Comments on: The Eastern Question: Part I http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/ Speak Victorian, Think Pagan Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:21:29 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » The Eastern Question: Part III http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-5505 ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » The Eastern Question: Part III Tue, 03 May 2005 23:35:17 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-5505 [...] t Post: Previous Post: « Happy B-day Nicky! Related Th [...] [...] t Post: Previous Post: « Happy B-day Nicky! Related Th [...]

]]> By: ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Apropos NATO http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-4204 ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Apropos NATO Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:58:02 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-4204 [...] Apropos NATO With regard to the discussion on NATO here ,Le Monde (via WatchingAmerica) has an interesting ar [...] [...] Apropos NATO With regard to the discussion on NATO here ,Le Monde (via WatchingAmerica) has an interesting ar [...]

]]> By: Chirol http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-4179 Chirol Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:26:48 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-4179 As I said, I wasn't discussing the future of NATO. I don't disagree with your comments either. My point was that the gesture itself and results of membership are what's important. As I said, I wasn’t discussing the future of NATO. I don’t disagree with your comments either. My point was that the gesture itself and results of membership are what’s important.

]]> By: Curzon http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-4178 Curzon Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:22:46 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-4178 <em>"Â? Pan-Turanism"Â? is established that makes Turkey a synthesizing transmission belt of European and Western ideas to their cousins further East.</em> A truly awesome prospect indeed. I don't see any future for Islamists in Turkey. There's no history of it, no culture to strictly following religion like that (actually, in the whole Turkic world). The incumbent AK Party is labeled Islamist which is a total crock -- rather, they're pro-EU, anti-corruption, and about as Islamist as Al Gore is fundamentalist Christian. But I take issue with Chirol here: <em>As for NATO, I don't see the actual purpose being as important here as the membership... the real importance is that these countries are brough into the western orbit.</em> Fine, but NATO will either die from 1.) mission creep or 2.) meaningless expansion whereas it becomes so bloated it ceases to work. “Â? Pan-Turanism”Â? is established that makes Turkey a synthesizing transmission belt of European and Western ideas to their cousins further East.

A truly awesome prospect indeed.

I don’t see any future for Islamists in Turkey. There’s no history of it, no culture to strictly following religion like that (actually, in the whole Turkic world). The incumbent AK Party is labeled Islamist which is a total crock — rather, they’re pro-EU, anti-corruption, and about as Islamist as Al Gore is fundamentalist Christian.

But I take issue with Chirol here: As for NATO, I don’t see the actual purpose being as important here as the membership… the real importance is that these countries are brough into the western orbit.

Fine, but NATO will either die from 1.) mission creep or 2.) meaningless expansion whereas it becomes so bloated it ceases to work.

]]> By: Chirol http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-4177 Chirol Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:15:59 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-4177 I don't think Turkey should have a problem maintaining its secular identity. In fact, secularism is the cornerstone of the Turkish Republic and you'd be hardpressed to find a Turk who wants to do away with it. Turks take pride in their secular republic and see it as one of the biggest factors that separates them from the Arabs who they see as backwards and old fashioned. If you look back at Turkish history to the coups that have taken place, they have never been coups in the classic sense, but the military stepping in to protect Atatürks legacy and maintain the separation of church and state. As for NATO, I don't see the actual purpose being as important here as the membership. Everyone, including NATO members, agree that the current organization is a far cry from the early days and that it lacks a clear objective. However, the real importance is that these countries are brough into the western orbit. It will not only increase military cooperation, but connectivity in general. It will boost their international standing and force them to play with the adults. That has the added benefit of increased regional stability and conflict prevention. Plus, membership sends the message that we aren't excluding them, that we are ready and willing to extend membership to countries not traditionally counted among our ranks. What NATO actually does is another question entirely. I don’t think Turkey should have a problem maintaining its secular identity. In fact, secularism is the cornerstone of the Turkish Republic and you’d be hardpressed to find a Turk who wants to do away with it. Turks take pride in their secular republic and see it as one of the biggest factors that separates them from the Arabs who they see as backwards and old fashioned.

If you look back at Turkish history to the coups that have taken place, they have never been coups in the classic sense, but the military stepping in to protect Atatürks legacy and maintain the separation of church and state.

As for NATO, I don’t see the actual purpose being as important here as the membership. Everyone, including NATO members, agree that the current organization is a far cry from the early days and that it lacks a clear objective. However, the real importance is that these countries are brough into the western orbit. It will not only increase military cooperation, but connectivity in general. It will boost their international standing and force them to play with the adults. That has the added benefit of increased regional stability and conflict prevention. Plus, membership sends the message that we aren’t excluding them, that we are ready and willing to extend membership to countries not traditionally counted among our ranks. What NATO actually does is another question entirely.

]]> By: mark safranski http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-4174 mark safranski Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:57:46 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-4174 An interesting set of questions will be if Turkey can maintain its adherence to secularism or will grow more Islamist. Secondly if Turkish involvement will lead to a revival of " *Pan-Turkism*" and investment in the Turkish identity among the Turks or if a " *Pan-Turanism*" is established that makes Turkey a synthesizing transmission belt of European and Western ideas to their cousins further East. In re: to Sir Iggy but what is NATO ? It is no longer what it once was and few leaders are willing to have a debate over what it actually is or could be ? A NATO that includes, say, Turkmenistan, is not what Truman and Acheson had envisioned. Not to say it would be all bad but we are talking about something closer to perhaps the UN than NATO of old. An interesting set of questions will be if Turkey can maintain its adherence to secularism or will grow more Islamist. Secondly if Turkish involvement will lead to a revival of ” Pan-Turkism” and investment in the Turkish identity among the Turks or if a ” Pan-Turanism” is established that makes Turkey a synthesizing transmission belt of European and Western ideas to their cousins further East.

In re: to Sir Iggy but what is NATO ? It is no longer what it once was and few leaders are willing to have a debate over what it actually is or could be ? A NATO that includes, say, Turkmenistan, is not what Truman and Acheson had envisioned. Not to say it would be all bad but we are talking about something closer to perhaps the UN than NATO of old.

]]> By: Sir Ignatius Valentine Chirol http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-4159 Sir Ignatius Valentine Chirol Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:43:17 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-4159 Yes, it's amazing how quickly these things can change. Turkey and now suddenly, the Ukraine is a likely candidate. I'll be covering this as well as NATO expansion in Part II. Yes, it’s amazing how quickly these things can change. Turkey and now suddenly, the Ukraine is a likely candidate. I’ll be covering this as well as NATO expansion in Part II.

]]> By: Curzon http://cominganarchy.com/2005/04/22/the-eastern-question-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-4156 Curzon Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:55:44 +0000 http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2005/04/19/the-eastern-question-part-i/#comment-4156 Zbigniew Brzezinski talked about this -- how far can the EU go? Optimists today suggest Turkey, but why not the Caucasus? Ukraine, long seen as a pipe dream, may be signing up for permanent membership in the next few years. Even Kazakhstan has EU ambitions I hear (impossible as they may be, but ambitions nonetheless). Zbigniew Brzezinski talked about this — how far can the EU go? Optimists today suggest Turkey, but why not the Caucasus? Ukraine, long seen as a pipe dream, may be signing up for permanent membership in the next few years. Even Kazakhstan has EU ambitions I hear (impossible as they may be, but ambitions nonetheless).

]]>