Let’s ban the European Union, and the month of December too
Güncelleme Tarihi:
Oluşturulma Tarihi: Aralık 13, 2008 00:00
Sopot, POLAND-Some years ago, I began working on a plan to get rid of the month of December. I still have a bit of refining to do, but the basic outline I came up with was for 11 months of eight-day weeks. The goal here was to go straight from November into January. I suppose we would still have to contend with some kind of New Year’s event but my idea would have eliminated a large measure of other holiday nonsense. This plan also would have excised my birthday from the calendar.
Ultimately I abandoned the idea. Not, as you might imagine, because of the obvious problems of convincing the rest of the world to go along with my "ban December" scheme. No, the real reason was that the mid-life melancholy that prompted all this plotting passed of its own accord. January came and I decided to just accept the existence of December. But after a decade or so of doing just fine in the month of the winter solstice, I found myself returning to this plot a few days ago during a walk on what happens to be Europe’s longest wooden pier, extending out into the frigid Baltic from the tiny resort town of Sopot.
This was a new form of depression, but almost as deep as any I could remember. I concluded, looking back from the pier upon the "Grand Hotel" dating to the 1920s that was the venue for a meeting called the "Europe-Turkey Forum," that this project to get Turkey into the European Union is really an empty exercise. Why, I found myself demanding of the somber Baltic Sea, are we all wasting our time on the futility of a European Union about which our discussion grows dumber by the day?
Don’t get me wrong. I salute the intentions of the Turkish Asian Center for Strategic Studies, or TASAM. This is the Istanbul-based think tank that carried a plane full of former diplomats, journalists and academics to Poland to commune for two days with colleagues from a counterpart think tank called Instytut Wschodni.
I know the directors of TASAM and the organizers are earnestly seeking a way to rekindle the fires of Turkey’s half-century old quest to join the project of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman that grew from the ashes of World War II. These are aspirations that we here at the Daily News share as well; Turkey’s accession to the EU, we often say, is at the heart of our journalistic mission.
But on the second day, about 10 minutes into a professor’s afternoon rant on the lessons of the Central Treaty Organization, or CENTO (A NATO-knock off for the Middle East that died in 1958 but was buried in 1979), I decided to cut out for the famous pier. Two days of EU jargon had left me more depressed than that lonely Christmas a decade ago that sparked my short-lived campaign to ban December.
Let me share a few choice quotes I carved from my Friday notes:
"As the world moves from a uni-polar order to a multi-polar order, Turkey has a great contribution to make and she should make that contribution through the European Union."
"Not only that, but if we in the European Union want to be a global player, this can only be affirmed by the accession of Turkey. Turkey is a bridge to the future."
"Enough is enough. Turkey is not a bridge. Turkey is not a corridor. Turkey is not a buffer. These terms are offensive."
"It’s all about energy. There are not just three corridors. There are four corridors now. There may soon be a fifth. Some 72 percent of the world’s oil reserves and 73 percent of its gas reserves are within Turkey’s periphery."
"Russia doesn’t need Turkey to export its oil, there are already plans to bypass Ukraine to the north and then there’s the Barents Sea option."
"But you’ve got it backwards. It’s not that Russia has a monopoly on European energy supplies; it is Europe that has a monopoly on Russia energy markets."
"We need to focus on the Black Sea. We have the new Union for the Mediterranean. We need a Union for the Black Sea."
"But the Black Sea doesn’t exist."
"It doesn’t exist?"
"Not in the geo-strategic sense."
"That’s right. The Black Sea was settled by peoples who don’t face the sea."
"Well, we really have to choose between Atlantacism and European security. The European Union is a security liability for Turkey. Yes, there are problems in Turkey’s relationship with the European Union. It’s time for the EU to deproblemitize it."
"But Turkey is in a no man’s land between the two concepts of Pax Romano and terra incognito. It’s all unworkable."
"But at least Turkish immigrants are not as fundamentalist Muslims as those from the Maghreb."
"Maybe not after the coming economic crisis. There are all kinds of new social and economic problems coming."
"Actually, Europe would be better off with young Chinese immigrants. If I can state it crudely, at least they are not Muslim."
"Actually, Turkey has all the advantages of the European Union and none of the disadvantages. Turkey should just take advantage of the customs union."
"But the customs union is a disaster. It’s costing Turkey $10 billion a year in straight economic losses. Only the World Trade Organization can sort it out."
"But why isn’t anyone considering the South Caucauses Federation created in 1917. It never had a chance to work."
"How can we talk about expanding the European Union when even most of Europe is skeptical that the European Union is a good idea."
I think that last quote is the only one that makes any sense. Let’s scrap the whole endeavor. And while we are at it, let’s get rid of the month of December, too.
David Judson is the editor-in-chief of the Daily News
This was a new form of depression, but almost as deep as any I could remember. I concluded, looking back from the pier upon the "Grand Hotel" dating to the 1920s that was the venue for a meeting called the "Europe-Turkey Forum," that this project to get Turkey into the European Union is really an empty exercise. Why, I found myself demanding of the somber Baltic Sea, are we all wasting our time on the futility of a European Union about which our discussion grows dumber by the day?
Don’t get me wrong. I salute the intentions of the Turkish Asian Center for Strategic Studies, or TASAM. This is the Istanbul-based think tank that carried a plane full of former diplomats, journalists and academics to Poland to commune for two days with colleagues from a counterpart think tank called Instytut Wschodni.
I know the directors of TASAM and the organizers are earnestly seeking a way to rekindle the fires of Turkey’s half-century old quest to join the project of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman that grew from the ashes of World War II. These are aspirations that we here at the Daily News share as well; Turkey’s accession to the EU, we often say, is at the heart of our journalistic mission.
But on the second day, about 10 minutes into a professor’s afternoon rant on the lessons of the Central Treaty Organization, or CENTO (A NATO-knock off for the Middle East that died in 1958 but was buried in 1979), I decided to cut out for the famous pier. Two days of EU jargon had left me more depressed than that lonely Christmas a decade ago that sparked my short-lived campaign to ban December.
Let me share a few choice quotes I carved from my Friday notes:
"As the world moves from a uni-polar order to a multi-polar order, Turkey has a great contribution to make and she should make that contribution through the European Union."
"Not only that, but if we in the European Union want to be a global player, this can only be affirmed by the accession of Turkey. Turkey is a bridge to the future."
"Enough is enough. Turkey is not a bridge. Turkey is not a corridor. Turkey is not a buffer. These terms are offensive."
"It’s all about energy. There are not just three corridors. There are four corridors now. There may soon be a fifth. Some 72 percent of the world’s oil reserves and 73 percent of its gas reserves are within Turkey’s periphery."
"Russia doesn’t need Turkey to export its oil, there are already plans to bypass Ukraine to the north and then there’s the Barents Sea option."
"But you’ve got it backwards. It’s not that Russia has a monopoly on European energy supplies; it is Europe that has a monopoly on Russia energy markets."
"We need to focus on the Black Sea. We have the new Union for the Mediterranean. We need a Union for the Black Sea."
"But the Black Sea doesn’t exist."
"It doesn’t exist?"
"Not in the geo-strategic sense."
"That’s right. The Black Sea was settled by peoples who don’t face the sea."
"Well, we really have to choose between Atlantacism and European security. The European Union is a security liability for Turkey. Yes, there are problems in Turkey’s relationship with the European Union. It’s time for the EU to deproblemitize it."
"But Turkey is in a no man’s land between the two concepts of Pax Romano and terra incognito. It’s all unworkable."
"But at least Turkish immigrants are not as fundamentalist Muslims as those from the Maghreb."
"Maybe not after the coming economic crisis. There are all kinds of new social and economic problems coming."
"Actually, Europe would be better off with young Chinese immigrants. If I can state it crudely, at least they are not Muslim."
"Actually, Turkey has all the advantages of the European Union and none of the disadvantages. Turkey should just take advantage of the customs union."
"But the customs union is a disaster. It’s costing Turkey $10 billion a year in straight economic losses. Only the World Trade Organization can sort it out."
"But why isn’t anyone considering the South Caucauses Federation created in 1917. It never had a chance to work."
"How can we talk about expanding the European Union when even most of Europe is skeptical that the European Union is a good idea."
I think that last quote is the only one that makes any sense. Let’s scrap the whole endeavor. And while we are at it, let’s get rid of the month of December, too.
David Judson is the editor-in-chief of the Daily News