 1949, Turkey has been a member of the Council of Europe, the first pan-European organisation created after World War II and the watchdog of democracy and human rights on our continent. Moreover, Turkey has actively defended Europe’s South-Eastern flank as a NATO member since 1952. Having a direct border with the Soviet Union, Turkey was the only European NATO ally that stood face-to-face with the Red Army and the Soviet Black Sea fleet.

I could add several other examples of recent and past history demonstrating the European orientation and the engagement of this country with the Union. Against such background, the endless controversies on the precise geographical location of Turkey, and whether the Bosphorus should be seen as a border of Europe, are frankly of little weight. There is no doubt that Turkey is part of Europe and has been part of our European political project from the beginning.

I am concerned, however, about the gap between overall public perception of this relationship and political decision-making about it. But this gap is not only a matter of “enlargement fatigue” or “the enlargement blues”. The debate about Turkey is also part of Europe having the blues about globalisation, the welfare state and unemployment. In other words, it stems rather from the global crisis of governance in our developed societies. I trust the distinguished researchers of the Helsinki University will actively study this matter, and I look forward to the findings of their research. But meanwhile, I will keep underlining Turkey's role and significance, which is a long-standing reality in Europe.

...
However, if those who have agreed on this principle continuously question Turkey's vocation to join the European Union, it also calls into question the credibility of our own commitments. That in turn seriously undermines the conditions and criteria for accession which the very same European Union defined unanimously, and thus damages the motivation for reforms in Turkey.

It creates a vicious circle of reversed commitment, weakened conditionality and stalled reforms. By keeping our word and sticking to the accession perspective, we can create a virtuous circle of credible commitment, rigorous conditionality and reinforced reforms. That means a more Europe-oriented Turkey. We must, at every stage, remain both firm and fair – not just firm.

The accession process with Turkey is a long-standing project, where the journey – Turkey's reform efforts – is as important as the final destination. It will have difficult moments, and call for difficult decisions. I trust that neither Turkey nor the European Union will lose sight of the key strategic value of the whole project; that is, peace, security, democracy and prosperity in Europe, from Helsinki to Lisbon, from Lisbon to Istanbul, and beyond.

Thank you for your attention.

.

Full-text of the speech avalable, click here.

.

AHR Forum: Historical Perspectives on Anti-Americanism

The American Historical Review

October 2006, Vol: 111, No: 4

.

Introduction
It is clear from many different sources that anti-Americanism around the world is at an all-time high. It is also clear, as the essays in this AHR Forum demonstrate, that anti-Americanism is hardly new. Nor is it simple. It is our hope that placing this phenomenon in a historical perspective might help us better understand its contemporary manifestations.
.

Academic historians are usually careful to qualify claims about the relevance of history with warnings about the fundamental remoteness of the past and the irreducible specificity of historical experiences. Their warnings are well-placed, for the call to make history relevant has often led to the misuse of the past and its exploitation for dubious ends. But in a sense, every historian who reads the morning paper "makes history relevant," insofar as he or she cannot resist wondering about the historical antecedents or analogies of the day's events. And when it comes to everyday assertions about the supposed intractability, changelessness, or utter novelty of contemporary affairs, the historian can provide a crucial public service by reminding us how wrong and misleading, in the light of history, these assertions are.
.
That is indeed the purpose of this AHR Forum. The three articles and comment show that anti-Americanism has a long and complex history, which belies any attempt to frame it as monolithic, ideologically determined in one direction, or historically constant. "Your Americanism and Mine: Americanism and Anti-Americanism in the Americas," by Greg Grandin, reminds us, as do the other contributions, that foreign perceptions of the United States were hardly of a piece. Grandin offers a complex analysis of both contrasting Latin American attitudes to the U.S. and the different faces America presented to its neighbors in the South. Jessica C. E. Gienow-Hecht's contribution, "Always Blame the Americans: Anti-Americanism in Europe in the Twentieth Century," adds to this complex, nuanced view of the sentiment, laying particular stress on the difference between cultural and political anti-Americanism. In "America in Asian Eyes," Warren I. Cohen and Nancy Bernkopf Tucker, focusing mostly on East Asia, demonstrate, among other things, the large role played by U.S. racial and colonial policies in fashioning Asian perceptions. Finally, in his comment, "Anti-Americanism: It's the Policies," Juan Cole offers both a critique of these three articles and his own view of the phenomenon from the vantage point of a Middle Eastern specialist. Together these articles add an element of historicity to a contemporary issue and contribute to a transnational understanding of American history as well.

.

Your Americanism and Mine: Americanism and Anti-Americanism in the Americas
Greg Grandin, New York University

Always Blame the Americans: Anti-Americanism in Europe in the Twentieth Century
Jessica C. E. Gienow-Hecht, Universität Frankfurt am Main

America in Asian Eyes
Warren I. Cohen, The University of Maryland

Nancy Bernkopf Tucker, Georgetown University

Anti-Americanism: It's the Policies
Juan Cole, The University of Michigan-Ann Arbor

.