The Turkish problem

Rev. Professor Maurice Eminyan, SJ (The Sunday Times, August 29) was right to disagree with "A Christian Outlook's" remark that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's specialisation in dogma should disqualify him from expressing his opinion on Turkey's entry in the European Union.

Everybody after all has a right to his own personal views. However, I disagree with the Cardinal's no to Turkey on the ground of its religious culture. Some of the Balkan states, like Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and Albania, also have a different religious culture, having had the same fate like Constantinople which fell to the Ottoman Empire in 1453. And yet, the whole Balkan peninsula, being in SE Europe, should be logically admitted to EU.

In my opinion the decisive point at issue is not that of culture but of Turkey's geographical position. And Professor Eminyan concluded his letter precisely on this point by saying that Turkey is not in Europe but in Asia. It is here where I don't see eye to eye with him. The crux of the problem is this: Is Turkey in Europe or in Asia Minor? I go straight to Philip's Encyclopedia World Atlas (2000), according to which Turkey is Eurasia or Euro/Asia.

It says: "The Republic of Turkey lies in two continents west of a waterway between the Black and the Mediterranean seas." Turkey has the same geographical problem as Russia, which is also split by the Ural Mountains, a natural barrier between European and Asiatic Russia.

Turkey is a country in SW Asia with only a small enclave in SE Europe. Ankara, its capital since 1923, is an inland city of Asia Minor. Istanbul, its former capital, is situated on the Bosphorus, partly in Europe, partly in Asia Minor, to which it is linked by two suspension bridges. It was formerly the Roman city of Constantinople, ancient Byzantium.

Modern Turkey is descended from the Ottoman Empire in the last Middle Ages. The general and statesman Kemal Ataturk moulded a new westernised secular state in the early 20th century.

Cardinal Ratzinger is reported to have said: "Making the two continents identical would be a mistake." He was here referring to Turkey's hybrid geographical position - the minor (comparatively small in size but very important politically and culturally) European Turkey, and the major (significantly much larger) Asiatic Turkey, comprising two different cultures.

However, the problem shouldn't be stated in cultural or religious terms. I don't think that Turkey should be precluded from joining the EU because of its Islamic culture, since the omission of a reference to Christianity was perhaps intended to keep religions out of the secular European Constitution.

Incidentally, Cardinal Ratzinger set us a difficult problem: which are the European boundaries? Where does Europe end? Turkey's entry or not in EU should be a guide for subsequent cases of other semi-European countries which might follow suit. A geographical line has to be drawn and the same principle applied to all prospective member countries, otherwise it would not be a 'European' but an 'International" Union.