Thursday, February 05, 2004
Why I Hate Web Logs
I just found an essay on the web detailing the general mundanity and crapness of most personal web-logs, probably including my own. It's a damn good read and something anyone with a web log should read. The link is to the right in my links list - Why i hate web logs.
I just found an essay on the web detailing the general mundanity and crapness of most personal web-logs, probably including my own. It's a damn good read and something anyone with a web log should read. The link is to the right in my links list - Why i hate web logs.
Israel to disengage?
Ariel Sharon, Primeminister of Israel, has announced that it his intention that Israel will pursue a policy of disengagement from the palestinians. The first step of this policy is the closure of Israeli settlements in Gaza. This has shocked critics and followers alike. He is now being accused of treachery by former supporters from the hard-line wing of Israeli politics.
Sharon is hoping that the removal of settlements to behind the new security fence will provide the security Israeli's hope for. It is a bold move and a big gamble with his political life.
I think this may well be a wise strategy in the long run and could smooth the way for a two-state peace sttlement between Isreal and the palestinians and should be supported by the international community.
Ariel Sharon, Primeminister of Israel, has announced that it his intention that Israel will pursue a policy of disengagement from the palestinians. The first step of this policy is the closure of Israeli settlements in Gaza. This has shocked critics and followers alike. He is now being accused of treachery by former supporters from the hard-line wing of Israeli politics.
Sharon is hoping that the removal of settlements to behind the new security fence will provide the security Israeli's hope for. It is a bold move and a big gamble with his political life.
I think this may well be a wise strategy in the long run and could smooth the way for a two-state peace sttlement between Isreal and the palestinians and should be supported by the international community.
Wednesday, February 04, 2004
Iran government close to resolving vote row
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's pro-reform government says it is close to resolving a bitter row with hardliners over parliamentary elections that has plunged the Islamic Republic into its worst political crisis for years.
But it is still not clear whether the last-ditch attempt to resolve the dispute over the February 20 vote will be enough to satisfy reformists who have threatened to boycott the election.
Reformist allies of President Mohammad Khatami are outraged by the hardline Guardian Council watchdog's decision to declare more than 2,000 candidates unfit to run in the election.
Government spokesman Abdollah Ramazanzadeh said an apparent deal to reinstate some of the barred candidates had emerged following crisis talks hosted by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has final say in all matters in the Islamic state.
"We hope that by tomorrow afternoon we can reach acceptable results which could prepare the ground for the government to be able to hold the election," Ramazanzadeh told reporters after a cabinet meeting.
He said Khamenei has intervened in the crisis, calling on officials to ensure a high turnout in the election. Reformists have said the mass disqualification of candidates would dissuade an already politically-disillusioned public from voting.
"We hope the leader's views will be implemented," he said.
The vast majority of candidates disqualified by the Guardian Council -- an unelected oversight body dominated by religious hardliners -- were reformist allies of Khatami who hold a majority in the current 290-seat parliament.
Those barred included more than 80 current legislators.
REFORMISTS MAY SOFTEN STANCE
Reformist parliamentarians said they did not know how many candidates bans would be lifted or whether those reinstated would include prominent reformists such as deputy parliament speaker Mohammad Reza Khatami, brother of the president.
Iran's largest reformist party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front, has said it will boycott a February 20 vote even if all barred candidates are reinstated. It argues the dispute has left it with no time to organise a proper campaign.
But leading IIPF member Ali Shakourirad hinted the party may soften its stance.
"If there are positive developments we will review our decisions for the future," he told Reuters. "I believe there is a lot of hope but we should wait and see what practical steps are taken," he added.
Reformists had called for the election to be postponed, but Khamenei made it clear a delay was unacceptable, officials said.
"The leader has said the elections should be held on February 20," Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh told reporters.
Khatami was due to meet later on Wednesday with reformist lawmakers, more than 120 of whom resigned from parliament in protest on Sunday, to discuss the latest developments.
Reformists say the mass disqualifications were a crude attempt by hardliners to regain control of parliament which they lost to reformists in 2000 elections.
Unelected hardliners control powerful institutions such as the military, judiciary and Guardian Council, which they have used to block reformist legislation, jail dozens of reformist activists and close down scores of liberal newspapers.
Public interest in the election row has been muted with most Iranians disillusioned with the reformist-conservative power struggle and the lack of progress on economic and social reforms.
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's pro-reform government says it is close to resolving a bitter row with hardliners over parliamentary elections that has plunged the Islamic Republic into its worst political crisis for years.
But it is still not clear whether the last-ditch attempt to resolve the dispute over the February 20 vote will be enough to satisfy reformists who have threatened to boycott the election.
Reformist allies of President Mohammad Khatami are outraged by the hardline Guardian Council watchdog's decision to declare more than 2,000 candidates unfit to run in the election.
Government spokesman Abdollah Ramazanzadeh said an apparent deal to reinstate some of the barred candidates had emerged following crisis talks hosted by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has final say in all matters in the Islamic state.
"We hope that by tomorrow afternoon we can reach acceptable results which could prepare the ground for the government to be able to hold the election," Ramazanzadeh told reporters after a cabinet meeting.
He said Khamenei has intervened in the crisis, calling on officials to ensure a high turnout in the election. Reformists have said the mass disqualification of candidates would dissuade an already politically-disillusioned public from voting.
"We hope the leader's views will be implemented," he said.
The vast majority of candidates disqualified by the Guardian Council -- an unelected oversight body dominated by religious hardliners -- were reformist allies of Khatami who hold a majority in the current 290-seat parliament.
Those barred included more than 80 current legislators.
REFORMISTS MAY SOFTEN STANCE
Reformist parliamentarians said they did not know how many candidates bans would be lifted or whether those reinstated would include prominent reformists such as deputy parliament speaker Mohammad Reza Khatami, brother of the president.
Iran's largest reformist party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front, has said it will boycott a February 20 vote even if all barred candidates are reinstated. It argues the dispute has left it with no time to organise a proper campaign.
But leading IIPF member Ali Shakourirad hinted the party may soften its stance.
"If there are positive developments we will review our decisions for the future," he told Reuters. "I believe there is a lot of hope but we should wait and see what practical steps are taken," he added.
Reformists had called for the election to be postponed, but Khamenei made it clear a delay was unacceptable, officials said.
"The leader has said the elections should be held on February 20," Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh told reporters.
Khatami was due to meet later on Wednesday with reformist lawmakers, more than 120 of whom resigned from parliament in protest on Sunday, to discuss the latest developments.
Reformists say the mass disqualifications were a crude attempt by hardliners to regain control of parliament which they lost to reformists in 2000 elections.
Unelected hardliners control powerful institutions such as the military, judiciary and Guardian Council, which they have used to block reformist legislation, jail dozens of reformist activists and close down scores of liberal newspapers.
Public interest in the election row has been muted with most Iranians disillusioned with the reformist-conservative power struggle and the lack of progress on economic and social reforms.
Thursday, January 29, 2004
Lies or Incompetence?
The Hutton Report has cleared Tony Blair's government of any wrong doing in the events surrounding the death of the scientist David Kelly. The BBC instead received harsh criticism for its journalism and internal governance for allegations made by one of its reporters which claimed that the government had 'sexed up' the dossier which set out the British case for war in Iraq. Hutton says the allegations that the govt sexed up the dossier were unfounded.
Here's the problem, if the govt did not deliberatly sex up the dossier, which said that Iraq had WMD and they could be used within 45 minutes, then they and the intelligence services must be totally incompetent! So what's it to be - Lies or incompetence.
This news also comes within the same week that in the US David Kay who headed up the US effort to uncover Saddam's WMD stated that they never existed and that the intelligence services made grave errors and that "we got it wrong".
Some basis for going to war. We may have got rid of a murdering dictator but why could our govt's not level with us as to what were the real reasons for going to war.? Because an agenda to get rid of one rogue murdering dictator would be a massive commitment to get rid of all of them and not even Bush and Blair have got the guts for that.
The Hutton Report has cleared Tony Blair's government of any wrong doing in the events surrounding the death of the scientist David Kelly. The BBC instead received harsh criticism for its journalism and internal governance for allegations made by one of its reporters which claimed that the government had 'sexed up' the dossier which set out the British case for war in Iraq. Hutton says the allegations that the govt sexed up the dossier were unfounded.
Here's the problem, if the govt did not deliberatly sex up the dossier, which said that Iraq had WMD and they could be used within 45 minutes, then they and the intelligence services must be totally incompetent! So what's it to be - Lies or incompetence.
This news also comes within the same week that in the US David Kay who headed up the US effort to uncover Saddam's WMD stated that they never existed and that the intelligence services made grave errors and that "we got it wrong".
Some basis for going to war. We may have got rid of a murdering dictator but why could our govt's not level with us as to what were the real reasons for going to war.? Because an agenda to get rid of one rogue murdering dictator would be a massive commitment to get rid of all of them and not even Bush and Blair have got the guts for that.
Wednesday, January 21, 2004
Funky monkey
The Chinese new year and its logical lunacy
The Year of the Monkey begins at midnight tonight in China, ushering in a period of rapid financial growth, natural disaster or trouble for things that face east; possibly all three if the year’s omens are fulfilled. The monkey is perhaps the most unpredictable of the 12 signs in the Chinese lunar calendar. It’s the closest to human.
That a year’s number — 2004 or, for the Chinese, 4072 — and symbolic animal might have such a profound impact is troubling for more rational minds. But the Chinese calendar is rooted in a very practical legend about professional courtesy. Evidently, Buddha wanted to restore order on Earth before taking his leave of it. So he invited all the members of the animal kingdom to a meeting. Only 12 turned up, and it is they who have been immortalised. The no-shows have been kicking themselves ever since.
Each of the now-legendary dozen animals has five varieties, so it takes 60 years to complete a full Chinese cycle. The last Year of the Monkey was 1992, but the last Year of the Wood Monkey was 1944 — a year marked by decisive battles (the invasion of Normandy on June 6).
The monkey promises not peace but progress. It is an erratic genius, distinguished by intellectual wiles that are supposed to spur innovation, negotiation and financial gain. This year’s monkey practically guarantees future profits. Devotees of the Chinese calendar would remind investors, however, to avoid making investment decisions based solely on a primate, and to install red carpet and a couple of turtle statues, just in case.
The monkey is said to create both cheer and mayhem. It might line pockets this year, but also wreak havoc. Other monkey years featured war in the Balkans and, in 1980, the Mount St Helens eruption. The monkey is rather mischievous, which makes 4072 an auspicious year for birthing boys, though not for having girls. Finally, the monkey symbolises increased travel and tourism. Unfortunately, it also symbolises traffic accidents. In sum, it is hard to say, exactly, what the Year of the Monkey will mean.
What is clear is that, in the Chinese calendar, a leap year adds not just a day but a whole month. This could be extremely bad news. Some believe that it is very unlucky to be in the year of your animal sign: you could be seriously distracted by all the sudden extra attention.
So if you were born in 1912, 1920, 1932, 1944, 1956, 1968, 1980, 1992 or even 1900, consider yourself warned. Also consider buying lucky red Chinese undergarments embroidered with the “funky monkey” symbol. It surely can’t hurt.
Taken from the Times, 21st Jan 04
The Chinese new year and its logical lunacy
The Year of the Monkey begins at midnight tonight in China, ushering in a period of rapid financial growth, natural disaster or trouble for things that face east; possibly all three if the year’s omens are fulfilled. The monkey is perhaps the most unpredictable of the 12 signs in the Chinese lunar calendar. It’s the closest to human.
That a year’s number — 2004 or, for the Chinese, 4072 — and symbolic animal might have such a profound impact is troubling for more rational minds. But the Chinese calendar is rooted in a very practical legend about professional courtesy. Evidently, Buddha wanted to restore order on Earth before taking his leave of it. So he invited all the members of the animal kingdom to a meeting. Only 12 turned up, and it is they who have been immortalised. The no-shows have been kicking themselves ever since.
Each of the now-legendary dozen animals has five varieties, so it takes 60 years to complete a full Chinese cycle. The last Year of the Monkey was 1992, but the last Year of the Wood Monkey was 1944 — a year marked by decisive battles (the invasion of Normandy on June 6).
The monkey promises not peace but progress. It is an erratic genius, distinguished by intellectual wiles that are supposed to spur innovation, negotiation and financial gain. This year’s monkey practically guarantees future profits. Devotees of the Chinese calendar would remind investors, however, to avoid making investment decisions based solely on a primate, and to install red carpet and a couple of turtle statues, just in case.
The monkey is said to create both cheer and mayhem. It might line pockets this year, but also wreak havoc. Other monkey years featured war in the Balkans and, in 1980, the Mount St Helens eruption. The monkey is rather mischievous, which makes 4072 an auspicious year for birthing boys, though not for having girls. Finally, the monkey symbolises increased travel and tourism. Unfortunately, it also symbolises traffic accidents. In sum, it is hard to say, exactly, what the Year of the Monkey will mean.
What is clear is that, in the Chinese calendar, a leap year adds not just a day but a whole month. This could be extremely bad news. Some believe that it is very unlucky to be in the year of your animal sign: you could be seriously distracted by all the sudden extra attention.
So if you were born in 1912, 1920, 1932, 1944, 1956, 1968, 1980, 1992 or even 1900, consider yourself warned. Also consider buying lucky red Chinese undergarments embroidered with the “funky monkey” symbol. It surely can’t hurt.
Taken from the Times, 21st Jan 04
Tuesday, January 20, 2004
Expert Testimony
England's Court of Appeal has advised that convictions of parents for murder in cases of "Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)" be reviewed and has also called on the authorities to stop prosecuting parents for murdering their babies when expert defence evidence pointed to the possibility of "cot death". - from Daily Telegraph, 20 Jan.
The Attorney General is now acting on this advice and is going to immediatley review approximatley 258 criminal convictions over the last 10 years involving the alledged killing of an infant by its parents; especially 54 cases of deaths involving SIDS.
This is because the Appeal judges believe that many of these convictions have been based on "expert" evidence which have been presented as solid scientific fact. The truth is that the knowledge behind this so called expert advice had come from research "still at the frontiers of knowledge" into SIDS. New research now suggests that SIDS is more common than previously thought and that it could be linked to genetics. This could mean that parents could be genetically prone to their offspring dying from SIDS. Prosectuions have been based on evidence from experts, especially that of Sir Roy Meadow, that it is near impossible for SIDS, aka Cot Death, to occur within the same family more than once. In many of the most high profile cases mothers have lost two or more infants to Cot Death. Sir Meadows' evidence has said that Cot Death was not a plausible explanation for these serial deaths. The truth is that no "expert" knows for sure why these infants die and the new evidence suggests contrary to Meadows' evidence that it is entirely possible for serial death within a family. Consequently Sir Meadows' is now being investigated by the General Medical Council in relation to the prosecution evidence he has been giving, additionally that he has been overemphasising his theory that the mothers in these cases are displaying "Muchausens Syndrome by proxy" - that they are seeking attention by harming their babies. With his and other "experts" evidence now in question it is clear that many cases would not have resulted in convictions as the prosecutions would not have been able to prove beyong reasonable doubt the guilt of the parents.
As the Daily Telegraph editorial points out - "The judgment is humane, because it recognises a fundamental truth about human feeling: that the only imaginable thing worse for a mother than the sudden, unexplained death of her baby is that she should be falsely accused and convicted of its murder. As Lord Justice Judge put it yesterday: "In any civilised community, that is abhorrent."
England's Court of Appeal has advised that convictions of parents for murder in cases of "Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)" be reviewed and has also called on the authorities to stop prosecuting parents for murdering their babies when expert defence evidence pointed to the possibility of "cot death". - from Daily Telegraph, 20 Jan.
The Attorney General is now acting on this advice and is going to immediatley review approximatley 258 criminal convictions over the last 10 years involving the alledged killing of an infant by its parents; especially 54 cases of deaths involving SIDS.
This is because the Appeal judges believe that many of these convictions have been based on "expert" evidence which have been presented as solid scientific fact. The truth is that the knowledge behind this so called expert advice had come from research "still at the frontiers of knowledge" into SIDS. New research now suggests that SIDS is more common than previously thought and that it could be linked to genetics. This could mean that parents could be genetically prone to their offspring dying from SIDS. Prosectuions have been based on evidence from experts, especially that of Sir Roy Meadow, that it is near impossible for SIDS, aka Cot Death, to occur within the same family more than once. In many of the most high profile cases mothers have lost two or more infants to Cot Death. Sir Meadows' evidence has said that Cot Death was not a plausible explanation for these serial deaths. The truth is that no "expert" knows for sure why these infants die and the new evidence suggests contrary to Meadows' evidence that it is entirely possible for serial death within a family. Consequently Sir Meadows' is now being investigated by the General Medical Council in relation to the prosecution evidence he has been giving, additionally that he has been overemphasising his theory that the mothers in these cases are displaying "Muchausens Syndrome by proxy" - that they are seeking attention by harming their babies. With his and other "experts" evidence now in question it is clear that many cases would not have resulted in convictions as the prosecutions would not have been able to prove beyong reasonable doubt the guilt of the parents.
As the Daily Telegraph editorial points out - "The judgment is humane, because it recognises a fundamental truth about human feeling: that the only imaginable thing worse for a mother than the sudden, unexplained death of her baby is that she should be falsely accused and convicted of its murder. As Lord Justice Judge put it yesterday: "In any civilised community, that is abhorrent."
Friday, January 16, 2004
Is Revolution comming to Iran?
The battle for democracy in Iran continues and this month faces a crisis. The Guardian Council, consisting of 12 mullahs who's job it is to ensure the continuation of the Islamic revolution of the 1970's, have made a critical move against the Reformist Party in parliament dealing a blow to democracy. The Guardian Council has overiding power over the directly elected parliament and can over-turn legislation they do not deem in tune with the spirit of the Islamic Revolution. They can also bar people from standing for election. This month they have barred from standing hundreds of members of the Reformist Party, including 85 out of the 210 current Reformist Party MP's; a staggering number considering there are only 290 seats in the Iranian parliament. In response the Reformist MP's are staging a sit-in protest in the Parliament, however their leader President Mohammad Khatami is urging caution and is publicly calling for a peaceful settlement to this dispute. The problem is that the Guardian Council, led by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei does not look likely to concede on this issue as they seem to be attempting to re-assert their authority. The Guardian Council is probably hoping to capitalise on disillusionment amongst the population with the Reformist Party and President Khatami who have failed to deliver on its promises of widespread reform and democracy which included trying to limit the power of the Guardian Council. Even the University students who periodically take to the streets to protest are currently silent and seemingly apathetic.
This all takes place within a country under international pressure to declare its Nuclear intentions and to allow unrestricted UN inspections. Unlike Iraq the International community is united over the need to deal with Iran's Nuclear intentions. Britain, France and Germany recently embarked on a successful joint round of diplomacy with Iran in a policy of engagement which led to more openess and a willingness by Iran to move on opening up its Nuclear capabilities to the world. Meanwhile President Bush has continued the USA's policy of non-engagement; Bush had previously declared Iran to be a member of his "Axis of Evil". However he seems now to be smoothing the path for future possible engagement and recently used the tragic earthquakes in Iran as a way of opening a dialogue.
The earthquakes in the world heritage city of Bam were devastating, killing much of the city's population and fed the general resentment of the people towards both the ruling mullahs and the elected government. It was clear that the authorities were unprepared for the disaster and many people felt that the extent of the tragedy would have been greatly limited had Iran been more like western countries.
No doubt the Guardian Council feels its power threatened by a Reformist government in Parliament, International pressure on Nuclear armament and US occupation of neighbouring Iraq and hope to reduce this pressure by reducing the influence of the Reformists. However they may in fact trigger the opposite, the previously dissilusioned people may find a new reason to get behind the reformists in opposition to the power of the mullahs. The students who instigated the 1970's revolution may take to the streets again and instigate a new Revolution for Iranian democracy. Iran is at a critical point in its history with a population which is demographically very young and looking longingly to the west and a depressed economy all under a restrictive social order - the country is ready for revolution. It is more important than ever that Khatami and the Reformists not lose their nerve. This battle must be won.
The battle for democracy in Iran continues and this month faces a crisis. The Guardian Council, consisting of 12 mullahs who's job it is to ensure the continuation of the Islamic revolution of the 1970's, have made a critical move against the Reformist Party in parliament dealing a blow to democracy. The Guardian Council has overiding power over the directly elected parliament and can over-turn legislation they do not deem in tune with the spirit of the Islamic Revolution. They can also bar people from standing for election. This month they have barred from standing hundreds of members of the Reformist Party, including 85 out of the 210 current Reformist Party MP's; a staggering number considering there are only 290 seats in the Iranian parliament. In response the Reformist MP's are staging a sit-in protest in the Parliament, however their leader President Mohammad Khatami is urging caution and is publicly calling for a peaceful settlement to this dispute. The problem is that the Guardian Council, led by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei does not look likely to concede on this issue as they seem to be attempting to re-assert their authority. The Guardian Council is probably hoping to capitalise on disillusionment amongst the population with the Reformist Party and President Khatami who have failed to deliver on its promises of widespread reform and democracy which included trying to limit the power of the Guardian Council. Even the University students who periodically take to the streets to protest are currently silent and seemingly apathetic.
This all takes place within a country under international pressure to declare its Nuclear intentions and to allow unrestricted UN inspections. Unlike Iraq the International community is united over the need to deal with Iran's Nuclear intentions. Britain, France and Germany recently embarked on a successful joint round of diplomacy with Iran in a policy of engagement which led to more openess and a willingness by Iran to move on opening up its Nuclear capabilities to the world. Meanwhile President Bush has continued the USA's policy of non-engagement; Bush had previously declared Iran to be a member of his "Axis of Evil". However he seems now to be smoothing the path for future possible engagement and recently used the tragic earthquakes in Iran as a way of opening a dialogue.
The earthquakes in the world heritage city of Bam were devastating, killing much of the city's population and fed the general resentment of the people towards both the ruling mullahs and the elected government. It was clear that the authorities were unprepared for the disaster and many people felt that the extent of the tragedy would have been greatly limited had Iran been more like western countries.
No doubt the Guardian Council feels its power threatened by a Reformist government in Parliament, International pressure on Nuclear armament and US occupation of neighbouring Iraq and hope to reduce this pressure by reducing the influence of the Reformists. However they may in fact trigger the opposite, the previously dissilusioned people may find a new reason to get behind the reformists in opposition to the power of the mullahs. The students who instigated the 1970's revolution may take to the streets again and instigate a new Revolution for Iranian democracy. Iran is at a critical point in its history with a population which is demographically very young and looking longingly to the west and a depressed economy all under a restrictive social order - the country is ready for revolution. It is more important than ever that Khatami and the Reformists not lose their nerve. This battle must be won.
Tuesday, January 13, 2004
Turkey to become member of EU?
I have read numerous articles over 2003, mostly from Thomas Friedman of the NY Times, regarding Turkey's efforts to become a member of the EU. This issue is causing quite some debate within the corridors of power, the arguments go to the core of the EU's foundation and principles. Many people, notably people at the centre of EU architecture and power are against Turkey joining. They claim that including Turkey would fundamentally change the nature of the EU, that Turkey is not part of Europe geographically or culturally. Others believe this is merely an excuse not to include a muslim country within a "christian club".
Turkey geographically and historically has been at the crossroads of europe and asia, where east and west meet. Istanbul is a cosmopolitan melting pot of ideas, culture and trade and has been since the days when it was know as Constantinople. In my opinion Turkey sits on the fringe of Europe, a gateway to the East. A gateway which allows the free flow of mutual influence of ideas and culture between Europe and Asia. To include Turkey within the EU would give this multilateral family of nations a permanant doorway to the riches of the east and prevent it from ever becoming an inward looking self-regarding entity. The EU could become a super-power which reaches out to other peoples and nations in the world rather than a defensive paranoid giant. Culturally, Turkish people are closer to europeans than the other peoples of the near east. Millions of europeans live in and visit Turkey for business and tourism, and there are already large communities of Turkish people living within the EU. Turkey has shown that it is committed to being a fully integrated member and has worked hard to bring itself in-line with EU policy and norms. This work has continued apace even under a new government with Islamacist roots, rendering false fears that admitting a large muslim country will mean changes to the core beliefs of the EU.
Turkey is essentially a secular muslim society just as current EU members are secular christian societies, there is only a problem with Turkey's roots being Islamic if you believe that Christianity is at the root of the EU. I believe this is ridiculous, the foundations of the EU in my opinion are humanistic and concerned with the rule of law and justice; not theocracy. It is about unity and solidarity between different peoples to create lasting peace. What greater chance than this to secure peace between east and west than this. A symbol of this is peace and unity for Cyprus, if Cyprus is to become an EU member it must unite and settle its conflict between the greek south and turkish north; this looks likely to happen with both sides making concessions with the support of Greece and Turkey. The efforts of Turkey on this issue cannot be ignored, in my opinion it is a firm commitment to the ideals of the EU. I would also sight the brave way that Turkey dealt with the recent terrorist suicide bombings to prove that there should be no impediment to Turkish entry to the EU; without delay.
A truly mulitlateral and forward thinking and open EU needs Turkish membership.
I have read numerous articles over 2003, mostly from Thomas Friedman of the NY Times, regarding Turkey's efforts to become a member of the EU. This issue is causing quite some debate within the corridors of power, the arguments go to the core of the EU's foundation and principles. Many people, notably people at the centre of EU architecture and power are against Turkey joining. They claim that including Turkey would fundamentally change the nature of the EU, that Turkey is not part of Europe geographically or culturally. Others believe this is merely an excuse not to include a muslim country within a "christian club".
Turkey geographically and historically has been at the crossroads of europe and asia, where east and west meet. Istanbul is a cosmopolitan melting pot of ideas, culture and trade and has been since the days when it was know as Constantinople. In my opinion Turkey sits on the fringe of Europe, a gateway to the East. A gateway which allows the free flow of mutual influence of ideas and culture between Europe and Asia. To include Turkey within the EU would give this multilateral family of nations a permanant doorway to the riches of the east and prevent it from ever becoming an inward looking self-regarding entity. The EU could become a super-power which reaches out to other peoples and nations in the world rather than a defensive paranoid giant. Culturally, Turkish people are closer to europeans than the other peoples of the near east. Millions of europeans live in and visit Turkey for business and tourism, and there are already large communities of Turkish people living within the EU. Turkey has shown that it is committed to being a fully integrated member and has worked hard to bring itself in-line with EU policy and norms. This work has continued apace even under a new government with Islamacist roots, rendering false fears that admitting a large muslim country will mean changes to the core beliefs of the EU.
Turkey is essentially a secular muslim society just as current EU members are secular christian societies, there is only a problem with Turkey's roots being Islamic if you believe that Christianity is at the root of the EU. I believe this is ridiculous, the foundations of the EU in my opinion are humanistic and concerned with the rule of law and justice; not theocracy. It is about unity and solidarity between different peoples to create lasting peace. What greater chance than this to secure peace between east and west than this. A symbol of this is peace and unity for Cyprus, if Cyprus is to become an EU member it must unite and settle its conflict between the greek south and turkish north; this looks likely to happen with both sides making concessions with the support of Greece and Turkey. The efforts of Turkey on this issue cannot be ignored, in my opinion it is a firm commitment to the ideals of the EU. I would also sight the brave way that Turkey dealt with the recent terrorist suicide bombings to prove that there should be no impediment to Turkish entry to the EU; without delay.
A truly mulitlateral and forward thinking and open EU needs Turkish membership.
