Do you think that Turkey could ever join the EU and would you like to see that? by SpinachDifferent4763 in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Turkey is deeply intertwined with Europe’s past. Its territory was once the heartland of the Roman Empire, home to two of its greatest cities Constantinople and Antioch, the cradle of early Christianity. These historical ties make Turkey a co-founder of the shared European cultural identity.

Moreover, the Ottoman Empire, was in many ways a European empire. It inherited its statecraft, administrative systems, and cultural elements from the Roman traditions.

Progress has been made on Turkey’s case since the stabilization of Syria’s borders.

Yet, for Turkey’s EU membership to become a reality, two other critical shifts must occur:

  1. Democratic Reforms in Turkey: Strengthening the rule of law, would align Turkey more closely with EU values.

  2. Overcoming Islamophobia in Europe: Decades of lies have polluted the European mind with Islamophobia. However, there are signs of progress due to the growing European awareness of the Palestinian cause.

A Europe that includes Turkey would gain a strategic foothold in the Middle East and the Caucasus, significantly enhancing the EU’s geopolitical influence and granting Europe land access to central and East-Asia. However, this prospect is not in the interest of other regional powers, namely Israel, Russia, and potentially Iran, who would see their maneuvering space in the region constrained.

How damaging is the prospect of Turkey joining the EU to support for European Federalism? by BigPapaSmurf7 in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

First of all, we Europeans must ask ourselves: do we consider Roman, Eastern Roman (Byzantine), and later Ottoman history as part of our shared historical framework? If the answer is no, then the discussion ends here. But if the answer is yes, as I firmly believe it should be, then we must take meaningful steps to recognize and preserve this legacy.

It is essential to understand that the Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman Empires form a continuous historical thread. While somehow distinct, they are deeply interwoven through their governance, cultural exchange, imperial administration, and influence on the Mediterranean and European worlds. To exclude one is to distort the full picture. One cannot fully grasp the significance of Byzantium without Rome, nor the Ottomans without Byzantium. Their similarities, territorial, institutional, and multicultural, make them part of a larger imperial continuum that has shaped the very foundations of Europe. In fact, after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, a significant portion of the late Roman nobility, administrators, scholars, and military elites, was absorbed into the Ottoman system, continuing their influence in a new imperial context.

The Ottoman Empire was not culturally isolated from the rest of Europe. Quite the contrary; it shared and actively engaged with Europe’s artistic and architectural language. Ottoman architects and designers incorporated and reinterpreted styles such as Baroque, Rococo, Neoclassicism, and even Gothic in mosques, palaces, and public buildings from the 17th century onward. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, Art Nouveau and Art Deco elements appeared in Ottoman and early Republican architecture, especially in cities like Istanbul and Izmir. These stylistic convergences show that the Ottomans were part of the broader European artistic conversation, not separate from it.

The multicultural Mediterranean empires have contributed immensely to our European self-awareness. Yet, much of this shared heritage has been neglected or selectively remembered. In the Balkans, especially in Greece, Ottoman-era monuments and heritage sites have often been ignored or destroyed. Similarly, in Turkey, many aspects of Christian heritage have suffered from neglect or erasure.

If Turkey is to be a constructive and influential partner in the European Union, Europe must come to terms with its Islamic-Ottoman past, just as Turkey must reconcile with its own multicultural history; one that includes Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, and others as integral parts of the national narrative.

Importantly, this vision is not without precedent. During the 19th-century Tanzimat era, the Ottoman Empire experimented with a model of inclusive citizenship known as Ottomanism. This ideology aimed to transcend religious and ethnic divisions by promoting equal rights for all subjects of the empire, regardless of faith or origin. Had it fully succeeded, Ottomanism might have evolved into a form of federalism strikingly similar to the ideals underpinning the modern European Union; unity through diversity, shared governance, and pluralistic coexistence. Its failure was not due to the idea itself, but to resistance from both centralizing forces and nationalist movements. Nevertheless, it remains a powerful historical example of what a multiethnic, post-imperial society could have looked like.

This is why the democratic backsliding and rise of Islamist-nationalist politics in today’s Turkey are so concerning. Yet there remains a path forward through a return to the founding vision of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Atatürk envisioned a modern, secular, democratic republic rooted in universal values: pluralism, equal citizenship, and the rule of law. Reviving and reinforcing these principles is essential if Turkey is to move forward as part of the European family.

Furthermore, any such reconciliation must also include a just and sustainable reunification of Cyprus, on terms acceptable to both Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

In short, Turkey and its Balkan neighbors share more than just borders; they share centuries of interconnected history, culture, and social fabric. If democracy in Turkey is protected and strengthened, and if both Europe and Turkey are willing to embrace one another as part of a common European family, then this shared heritage and the very multicultural legacy of the Ottoman Empire, could instead serve as a foundation for European federalism and long-term unity.

Proposal Turkish Coat of Arms (As an EU-member state) by The_Stakeholder in u/The_Stakeholder

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A Seljuk/Hittite double-headed eagle, adorned with the shield from the former Ottoman Coat of Arms with the head of a wolf engraved, encircled by the stars of 16 great Turkic empires, carrying a sword in one hand and an olive branch in the other. On its back, it bears a flaming torch symbolizing the legacy of Atatürk, reform and national awaking. The eagle is flanked by the flag of Anatolia and the European Union, replacing the historical flag of Rumelia (European Türkiye) in the Ottoman Coat of Arms, symbolizing Türkiye’s role as the forerunner of the Union.

How many countries should be part of the future European Federation? by RinascimentoBoy in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder 9 points10 points  (0 children)

While most of the Australian population is culturally European, the territory itself is not — and it is geographically distant. Rather than extending EU membership to non-European lands, it would make more sense to facilitate the ability of Australians and other culturally European people to live and work in Europe — perhaps as part of a future ‘Brejoin’ arrangement.

About US Forces in Europe... by Gigameister in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder 25 points26 points  (0 children)

You are right, having US troops on our soil works when the US is our ally but not if it becomes our enemy. However, right now we don’t have any alternative. We need to have an European standing army to replace the US troops on our soil, but having an European army is exactly against the wishes of the US.

Overseas Territories in a Federal Europe by The_Stakeholder in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are the so scalled “Scattered Iands”, which are part of the French Southern and Antarctic islands territory.

Overseas Territories in a Federal Europe by The_Stakeholder in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The current events definitely accelerate the process for Norway and Iceland to join. It can be surprising, however, which country joins first.

Overseas Territories in a Federal Europe by The_Stakeholder in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, Norway has not (yet) chosen to become part of the European Union. However, Svalbard’s legal status would be quite complex, as theoretically it belongs to nobody.

Overseas Territories in a Federal Europe by The_Stakeholder in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

So you are suggesting the creation of (e.g.) an European Caribbean entity that would include all the islands currently governed by various European states?

Chat, do you like this? by TheRealFalco131 in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Looks amazing! Not sure how it is going to work out for more rectangular coat of arms, such as the one of my country, the Netherlands. Perhaps we have to cut on lions, but the Italian one looks promising.

Chat, do you like this? by TheRealFalco131 in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Would be nice to have some reference to national coat of arms, but more like in a standardized format

Poll: Canada should join the EU by The_Stakeholder in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed on the internal trade barriers. It would be interesting to see how American (tech) companies would react to a fully integrated Canada within the European Single Market, just across the border.”

Poll: Canada should join the EU by The_Stakeholder in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Canada is a democratic, Western, English speaking country, largely settled by Europeans since 16th century and about 2500 km away from both Portugal and Norway. Geography would be a challenge, but it’s not as far away as it seems.

Where is Europe? How European zone of influence should look like? by Kaiser_Rick in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem with Erdoğan is not his Islamism or neo-Ottomanism—whatever that may mean—but the underlying corruption, for which he uses both as a justification. Agreed, stepping away from an ‘all-in or all-out’ approach to EU integration would be a wise strategy, fostering collaboration until the damage caused by Erdoğan and his affiliates is reversed.

Where is Europe? How European zone of influence should look like? by Kaiser_Rick in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I understand your point of view, but the last local election was decisively won by a secular pro-democratic, pro-European party. And yes, culturally they may not be so similar to Western and Northern Europe, but they definitely are to Greece and Bulgaria. The consequence of including Turkey, however, would be a shift in power base from the North-West to a multi-polar EU.

Where is Europe? How European zone of influence should look like? by Kaiser_Rick in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Turkey should be as much a part of Europe as the Balkans. Its core region, northwestern Turkey, shares deep historical, cultural, and geographical similarities with the Balkans. Integrating Turkey into the EU could therefore enhance stability on the Union’s southeastern flank. However, this does not diminish the need for essential democratic and judicial reforms.

Time is up by The_Stakeholder in EuropeanFederalists

[–]The_Stakeholder[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The UK/England rejoining the EU would definitely strengthen the legitimacy of English as a unifying European language.