Top Priority for Turkey and Europe: Clarify Identity and Limit Confusion! By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis A serendipitous positive side effect of the negotiations between Turkey and the European Union that have already started is that the dynamics of the negotiations and the ensuing debates will necessarily focus on a most neglected issue and aspect of the European unification: the European Identity. On the other hand, Turkey will have to work a lot, at the cultural level too! Of course, things cannot happen anymore unidimensionally; if Turkey must undergo a Cultural Revolution, as the French President suggested yesterday, Europe must submit itself to a similar procedure and experience. A lot is missing on both sides. Three statesmen – three different opinions: a typical European case! British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said that "Turkish membership would demonstrate that Western and Islamic cultures can thrive together as partners in the modern world". French President Jacques Chirac reminded that "adhesion to the European Union imposed every effort needed so that Turkey accepts 'the totality' of the European values. It is a formidable effort, a major cultural revolution". Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi underlined that "Turkey has become a secular state, having acquired a laic constitution", and considered that "we should not miss the opportunity to establish a bridge between the Occident and the Muslim World"; he added that "if we reject love, it can be transformed into hatred". We could not collect more contradictory and divergent opinions from Turkey, and yet all these statements have been made by ostensible supporters of Turkey's adhesion; it is probable that there are many types of 'Turcophiles'… Jack Straw Commenting briefly these speeches, we should point out that J. Straw's words could fit perfectly well to the mouth of a regular Turcophobe, like Angela Merkel and N. Sarkozy. Two different 'cultures' (Western and Islamic) would impose a special 'partner'ship, as it was demanded so passionately by the Austrian premier and foreign minister! Furthermore, one should wonder why Turkey is so easily taken as a paradigm of the Islamic world, since in many aspects it represents a society at an advanced level of Westernization! One should also wonder what the British Foreign Secretary would answer to large masses from Egypt to Yemen and from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan that hate Turkey and Kemal Ataturk for his successful westernization project, depicting him as an (Islamic) Anti-Christ (in their erroneous and perverse mind)? Jacques Chirac But the embattled at home French President, a supposed Turcophile', probably does not believe that two cultures "can thrive together as partners", and demands Turkey to deploy all sorts of effort in order to finally accept the 'totality' of the European values; speaking thus, he does not even remain at the level of culture, but refers to 'values', i.e. the constituent elements of a culture! And, in an unprecedented _expression of colonial, cultural hegemonism and absolutism, he dares ask Turkey to eradicate all elements of its own culture, undergo (what a precision!) 'a major cultural revolution', and then be reduced to a pathetic, mimetic figure good for the wall decoration of the Brussels bureaus! There is a very critical error or misperception, totally irrelevant of the Turkish issue. What are the European values? Are they all homogeneous and standardized? To what extent does a Greek Orthodox monk at Athos Mountains share the same values with the homosexual couples – followers of the Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero? To what extent do a Catholic Polish priest and a French atheist and communist represent the common background of similar – in their 'totality' – values? And why Turkey is asked to accept something ('the totality of the European values') that Greece has not, after 25 years of European membership, remaining a religious state with a constitution that starts with the words 'In the name of the Holy, Consubstantial and Indivisible Trinity'? Silvio Berlusconi The Italian Premier Minister looked for a while concerned with the past and the History of Modern Turkey, although he seemed very confused in his assertions. 'Turkey has become a secular state' can be said comfortably in the late 1920s and the early 30s, not in the year 2005. After all, Turkey has not become 'a secular state', but it was incepted as such! In 1922 – 23! And why say that Turkey 'acquired' a 'laic' constitution, without specifying that this was already the first Turkish constitution going back to 1920s as well? Then, the Italian Prime Minister envisages, not an assimilation of Turkey (in the way of J. Chirac), neither a partnership between the two cultures (Western and Islamic) as J. Straw does, but the establishment of a bridge between the two worlds, a third potentiality! These few points illustrate perfectly well what terrible confusion reigns in the heads of the foremost European statesmen, who are tasked with top decision making with regard to Turkey's adhesion to the European Union.