I can understand that as I have studied the 'difficulties' in Turkey that you hint at as part of my research in the future of European integration. Those "problems" I believe worry those within the European Union, and outside it. I hope all is resolved one day Cem 
Nice to hear those words from you Lizzie
here , there are some factors about the situation that must be noted.. Turkey is a big country and have a high population (80 million nearly) .. and our population increase rate is nearly the double of avg european country..if we are added to EU, the power equations and EU parliament will change .. and many other things..neither the european heads and nor some Turkish heads(including me) are not ready for that imo..apart from the burocratic problems and any other things , we have a bigger problem here that we have to solve between us(my citizens).(I wont go in details for the time being but you can guess)
Aah, cem has touched on a very interesting point there Lizzie.
You have probably guessed that I am no fan of the Europe that is envisaged by those presently in Brussels, I do see however the advantage in having an association of friendly cooperating nations trading within the European region.
Cem's point regarding the particular circumstances within his own country lends me to ask, can we ever hope to have a truly united Europe given that we are a group of culturally diverse sovereign nations each having their own view on what ranks to be important in the way forward for their own nation?
Is it possible for the individual elements (each with its own history, language and cultural idea) l to coalesce sufficiently to have the common economic machinery, system of justice, domestic and foreign policy and security apparatus?
In my view that's a big ask and one reason why there seems to be tension developing within some nations of the group - considering the proposals for future harmonisation presently being made by 'Brussels'
I remain very uneasy about this whole experiment as it seems to fly in the face of the idea that individualism and freedom of choice should be paramount to the governments and peoples within the sovereign nations of the present arrangement.
This is NEVER an easy question to answer ZL. I am definately split myself on what form Europe should take. I believe, like you that it should be a strong, trading, and economic unit that keeps the very varied cultral nations together, talking, understanding, and mutually helping each other. Like you ZL I agree that the very nature of all the European countries means we are cultural diverse, which to me is a great strength. I wish that one day it will be even more diverse, with Turkey joining the club!
However, to form one Federal State, where we are all the same is so much air brained thinking. That will never (and I use that word with complete confidence) work! No, we must stay together as partners in a European consortium, but retaining our individual identities, whilst ridding Brussels of the waste and fraud that is costing all European nations dear!
Churchill never envisaged a Federal Europe, just a strong political and trading unit. He was right, as he was right in so much of his thinking. Why did he think along those lines during the end of the 1939-45 war, and why a generation earlier had the American President Woodrow Wilson sought the unification of the European powers in 1919? In both cases for the reason for keeping the European nations, with a terrible track record, at peace and talking to each other rather than committing to disastrous wars, then talking afterwards!!
That is precisely the reason why I want a united Europe, talking, trading, and deciding matters together. Never again do we, and can we, allow war to arise in Europe, or elsewhere. In the words of Churchill, we must jaw, jaw, rather than war, war!
Author
Topic: First Tunisia, now Egypt. Where next? (Read 8539 times)