#Greek Cypriot genocide

[kyreniacommentator]

President Ersin Tatar meets 42 Swedish 1964 UNFICYP Veterans

[sanctiphera]

“Israel is not just a threat to Gaza but to all of humanity,” Erdoğan said, warning that, “No state is safe as long as Israel does not follow international law and does not feel bound by international law.”

– was Turkey following international law when they invaded Cyprus and murdered civilians taking half the country? Still, over 1000 Greek Cypriots are missing presumed murdered and the Turks are still in Cyprus. Maybe they followed international law when they murdered over a million Armenians by genocide?

Erdoğan accused Netanyahu of overseeing barbaric acts against innocent civilians, stating, "No ideology sees the burning to death of innocent civilians in their tents as legitimate. The world is watching the barbarism of this vampire called Netanyahu live." 

– and this from a man who has launched attacks on people he calls militants with the intention of killing them. Leaving thousands dead in his wake. But as with all dictators, it's do as I say, not as do.

– he also forgot to mention that the people burning in tents died from explosives embedded amongst them by Hamas. In fact, there was a jeep loaded with explosives adjacent to the tents. That’s what was targeted, and that is what caused much of the damage. All by design by Hamas.

[alatismeni-theitsa]

wrt the nationalism i experienced at my old Greek School, which was part of the larger North London Greek Community even if it was technically just outside London, I remember there were big get-togethers of the various schools for the likes of 25th March. Normal stuff really. I remember we were asked to do some art, and as I was a teenager literally called Peace and with a conscientious objector for a dad, I was pretty opposite in values to the general militarism etc around it, so i slightly... took the piss by drawing Bouboulina anime-fied in a way that was Well Drawn but also Not Reverent.

Anyway, the thing that actually shocked me amongst all this (as opposed to just a bit of discomfort and eyerolling). As a fluent speaker, the teachers liked to show me off by writing speeches for me to give at some events. My tutor had written, very carefully, a big speech for me, and usually I begrudgingly went along with them, but i refused to read this one bit, in which I was expected to declare (cw: self harm, implied suicide, blood): <...κι αν χρειαστεί, δεν θα διστάσω να ανοίξω τις φλέβες μου σαν βρύσες για να ποτίσω το δέντρο της ελευθερίας, ζήτω η Ελλάδα, ζήτω η Κύπρος, ζήτω η ελευθερία>. When I refused point-blank, he looked at me with confusion and said - bearing in mind that i was 16 at this time - so wait, you Wouldn't die for your homeland???? Also bearing in mind this was 13 years ago or so and its still pretty embedded in my memory.

Idk how representative this particular anecdote is but as this was intended for a large event i imagine it wasn't expected to be controversial. He was a little extra I think, probably in part to being a Cypriot refugee himself and therefore having a v different emotional relationship w nationality. Despite module options for A levels (final exams/qualifications for subjects for 18yrolds in the UK) that included Greek Lit and Greek Poetry, he'd only teach Cypriot History and Cypriot Geography, which to me, as an Athenian who generally sucks at any kind of History or Geography, didnt really appeal. I only found out there were other modules when I got to the exam and saw them available. Seeing as they were available, I assume he was something of an outlier, as most kids doing Modern Greek exams would probably have been 3rd-gen Cypriots.

Γειααα! Given the Greek history and how we preserve remembrance, I don't think the sentence you mentioned is controversial, either. But as always, there's more nuance to it, so please bear with me! (quick historical recap for people not familiar with recent Greek history + the psychology of Greeks and Greek immigrants)

Under the boot of the Turks, the Bulgarians, the Italians, the English (and who knows who else) Greeks (and other Balkan nations) quickly realized that advocating for people with the same ethnicity was the only way not to be assimilated at best and eradicated at worst. For centuries Greeks weren't heard by their masters (who also called them "chattel" - "ραγιάδες") at times so after 400 and 600 years they said "if you don't advocate for us, if you treat us like this, fuck you, we are going to become independent". Since 1821 they became an example of revolt for all slaves in Europe and the Americas (without claiming they were the only inspiration) and warmly greeted and aided by Haiti, the first nation to abolish slavery.

I don't need to write much about the Balkan wars, ww1, and the Macedonian struggle, where being ethnically Greek automatically made you an enemy. (without saying Greeks were always on the right side of things or never committed any atrocities), or mention the Greco-Turkish War which ended with the peak of the Greek (Armenian and Assyrian, too) genocide.

Additionally, most of us have heard how the Greeks were treated in ww2 under the Bulgarians and under the Italians and Germans when the country was occupied. Or about the Greek programs in USSR (1937) and Turkey (1955 and 1960) to erase the Greek identity that in many ways still goes on to this day. (Pushing for the Turkish and Russian language and customs only, calling the Greek history of oppression "propaganda", erasing names of Greek villages, etc)

Again, being Greek was pretty much a ticket to punishment and oppression.

Cyprus is included in many of these cases as it suffered long from the Turks until 1878 and then it fell to English hands who filled the citizens with hallow promises (and good ol' colonialism) and let them eat each other alive - resulting in the Turkish occupation of half the island. Although all citizens suffered from the turmoil and the Greek side wasn't a saint, it was mostly random average Greeks who were kicked out of their homes when the invasion happened (1974).

War after war created a generational trauma that cannot be shaken away and that can affect someone when they've lived around people who remember their family getting executed by Turks, or Bulgarians. In that climate, fighting for your ethnos to the point of bleeding became something natural, like bleeding for freedom of speech, worker's rights, for lgbt+ rights, refugee rights, and more.

So, yes, your tutor definitely came from this background so I am not surprised he was that way after living through the tensions and being forced to leave his home because he wasn't the "right" ethnicity. His love for his ethnicity differs from the love a native UK or US person has, in the sense that it comes from the side of the oppressed, not the oppressor. (On top of that, he could also be a weird person as a character, since you mentioned he didn't want to teach anything that wasn't related to Cyprus)

There's no coddling up for how much blood was shed, no χρυσό χάπι for what a country does to you when it occupies you. I want to stress a lot how I hate the idea of war and the idealization of war. However, one doesn't exactly speak politely to the new oppressor, who wants to assimilate others and spread their own influence. I haven't seen a nation talk its way out of occupation and the inevitable repression, so to speak. And when the n-th invasion happens for Greece (for our specific hypothetical example) I don't think there will be any change in how things will be resolved. In a way, the school events remind you that, and also that history is a cycle.

With Turkey as a neighbor, things are still politically tense, and many Greeks still fear another invasion. (At the moment I don't think Turkey will attack for many reasons and bc we are NATO allies but I am telling how the situation is) Let's not forget our state has been allied with Russia for a long time and we betrayed that bond with whatever sanctions might come from Russia to us. When Russia invaded Ukraine, most Greek men around me were fearing the draft. From where we stand on the map, we don't exactly feel safe. War is a possibility and many Greeks feel fight-ready psychologically, or jumpy when they hear the news. (I belong to the chill group and still get anxious from time to time) That might color the patriotic statements with an intensity that doesn't feel natural in other nations which may not feel that close to getting a war on their soil.

As for the militarization in the events, the first thing I'll say is that war and the army can be totally rotten and there's a ton of propaganda we must resist, and I'll admit that even the Greek army when doing the defense has crossed the line at times. Buuuut realistically, it's difficult to resist an invasion from - say - the nazis without an armed force. That's why the army has a place in Greek remembrance events.

Thousands of Greeks fought in the frozen Pindus mountains against the Axis force because they all knew what would happen if the enemy got to Greece. And lo and behold, once the fascists took control of my city, thousands were sent to concentration camps where they were incinerated (700 recorded children among them). In just three years, 1/3 of Greece died under occupation. Fighting to prevent that - even if they failed eventually - is objectively valiant. Not to mention, the resisting armies of various countries achieved weakening the Axis forces to the point they finally got beaten.

Of course, there is no need for panic in the present. No objective need or extreme speeches where teens shout "I will shed my blood". I am fully aware of how expressions of the desire to protect what was - again with blood - given can be weird and reach extremes. Such yearly school events are the norm in Greece.

It's worth mentioning that such texts were written (or based on texts written) at the time of the oppression so they are emotionally charged and often carry the bloodshed of war which was very real for the country back then. That's the reason they are not considered controversial. (add to the mix the constant fear of imminent invasion we still live in 2023)

Another reason they may not be considered controversial is that we are used to them but also don't exactly follow them. Such events may be a yearly reality here (multiple times per year) but a kind of mundane one and people go about their lives without so much gravity given to the event statements.

Sure, it's atmospheric and it's good to remember the dead, but it's the usual grind, ya know... We get reminded of the war for a few days in very sentimental ceremonies and then we move on. The majority of Greeks in Greece are unlike your tutor, in spite of taking part in these school festivities and in the school parade. And the teachers are usually chill about it.

It can have negative effects, though. For starters, I believe the student parade accompanying the military was established during the 70's junta where nationalism was often regarded as the solution. So we are not on a good base here 👀

Most Greeks shun extreme militarism (we know what disgusting people lead in our army and what bigoted ideas they hold) and the belief that we are better than other nations. I can totally understand how a 16-year-old could feel uncomfortable when made to read the phrase you were made to read. In Greece, I think most (not all) 16-year-olds would roll their eyes and go along (because we know it's mainly fanfare for the drama 😂) and they wouldn't be phased by it.

For example, my teen self would perhaps read the "κι αν χρειαστεί, δεν θα διστάσω να ανοίξω τις φλέβες μου σαν βρύσες για να ποτίσω το δέντρο της ελευθερίας, ζήτω η Ελλάδα, ζήτω η Κύπρος, ζήτω η ελευθερία" and see some poetry in it BUT I wouldn't actually want to do it 😅 Nobody does and nobody cares, except the few rare radical people, who exist in all countries in equal measure. And we know that the rest of the students just wanted to stay out of class and didn't give two shits about how serious this is supposed to be 😂 We were aware we were preaching to the choir - who already knows this stuff and just wanted to go home. We are kinda desensitized, I think.

But teens also have their own political sentiments, which may clash with how the school festivities are organized, so we should take them into account. The students (and all people) should be free to not partake in events opposite to their ideals. And many teachers, too, are uncomfortable with how these events are conducted and wish to tone them down. There are some teachers here who are more into it so they add more passion and grand statements.

Different areas and families experienced oppression and genocide in various ways, so I don't have a concrete statement fit to dictate how much passion and poetic symbolism they'll use in their remembrance events and how they promise that the same harm will never come to their families again - as long as one doesn't fall into bigoted traps and militarization. Meaning that if the issue makes them sentimental and they want to mention blood and blades against slavery, that's their own thing.

But it also means that you are (obviously) allowed to remember the fallen and celebrate the existence of the nation without bold statements if you don't feel like it. (Or perhaps one doesn't want nations to exist at all so we go to another level altogether, and maybe you don't want a remembering at all, which is another discussion)

Thank you very much for reading all this! I wrote so many things to demonstrate Greek history is quite heavy and complex, which in turn creates complex situations for the people who are left to do the remembering.

Other people who took part in such Greek events, write your opinions down if you like!

[mightyflamethrower]

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: The Unhinged Among Us

VICTOR DAVIS HANSONCONTRIBUTOR

November 30, 202310:42 PM ET

October 7 should have been an open-and-shut case of moral condemnation

During peace and holiday, invading Hamas gunmen murdered, tortured, mass raped, decapitated and mutilated some 1,200 Israelis. The vast majority were unarmed women, children, infants and the elderly.

The cowardly murderers proudly filmed their atrocities and then fled back to Gaza — to cheers from the Gaza street.

Before Israel even retaliated, the mass murdering of Jews earned praise from the Middle East, the international hard left and especially the faculty and students of elite Western campuses.

When the Israeli Defense Forces struck back, the killers dispersed to the safety of their multibillion-dollar subterranean cities. The cowardly elite architects of the mass murder fled to Arab sanctuaries in Lebanon and Qatar.

From its headquarters burrowed below hospitals, mosques and schools, Hamas bartered hostages for a reprieve from the IDF and the release of its own convicted terrorists in Israeli jails.

Hamas shot any of its own supporters who refused to shield Hamas gunmen.

It continued launching rockets at Israeli civilian centers. It serially lied about its casualties, expropriating intended relief food and fuel for its underground tunnel city of killers.

Abroad, Hamas supporters also emulated the methods of the pro-Nazi demonstrators in Western cities of the 1930s. Unlike their pro-Israel critics, the pro-Hamas demonstrators in the U.S. and Europe turned violent.

They took over and defaced private and public property. They chanted genocidal antisemitic slogans calling for erasure of the nation of Israel.

They interrupted shoppers, blocked highways, attacked businesses and swarmed bridges. They assaulted police.

The majority wore masks to hide their identities in the fashion of antisemitic Klansmen.

Why did the doctrinaire left, the youth of the Democratic Party and the campuses outdo each other in their antisemitic venom toward Israel?

For the first time in their lives, many of the ignorant protestors suddenly professed concern about refugees, colonialism, disproportionality, innocent civilians and the rules of war.

But none could explain why the Palestinians who fled Israel in 1947-48 still self-identify as victimized “refugees” when 900,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from Middle-East Arab cities about the same time do not.

The 200,000 Greek Cypriots driven out from norther Cyprus by Turkey apparently do not warrant “refugee’’ status either.

Few protestors knew that Jews have lived in present-day Israel for over three millennia. The longest colonialist presence there were Muslim Turks who brutally ran the Holy Land for 300 years until they lost in World War I and were expelled.

How exactly did it happen that the eighth-century A.D. Al-Aqsa Mosque was built within King Herod’s earlier Second Temple enclosure?

The pro-Hamas crowd has little appreciation that colonizing Arab Muslims have one of history’s longest records of “settling” other countries far from their historic birthland.

They “settled” and “colonized” the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Middle East, Berber North Africa and southern Spain. Millions of Middle Easterners migrated to — “settled?” — supposedly infidel European cities, where they often self-segregate, and do not assimilate fully with their magnanimous hosts.

As far as “disproportionality,” it is the goal of every power at war, Hamas included.

What protestors are furious about is that Israel is more effective at being disproportionate in retaliation than Hamas and its Iranian supporters were in their preemptive mass murdering.

Targeting innocent civilians? Hamas is among the current greatest offenders in the world.

It rockets Israeli cities without warning. It mass murders Jews in their beds during peace. It exposes Gazans to mortal danger by impressing them as human shields. Hamas shoots those who refuse.

The “rules of war” are violated by Hamas daily. Such protocols require combatants to wear uniforms not to blend in with civilians, not to use them as shields, not to murder noncombatants, not to rape them, not to mutilate them and not to execute civilians without trial.

Why then would millions ally themselves with this odious reincarnation of the SS?

Are they ignorant of the history of the Middle East?

Are they arrogant since few challenge their hate and threats?

Are they opportunists who feel mouthing anti-Western shibboleths gains them career traction in leftist-run media, academia and popular culture?

Are they bullies who count on the Western silent majority remaining quiet as they disrupt lives, trash Western tolerant culture and commit violence?

Like Hamas that they support, do they despise Jews? Why else do they express an existential hatred toward Israelis that they never display to any other group?

Those now on the street utter not a peep about the Sudanese Arab mass killers in Darfur, Chinese oppressors of the Muslim Uighurs, Russians targeting civilians in Ukraine or ISIS, Syrian and Yemeni murderers of fellow Muslims.

Yet all of these terrorist killers are guilty of the very charges the protestors falsely attribute to Israel. But they are all not Jewish — and that explains the pass given them by our antisemitic, pro-Hamas street.

[its-suanneschafer-author]

Book Review: The Island of Missing Trees by Elif Shafak

Book Review: The Island of Missing Trees by Elif Shafak

The Island of Missing Trees is undoubtedly the most beautiful, most lyrical book I’ve read recently. I previously enjoyed Elif Shafak’s The Bastard of Istanbul but feel she outdid herself with this newest book. Shafak writes with imagination, originality, and a hefty dose of magical realism of the people and natural environment of Cyprus. Cyprus has a turbulent history, governed in succession by…

[agallimaufryofoddments]

Holy good God, the U.S. government is set to recognize the Armenian Genocide on Saturday? Oh yes, goodness gracious please, this is something we’ve been hoping for since yay back and we aren’t Armenian, just Greek Cypriots standing in solidarity. 

Turkey warns it could “worsens ties,” oh my goodness, whoops oh well, it happened thank you and the U.S.A. government is recognizing it oh heck.

[scripttorture]

Hello! I've browsed this blog a bit and came across the idea that torturers often develop mental illness because of their repeated exposure to the violence/trauma of seeing another person in pain, which I'd never considered before. A) Do you believe torturers can therefore be a type of victim as well, depending on the circumstances, and therefore deserving of compassion/therapy? B) Can you point me to more information about this/what kinds of mental illnesses develop in torturers? (1/2)

C) Do you think it's possible for a mass murderer/torturer character to have a realistic, satisfying redemption arc? Do you know any media that's pulled it off believably? Thank you so much for taking the time to read/answer this if you do! And for this excellent resource!

-

The most accessible sources that cover this are O’Mara’s Why Torture Doesn’t Work (good grounding, start with him), Rejali’s Torture and Democracy and the appendices to Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth where he describes treating two torturers.

 The most current research is about 600 pages of print on demand untranslated French. If you’re fluent in French (I am not and lock down etc has got in the way of me getting this translated) Sironi Comment devient-on tortionnaire?

 Broadly speaking the symptoms appear to be the same as those survivors and witnesses develop.

 And I will go into this in more depth later but keep in mind there is not anywhere near enough research on torturers for us to be entirely sure about most of this. I’m working with the best information we have right now.

 The other two questions are subjective and sort of complicated. By definition a lot of this is going to be my opinion because well that’s what you’re asking for.

 I think we need to be really careful about describing torturers as ‘victims’.

 Yes they’re put in this situation by social structures beyond their control. It is not their fault that they weren’t given training or support in their job. It’s also not their fault that we have this global message that violence is effective or that so many workplaces are unnecessarily pressured/stressful. Most of the time they are drawn in to abusing others because of the social groups and structures within the organisation they join.

 Oversight (with a drive to eradicate torture), funding, training and clear consistent messages about the right way to handle difficult situations would probably prevent most cases of torture.

 This does not change the fact that on an individual level each of them chose to hurt other people.

 Some of them will have made that choice understanding there was a threat to their own safety if they did not. Some of them will have made that choice just because it was what everyone else was doing. Some of them genuinely believe what they did was the ‘right’ decision at the time.

 They still made that choice. And given that we have records of people in similar positions refusing, even when it put them at risk of attack or death, I don’t have a lot of sympathy with the choice torturers made.

 The fact I’m a pacifist factors into this. Consider my biases.

 Torturers typically show a very low understanding of the impact their actions have had on other people.

 They might regret their actions but this is typically framed in a very self-centred way. They usually don’t express more then cursory regard for the victims. They regret it because they’re suffering now, because they have nightmares, because they can’t keep a job. And oh it’s all so unfair.

 I don’t know why this is the case. But it’s a feature Sironi described in interviews about her work. And I’ve seen it over and over again in interviews with torturers.

 Yes torturers suffer. The symptoms they develop are terrible and have a lasting impact on their lives. They typically can’t hold down jobs and struggle to re-integrate into society in any meaningful fashion.

 And yes I believe they should be treated. I believe that anyone with a disease or condition which requires treatment should have access to care and treatment. Whoever they are. Whatever they did.

 I believe that as fellow human beings torturers are entitled to a degree of compassion. When I say that torture and mistreatment are wrong I mean it. My position doesn’t change just because the theoretical victim is a former torturer.

 I do not think that treatment and compassion should be dependant on a person being suitably victimised. For me the only thing it depends on is their need and their humanity. In the literal physical sense of them being a human.

 But we tend to think of ‘victim’ as a simple category that doesn’t overlap with mass murderers.

 And I don’t believe the position of torturers is that simple.

 Especially when so few of them are charged. Torture trials are rare. Convictions are rare. And sentences are short.

 And their victims deserve justice too.

 I feel conflicted about calling torturers ‘victims’ because of this complex reality. And because in fiction we have a tendency to focus on the torturers prioritising their voices over the survivors. I feel like presenting torturers as simple victims of society could risk adding to that.

 For me the focus has always got to be the survivors.

 And I think all of this feeds into how we handle redemption arcs.

 I don’t think that writing redemption arcs for villains, even torturers or mass murderers is ‘wrong’. In fact I think that it can be a really good idea. Showing how toxic the environments these people are in is a good thing. Puncturing the way it’s romanticised is a good thing. And showing a way out of it, even if it’s imagined, is not a bad thing.

 But if we’re going to do that in our stories then I think we need to think about what redemption means and in whose eyes the character is redeemed.

 There’s also a small problem: we don’t really know what recovery for torturers looks like.

 There isn’t enough research on them. Partly because of lack of interest but partly because the low conviction rates means sample sizes are small. We’re talking about a limited number of individuals who are jailed and we can’t really ‘prove’ that individuals who weren’t convicted were torturers. We don’t really know what the long term outcomes are, what treatments might be effective or- Much of anything.

 Studies on torturers are typically based on very small numbers of individuals. (For a long time Fanon’s work was the only example of a mental health professional talking about torturers specifically. He saw two of them.) They are not statistically sound. And a lot of resources were simply journalists or mental health professionals compiling notes on the handful of individuals they talked to.

 Everything I say about torturers is based on things like interviews, a handful of studies that have flaws and anecdotal evidence. Unfortunately as of right now it’s the best we’ve got.

 Personally I don’t think there’s enough research on torture generally. Or enough attempts to collate relevant research from other fields. But that’s a rant for another day.

 Let’s get back to that central question: what does redemption mean?

 I think that it’s pretty easy to write a character changing for the better. You can build up the character’s level of insight into what they’re doing/did over the course of the story. You can show them choosing to stop. You can show them shifting to oppose their former allies.

 But bundled up in the idea of a redemption arc is this: is it enough? And who is it enough for?

 I don’t think survivors should be obliged to forgive former torturers. I also don’t think they’re likely to interact positively.

 I’ve talked about this now and again when asked about the difference between legally defined torture and abuse. Because of the organised and widespread nature of legally defined torture there are usually communities of survivors. And communities that are collectively moving through a recovery process because even those people who weren’t directly attacked are likely to be witnesses, carers and relatives or friends of survivors.

 These things echo down generations.

 Cyprus gained independence from the British in 1960, my father is too young to have any real memory of the violence during the colonial period. But he referenced it in arguments with my English mother during my childhood. There are people throughout China today who won’t buy anything Japanese because of Japanese war crimes there during World War 2. There are people who won’t eat fish from the Black Sea, because the bodies of their ancestors were thrown into that sea during a genocide over a hundred years ago.

 I know that as a both a Greek Cypriot and an English person there are people all over the world who will not want anything to do with me based on what my people have done to theirs. And the fact I wasn’t alive at the time does not really factor into it.

 What I’m trying to illustrate here is that this is much bigger, broader and more complex then individual acts of forgiveness.

 Survivors are a highly varied group of individuals. And each torturer can have thousands or tens of thousands of victims. Expecting each impacted individual, and any witnesses and all their family members and friends, to forgive these people is… let’s say ‘unlikely’.

 So does redemption require forgiveness from the wounded party? Is there any possible action that can atone for the sheer scale of these atrocities?

 If we play a simple number game causing this level of harm can be achieved in months or years, but saving the equivalent number of lives takes decades of skilled, dedicated work. If we look at concepts like wergild or jail as ‘paying your debt to society’ then how do we measure something like torture where the numbers are so big?

 I haven’t seen a piece of fiction seriously tackle these questions. But then again I also haven’t actively looked for that fiction.

 I feel like a lot of fictional redemption arcs judge a character to be sufficiently redeemed based on audience sympathy and the main cast forgiving the character. They don’t typically go on to broaden the scope of the narrative and question whether any one else impacted by the former villain’s actions also sees the character as redeemed.

 One of my stories has a former torturer as a major character and I think they are a sympathetic character in many ways. I think that my readers would empathise with them through a lot of the story (which takes place decades after they stopped torturing).

 They’re a mentor figure to some of the younger cast members. They’ve acted as a protector to them and taught the younger generation a lot about the minority culture they themselves are from. And they do genuinely care about these people that they helped to raise, consistently sacrificing to protect these ‘kids’. (The ‘kids’ are 30s-20s at the time of the story.)

 But they’re also incredibly self centred. They don’t really interact with or have a lot of sympathy for the people they hurt. And while this particular family loves and forgives them society at large views them as a monster. Albeit one that is now leashed.

 Is this a redemption story? Is this character redeemed? I genuinely don’t know. In fact that’s part of my interest in writing the story: trying to work out if there is a point, as this character grows, develops and helps others, when I believe they’ve done ‘enough’.

 I think that redemption means different things for different people. A satisfying redemption story is different for different people. And if we can disagree so strongly about it with much simpler, smaller scale crimes then where does that leave us with torture?

 There isn’t a simple answer or a one-size-fits-all writing solution. There can’t be.

 My approach is to try and use the story to see if I can find an answer. Even if it’s only a limited one. For me the story itself is a forum for exploring human complexity and difficult ethical questions.

 I don’t think we have a good solution for how to deal with these people in reality yet. But I do hold out hope that a good solution is possible. Fiction is an arena where we can safely explore possible solutions.

 I guess in the end I’m not sure if there’s any story or arc that will work for everyone. I don’t think there are any hard rules for writing anything and I don’t think there’s ever a way to please everyone.

 Redemption and forgiveness are complicated topics. I think we do a much better job when we engage with that complexity then when we assume a character just has to do a, b and c in order to achieve it.

 When you consider someone to be truly redeemed is an ethical question that I can’t answer for you. I don’t think I should. The chances are you’ll know when you think your character has done enough.

 Just be open to the fact that it won’t be enough for everyone. Consider reflecting that with the characters, because that can make for truly powerful moments.

 In Midnight’s Children Shiva never forgives Saleem, even though Saleem isn’t responsible for Shiva ‘losing’ his life and family because they were both infants at the time. And damn there are a lot of flaws in the movie adaptation but that scene between them in the jail, when Saleem throws that in Shiva’s face hits hard. It shows us so much about both characters.

 And I think that’s a better way to approach it then trying to figure out if a character is redeemed yet: figuring out how they’ve progressed, how others respond to that progression and why.

 I hope that helps :)

Available on Wordpress.

Disclaimer

[latenightsinpemberley]

Privilege over Turks? The same nation who killed 1.5 million Armenians, murdered tens of thousands of Cypriots and STILL won't give their land back, slaughtered the Greeks, the Bulgarians, the Kurds? Stfu.

I'm talking about Western Europeans and Americans.

I'm Greek, I absolutely hold Turkey responsible as an imperial power that committed multiple genocides merely a century back. Hence why it's in bad taste imo to apply Western neolib racial descriptions of Turks being “poc” and the oppressed minorities you mention “white” in this context. It's useless, especially since none of these groups categorises the other as such irl, from Armenians and Greeks being persecuted and displaced en mass from their homeland by the Turks due to their ethnic origin, to Greek refugees being ostracized for decades upon their arrival to Greece by the locals because they were viewed as Turkish. Applying Western labels to define and discuss these social and historical realities would be as disrespectful as me randomly using my people's specific historical context to describe the relations between different ethnic/racial/religious groups in x place of the world, while knowing nothing about the historical context– and not caring to learn either.

That being said, I do find Westerners categorising Turks as “white” (in the woke white=privileged sense) hypocritical because it simply disregards the power the West holds over the world on a global level, and that includes Turkey. Both may have been imperial forces with a history of brutal oppression towards minorities, yes, but it's the US that's currently the dominant superpower, which shapes the reality for all of us in various ways. And that goes for different countries that have a colonial/imperial history; their place of privilege and accountability over the people they oppress should be addressed, but their position in relation to the West is another issue altogether.

And, something that for me is very important, is also the treatment of Turkish women of the diaspora by Western men. I care very little whether someone will categorise a Turkish woman as “white” or “WoC” if they are unwilling to discuss the intersection of racism and sexism they face in the West because of their ethnic background and sex.

Same goes for Eastern European and Caucasian (actually Caucasian, ie Armenian) women. I don't know if things in the US are so different for them and they're suddenly afforded all the privilege of a WASP, but at least here there is a specific kind of discrimination and fetishization faced by them, ranging from them forced to work in domestic service and other menial labour in far larger numbers than local women and of course the horrific situation of them being groomed to become mail order brides to Western men and/or trafficked into the sex industry en mass after the fall of the Soviet Union.

[menalez]

CENTURIES ago???? armenian women were collectively raped during the armenian genocide at the beginning of last century. it's been less than 50 years since the mass rapes of greek cypriot women during the turkish invasion of cyprus. but sure, ancient history we're only bringing up to be racist to our fucking colonizers i guess. the difference between us is that i get 100% why women who have been colonized by europeans don't trust white men bc they have every damn right not to. you care more about caping for muslim men instead.

women have every right to see religious men as a red flag, and that includes muslims. just like I'd warn a muslim girl to stay the hell away from some religious catholic male freak non muslim women have every reason to see men whose version of paradise is being rewarded by fucking virgins as a red flag

this...........was done by turkey..........not the ottoman empire.......... and the stuff w armenian women... do u guys... know where armenia is? this is exactly my point yall are bringing up the ottoman empire when it literally was persecuting women from the demographics u keep putting down. the ottoman empire was colonising all of us and yes when u say the OTTOMAN EMPIRE im gonna say centuries ago bc the ottoman empire fell in 1922. the stuff u mentioned previously was stuff most prominent in the 1700s and 1800s. the turkish invasion of cyprus was decades after the ottoman empire fell. and again you are comparing white women being wary to muslim men on the basis of their race and then using the ottoman empire to justify it when the ottoman empire colonised the rest of us too. and the ottoman empire literally enslaved woc, namely african women (including north african women iirc) and women from northern middle east.

not once did i say women aren't allowed to be wary of men as a whole, or religious men as whole. my issue is when it becomes clearly racialised, is racism, and is about xenophobia.

but please tell me again how im the one engaging in bad faith when youre over here twisting my words and acting like im out here defending the ottoman empire

[kyreniacommentator]

Faiz Sucuoğlu: “The heroic epic of Turkish Cypriots from Limassol”

Faiz Sucuoğlu: “The heroic epic of Turkish Cypriots from Limassol”

TRNC Prime Minister Faiz Sucuoğlu, emphasized that the Limassol Resistance is an heroic epic of the Turkish Cypriots from Limassol. (more…)

[davidluongart]

Aphrodite as 100 years of Greek fashion (part 1)

Before writing this long essay post, I just wanted to give props and citations of information to both @alatismeni-theitsa and @greek-mythologies for introducing me a lot of things about Greek arts, culture, and its past history over several months now; and that this idea was also partly inspired from the common idea of modern Hellenic Polytheists as well: that “the gods are often enormously powerful beings who don’t have definitive physical bodies, and they often manifest/appear to whomsoever they wish and in any form that they wish to.” To me, since both Aphrodite and Ares have always been appeared as local Mediterranean Greeks in modern-day clothing fashion, here are some photos of what the couple themselves would wear/ dress like for over past 100 years ago.

1910s:

During this time and era, Western European fashion from the Edwardian era haven't reached to most of the Greek population, yet; and only to be worn by the royal aristocratic class and the affluent wealthy class. It was much more transition period due to the effects of Second Industrial Revolution, to be exact. Villagers who lived in both rural and developing areas back then often wore the traditional clothing (paradosiaki foresia), consisted of a simpler attire: shirt, skirt, apron, and handkerchief for women. (Even though this is not really a case for all the affluent wealthy class, as sometimes they wore traditional fashion or a fusion mix between both modern and traditional, in some occasions.) Aphrodite, in this case here, as the goddess of sex, love and beauty, wore “the traditional folk kaprasia bridal dress” from the island of Cyprus as usual, with the traditional ornate golden jewelry that Greek Cypriot families often passed down from generations to generations.

Historically, this is also the time when all countries in the Balkan region (Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia) forming allies together in order to help smaller European territories to gain independence from the ever slowly-dying Ottoman Empire; but later turn hostile towards to each other due to the partitioning of their conquests. The political Greek royal family and the Greek Prime Minister also began to ripping the Greek society apart; as Konstantinos I was married to Kaiser Wilheim II’s sister while the Greek government Eleftherios Venizelos was allied with the Allied Powers, British Empire, and France. This period of time, also marked “one of the largest chain of tragedies and sadnesses within the modern Greek history”; as the famous Greek genocides were being committed in the Anatolia region of Turkey, on the basis of their religion and ethnicity. With the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the assassination of Franz Ferdinand of Austro-Hungarian Empire, and other problem factors that related to “Socio-Darwinism” and “colonialism” across Africa and Asia, World War I begins and Greece declares war on the Central Powers in 1914, ending three years of neutrality by entering World War I alongside Britain, France, Russia, and Italy.

1920s: 

During this time and era, Europe just formed a fragile peace treaty together and WW1 had made a fundamental and irreversible effect on society, culture, and fashion; where women’s fashion were all often associated with the ideas of “letting loose”, “breaking free” and “rebel against” the physical and social constraints of the previous century. Letting go away from the extravagant and restrictive styles of the Victorian and Edwardian periods, and towards a more simple, more casual chic, and looser clothing which revealed more of the flowing silhouette, the arms and the legs. This idea might have originally started in Paris and popularized by Gabrielle Chanel, paralleling with the idea of “women’s participation on the war, have the right to vote and entering the workforce to win her own liberty” -which later spread to many parts of urban cities across the Americas and Western Europe. Despite this, since Greece has always been much more socially-culturally modest and much more conservative than other Northern European countries during this time: it is either that Greek women embraced these new long flowy dresses where their skin was less revealed, or that women still embraced the dresses from the past Victorian-Edwardian eras. (But I personally think that Aphrodite herself would passionately embraced these new minimalist flapper-like looks, to be honest.)

Aphrodite’s dress and hairstyle in here was inspired from Princess Aspasia Manos of Denmark and Greece, and Queen Victoria Eugénie of Battenberg and Spain; since during this time, high end fashion trends were now become much more cheaper and affordable to people who coming from the middle working classes. The jewelry that she wore around her neck were the strands of pearls - one of the common characteristic that was popularized by Gabrielle Chanel during that time and had always been considered as “the sacred stone of love” to the goddess herself back in the ancient times- and a necklace of red coral beads. Her once ancient golden jewelry is now remodeled and incorporated with new gemstones, which was a kind of common case during that time, too. Her husband, the god Ares here wore the usual local traditional fustanella from the region of Thessaloniki-Macedonia that you guys had saw in my previous drawings.  The architectural background was based on one of the oldest and the most beautiful neighborhoods in modern city of Athens, Plaka and several other neoclassical architectural pieces around the city’s center. 

[newstfionline]

Monday, April 26, 2021

California ponders slow growth future (AP) In 1962, when California’s population of more than 17 million surpassed New York’s, Gov. Pat Brown celebrated by declaring a state holiday. In the coming days, when the U.S. Census Bureau is expected to release the state’s latest head count, there probably will be no celebrations. Over the past decade, California’s average annual population growth rate slipped to 0.06%—lower than at any time since at least 1900. The state is facing the prospect of losing a U.S. House seat for the first time in its history, while political rivals Texas and Florida add more residents and political clout. The reality behind the slowed growth isn’t complicated. Experts point to three major factors: declining birth rates; a long-standing trend of fewer people moving in from other states than leaving; and a drop in international immigration, particularly from Asia, which has made up for people moving to other states. California is in the throes of a yearslong housing crisis as building fails to keep up with demand, forcing more people onto the streets and making home ownership unattainable for many. The state has the nation’s highest poverty rate when housing is taken into account. Its water resources are consistently taxed, and the state has spent more than half of the past decade in drought. Freeways are jammed as more people move to the suburbs, and worsening wildfires are destroying homes and communities.

Armenians Celebrate Biden’s Genocide Declaration as Furious Turkey Summons US Ambassador (Newsweek) Armenia celebrated President Joe Biden’s recognition of the massacres of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during World War I as genocide on Saturday, as Turkey summoned the U.S. ambassador and strongly condemned the move. In acknowledging of the deaths of 1.5 million Armenians as genocide, Biden went further than his predecessors in the White House after years of careful language on the issue. The move risks fracturing America’s relationship with Turkey, a longtime U.S. ally and NATO partner. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan sent Biden a letter praising his statement. Meanwhile, officials in Turkey quickly denounced Biden’s remarks and summoned the US Ambassador to Ankara. In a statement, Turkey said its foreign minister, Sedat Onal, has told ambassador David Satterfield that Biden’s remarks caused “wounds in ties that will be hard to repair.” Onal also reportedly told Satterfield that Turkey “rejected it, found it unacceptable and condemned in the strongest terms.”

Ahead of Geneva talks, Cypriots march for peace (Reuters) Thousands of Cypriots from both sides of a dividing line splitting their island marched for peace on Saturday, ahead of informal talks in Geneva next week on the future of negotiations. With some holding olive branches, people walked in the bright spring sunshine around the medieval walls circling the capital, Nicosia. The United Nations has called for informal talks of parties in the Cyprus dispute in Geneva on April 27-29, in an attempt to look for a way forward in resuming peace talks that collapsed in mid-2017. Prospects for progress appear slim, with each side sticking to their respective positions. Greek Cypriots say Cyprus should be reunited under a federal umbrella, citing relevant United Nations resolutions. The newly-elected Turkish Cypriot leader has called for a two-state resolution. Cyprus was split in a Turkish invasion in 1974 triggered by a brief Greek-inspired coup, though the seeds of separation were sown earlier, when a power-sharing administration crumbled in violence in 1963, just three years after independence from Britain.

World’s Biggest Covid Crisis Threatens Modi’s Grip on India (Bloomberg) As India recorded more than 234,000 new Covid-19 infections last Saturday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi held an election rally in the West Bengal town of Asansol and tweeted: “I’ve never seen such huge crowds.” The second wave of the coronavirus has since grown into a tsunami. India is now the global coronavirus hotspot, setting records for the world’s highest number of daily cases. Images of hospitals overflowing with the sick and dying are flooding social media, as medical staff and the public alike make desperate appeals for oxygen supplies. The political and financial capitals of New Delhi and Mumbai are in lockdown, with only the sound of ambulance sirens punctuating the quiet, but there’s a growing chorus of blame directed at Modi over his government’s handling of the pandemic. “At this crucial time he is fighting for votes and not against Covid,” said Panchanan Maharana, a community activist from the state of Odisha, who previously supported Modi’s policies but will now look for alternative parties to back. “He is failing to deliver—he should stop talking and focus on saving people’s lives and livelihoods.” Modi is seen by many as a polarizing leader whose brand of nationalism that promotes the dominance of Hindus has appalled and enraptured the nation. Whether the pandemic will dent his appeal remains unclear.

ASEAN leaders tell Myanmar coup general to end killings (AP) Southeast Asian leaders demanded an immediate end to killings and the release of political detainees in Myanmar in an emergency summit Saturday with its top general and coup leader who, according to Malaysia’s prime minister, did not reject them outright. The leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations also told Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing during the two-hour talks in Jakarta that a dialogue between contending parties in Myanmar should immediately start, with the help of ASEAN envoys. Daily shootings by police and soldiers since the Feb. 1 coup have killed more than 700 mostly peaceful protesters and bystanders, according to several independent tallies. The messages conveyed to Min Aung Hlaing were unusually blunt and could be seen as a breach of the conservative 10-nation bloc’s bedrock principle forbidding member states from interfering in each other’s affairs. But Malaysian Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin said that policy should not lead to inaction if a domestic situation “jeopardizes the peace, security, and stability of ASEAN and the wider region” and there is international clamor for resolute action.

Sunken missing Indonesian submarine found broken into pieces (Reuters) A missing Indonesian submarine has been found, broken into at least three parts, at the bottom of the Bali Sea, army and navy officials said on Sunday, as the president sent condolences to relatives of the 53 crew. Navy chief of staff Yudo Margono said the crew were not to blame for the accident and that the submarine did not experience a blackout, blaming “forces of nature”. A sonar scan on Saturday detected the submarine at 850 metres (2,790 feet), far beyond the Nanggala’s diving range.

At least 82 die in Baghdad COVID hospital fire (Reuters) A fire sparked by an oxygen tank explosion killed at least 82 people and injured 110 at a hospital in Baghdad that had been equipped to house COVID-19 patients, an Interior Ministry spokesman said on Sunday. “We urgently need to review safety measures at all hospitals to prevent such a painful incident from happening in future,” spokesman Khalid al-Muhanna told state television, announcing the toll.

Struggling to stay afloat during the pandemic, people turn to strangers online for help (Washington Post) The pandemic has been disastrous for millions of families across the United States. Roughly 8.5 million jobs have not returned since February 2020. Meanwhile, more than 564,000 people have died of the coronavirus, and 100,000 small businesses closed permanently in just the first three months of the crisis. The government has provided help, including through multiple relief packages that sent out three rounds of stimulus checks and extended unemployment benefits. But for many people it hasn’t been enough—or come quickly enough—to avoid eviction, put food on the table and cover a growing pile of monthly bills. Enter crowdfunding, which has taken off more than ever in the past year as a way to supplement income. Sites like GoFundMe, Kickstarter or even Facebook allow people and businesses to establish a cause—or set up a page laying out why they (or someone they are raising the money for) need money, and what the cash will go toward. After demand spiked last year, GoFundMe in October formalized a new category specifically for rent, food and bills. More than $100 million had been raised at that time year-to-date for basic living expenses in tens of thousands of campaigns during 2020—a 150 percent increase over 2019. But a year into the pandemic, some individual crowdfunding campaigns are reporting little success raising donations to cover basic expenses. As pandemic fatigue worsens, it’s getting hard to raise cash for basic expenses this way. Daryl Hatton, CEO and founder of FundRazr said when he browsed through the campaigns for basic expenses, most were getting little or no donations. “I saw a whole bunch of zeros,” he said. Crowdfunding still tends to work best when people have a compelling story to tell.

Older people are the one group egalitarians discriminate against (Quartz) Young people have always been critical of their elders. What’s noteworthy about the way millennials and Zoomers talk about Baby Boomers today isn’t their disdain but its particulars: They resent the older generation because they feel shortchanged, deprived of promising futures. Gen Z, for example, famously channeled their frustration with the generation they hold responsible for issues like climate change and wealth inequality into the simple, sarcastic meme “OK boomer.” Vaccines aside, these economic frustrations are grounded in reality. At the same time, younger people’s systemic objections to the distribution of wealth and power in the US can wind up curdling into ageism. A new paper, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, highlights the importance of guarding against this bias. Over 80% of Americans between the ages of 50 and 80 say they experience ageism in their everyday lives, according to a 2020 poll from the University of Michigan. “I think many people overlook ageism as a form of prejudice in American society,” says Ashley Martin, an assistant professor of organizational behavior at Stanford University, who co-authored the paper with Michael North, an assistant professor at New York University. “It is often overlooked as an “ism” altogether, not only being condoned but often even promoted.” The paper identifies a surprising link between ageism and egalitarianism. The more participants in the study supported the principle of equality for all, the more likely they were to be biased against older people.

[alatismeni-theitsa]

The problem now is that the people of Turkey especially the government doesn't want to admit what they did was wrong back then. And I saw interviews of the Turkey people in Cyprus and said that Turkey saved them back then.

Don't know If it was propaganda but when I visited τα κατεχόμενα it was...a sad view. People left their homes and now are decaying and ruined.

I really hope it will be resolved and cyprus just be united again :/ I now it's really hard but I think the new generations should not make the same mistakes as their ancestors and hate will only make things worse.

It's a deep wound that will take time to heal but the first step is for both sides to acknowledge their past mistakes

I don't remember ever seeing any proof of Greeks oppressing the Turks back then. It was the Turks that had occupied the island for three centuries and thus (usually Greek) Christians were the ones who got treated like second class citizens (up until 1878). One could argue this is old history and in the 1970s Greeks found a way to turn the tables on the Turks. But I have yet to see evidence of that so if anyone has it, please present it.

It's a fact though, that before Turkey invaded, there were fights between Greeks and Turks about control of the island, and the Greeks performed a coup with the help of the Greek Junta (that most Greeks in the mainland hated as well). This is what the Turkish call "genocide", half a century after they exterminated hundreds of thousands of Greeks, Assyrians and Armenians?

Anyways, to defend the Turks of the island against the Greek coup, the Turkish government decided to invade, and when the fighting stopped, the Turkish forces just... stayed, and Greek people could no longer go home.

To this day they can't go to their homes and the buildings have fallen into ruin or taken by Turks. But the Turks didn't lose their homes. If some did I am terribly sorry for them as well, but it was the Greek population that was majorly and permanently displaced. Movies and literature about average family people, Greek Cypriots, having nostalgia for their old homes after the invasion are big in Greece and the South part of Cyprus.

I am aware that both Turks and Greeks suffered during this short war and I sympathize with everyone regardless of ethnicity. It's certain that most Turks and Greeks lived normal lives and were good people and didn't fight or kill anyone at this period. And of course any atrocities committed by Greeks or Turks, I condemn them. But when propaganda about genocide comes to the front, I feel I have to get some things straight.

[mightyflamethrower]

October 7 should have been an open-and-shut case of moral condemnation.

During peace and holiday, invading Hamas gunmen murdered, tortured, mass raped, decapitated, and mutilated some 1,200 Israelis. The vast majority were unarmed women, children, infants, and the elderly.

The cowardly murderers proudly filmed their atrocities and then fled back to Gaza—to cheers from the Gaza street.

Before Israel even retaliated, the mass murdering of Jews earned praise from the Middle East, the international hard left, and especially the faculty and students of elite Western campuses.

When the Israeli Defense Forces struck back, the killers dispersed to the safety of their multibillion-dollar subterranean cities. The cowardly elite architects of the mass murder fled to Arab sanctuaries in Lebanon and Qatar.

From its headquarters burrowed below hospitals, mosques, and schools, Hamas bartered hostages for a reprieve from the IDF and the release of its own convicted terrorists in Israeli jails.

Hamas shot any of its own supporters who refused to shield Hamas gunmen.

It continued launching rockets at Israeli civilian centers. It serially lied about its casualties, expropriating intended relief food and fuel for its underground tunnel city of killers.

Abroad, Hamas supporters also emulated the methods of the pro-Nazi demonstrators in Western cities of the 1930s. Unlike their pro-Israel critics, the pro-Hamas demonstrators in the U.S. and Europe turned violent.

They took over and defaced private and public property. They chanted genocidal anti-Semitic slogans calling for erasure of the nation of Israel.

They interrupted shoppers, blocked highways, attacked businesses, and swarmed bridges. They assaulted police.

The majority wore masks to hide their identities in the fashion of anti-semitic Klansmen.

Why did the doctrinaire left, the youth of the Democratic Party, and the campuses outdo each other in their anti-semitic venom toward Israel?

For the first time in their lives, many of the ignorant protestors suddenly professed concern about refugees, colonialism, disproportionality, innocent civilians, and the rules of war.

But none could explain why the Palestinians who fled Israel in 1947-48 still self-identify as victimized “refugees” when 900,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from Middle-East Arab cities about the same time do not.

The 200,000 Greek Cypriots driven out from norther Cyprus by Turkey apparently do not warrant “refugee’’ status either.

Few protestors knew that Jews have lived in present-day Israel for over three millennia. The longest colonialist presence there were Muslim Turks who brutally ran the Holy Land for 300 years until they lost World War I and were expelled.

How exactly did it happen that the eighth-century A.D. Al-Aqsa Mosque was built within King Herod’s earlier Second Temple enclosure?

The Pro-Hamas crowd has little appreciation that colonizing Arab Muslims have one of history’s longest records of “settling” other countries far from their historic birthland.

They “settled” and “colonized” the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Middle East, Berber North Africa, and southern Spain. Millions of Middle Easterners migrated to—“settled?”— supposedly infidel European cities, where they often self-segregate, and do not assimilate fully with their magnanimous hosts.

As far as “disproportionality,” it is the goal of every power at war, Hamas included.

What protestors are furious about is that Israel is more effective at being disproportionate in retaliation than Hamas and its Iranian supporters were in their preemptive mass murdering.

Targeting innocent civilians? Hamas is among the current greatest offenders in the world.

It rockets Israeli cities without warning. It mass murders Jews in their beds during peace. It exposes Gazans to mortal danger by impressing them as human shields. Hamas shoots those who refuse.

The “rules of war” are violated by Hamas daily. Such protocols require combatants to wear uniforms not to blend in with civilians, not to use them as shields, not to murder noncombatants, not to rape them, not to mutilate them, and not to execute civilians without trial.

Why then would millions ally themselves with this odious reincarnation of the SS?

Are they ignorant of the history of the Middle East?

Are they arrogant since few challenge their hate and threats?

Are they opportunists who feel mouthing anti-Western shibboleths gains them career traction in leftist-run media, academia, and popular culture?

Are they bullies who count on the Western silent majority remaining quiet as they disrupt lives, trash Western tolerant culture, and commit violence?

Like Hamas that they support, do they despise Jews? Why else do they express an existential hatred toward Israelis that they never display to any other group?

Those now on the street utter not a peep about the Sudanese Arab mass killers in Darfur, Chinese oppressors of the Muslim Uighurs, Russians targeting civilians in Ukraine, or ISIS, Syrian, and Yemeni murderers of fellow Muslims.

Yet all of these terrorist killers are guilty of the very charges the protestors falsely attribute to Israel. But they are all not Jewish—and that explains the pass given them by our anti-semitic, pro-Hamas street.

[robertbinkowski]

“The Turkey Isn’t Ready Yet”, a look at Turkey’s entry to the European Union

Let’s talk Turkey, and see whether I can squeeze any more puns into a topic as dry as the diplomacy around European Union enlargement.

Introduction

Enlargement has been a part of European Union policy since 1973, and has seen the member-state count rise from just six founding members into twenty-seven member states as of 2020. While each enlargement has brought with it a host of sociopolitical questions, most nations that seek to join the European Union do so, albeit once they fulfill the requirements which do change over time. However, one potential candidate for enlargement has seen increased debate about whether their accession negotiations should be aborted or suspended– the Republic of Turkey. The subject of Turkish accession has been hotly debated– while pros and cons exist to the accession, the process has been mired in controversy. While advocates claim that Turkish accession would be a mutually beneficial agreement in the long-term, it must be said that Turkey should have their current negotiations terminated or suspended until major changes occur in the nation. By looking at the arguments in favour and against Turkish accession, as well as the controversies that exist in the process, this analysis will argue that it is in the best interest of the European Union to terminate or suspend the accession negotiations with Turkey until the nation has taken further steps to show willingness to implement further measures that could ensure cohesion.

Internal Policy Concerns

The political situation in Turkey is problematic for many reasons, but can be boiled down to a lack of effort on the part of the Turkish government in encouraging cohesion with European Union standards, as well as having a set of political principles including authoritarianism and militarism which find themselves at odds with the standard for European democracy. Where Turkey has expressed interest in joining the European Union, they have failed to follow this sentiment up with effective political change. Internally, it seems that much of the controversy of accession revolves around the poor track record that Turkey has with its minority groups and a political system based less on democracy and more on militarist supremacy. While these issues are solvable, and the European Union should continue to encourage Turkey to move towards European ideals, the nation has quite simply not made any considerable efforts to adapt to the criteria outlined for their accession process.

While expressing interest to join the European Union, Turkey has continuously regressed in its convergence efforts in favour of authoritarianism– Turkish scholars identify a so-called “deep state” of military elites, big business and big media, which stand as a threat to democratic reform efforts in Turkey. Indeed, Turkey’s political instability and fragile democracy make them a difficult accession candidate, as the European Union would naturally inherit the problems that come with a new member-state. It is not currently in the best interest of the European Union to be saddled with decades of ethnic tensions, constitutional strife, and a political system based on the elevation of the military over popular sovereignty. Nothing better encapsulates this issue than the ongoing political instability perpetuated by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has effectively outlawed opposition to his party, silenced minority dissenters such as the Kurds, and added a multitude of authoritarian additional powers to the presidency. Quite simply, Erdoğan has done everything possible to avoid meeting European convergence requirements– it cannot be the case that a nation joins the European Union while at the same time standing against democracy, political opposition, and the rule of law. While an argument can be made that the continued accession process may motivate Turkey to democratize, this has been already proven to not be the case– even with the ongoing process, Turkey has taken many backward steps in the issues outlined above. While this is not to say that Turkey may never join the European Union, it certainly must be said that the ongoing domestic political struggle in Turkey leaves the nation as too far away from European standards for the time being.

As touched on previously, a major controversy facing Turkey is its poor treatment of minorities inside its borders, both historically and in a contemporary setting. Turkey, like many countries involved in the European region’s political history, has been founded on nationalism and genocide. However, unlike member-states such as Germany, Turkey has not yet come to terms with its past– in fact, the nation denies any involvement in genocidal activity, for example their infamous denial of the Armenian and Greek Genocides. While a history of such behaviour should not necessarily be a reason to bar Turkey’s accession, the same cannot be said for their historical revisionism, which has been recognized as an authoritarian and nationalist move. Moreover, Turkey’s continued strife with the Kurdish population shows that there are still heavily monocultural and nationalistic sentiments in the country; in fact, this issue has reached a point where there exists active fighting between Turkish and Kurdish populations. Once more, this is not necessarily a permanent halt to European Union membership, but the Kurdish discrimination does show internal instability within Turkey that will realistically take time to solve. It is not in the interest of the European Union to get caught up in this struggle, and European involvement should be limited to providing political aid until the country is ready to initiate meaningful change. While it would be valuable to make haste in integrating Turkey to take advantage of their national capabilities, including a wider labour pool, geopolitical position, and military capability, this is simply not an option while Turkey continues to defy the values that the European Union considers essential. While it could certainly be argued that continuing the process may stabilize Turkey through a more forceful set of convergence requirements, it seems that the current problems lie extremely deep in the Turkish political system– as of now, it seems that the Turkish “exit from democracy” is not only getting worse, but that it is coupled with a general rise in behaviours contrary to the values of the European Union.

Foreign Policy Factors

Turkey is quite a significant player in Middle Eastern and European politics– boasting the status of a regional power, a strong military, and a population of over 80 million people, the nation’s influence is not to be underestimated. However, Turkey’s foreign policy poses a big problem for their entry into the European Union, both when considering their policy towards European Union member-states and non-member-states. The major controversies largely revolve around the nation’s relationships with, and attitudes towards, their neighbours– specifically, Greece, Cyprus, and Syria.

Arguably one of the most significant controversies facing Turkey is the fact that it is involved in an active border dispute with an existing member-state, Cyprus. Since 1974, Turkey has occupied the northern section of Cyprus, which is an issue that the European Union had inherited upon the Cypriot accession in 2004. While some would argue that having Turkey join the European Union, or at least further negotiations, may help the nations agree to a resolution to the issue, this is simply not a realistic viewpoint. Of course, the continued accession process of Turkey would be a step in political cooperation– there is little doubt that the European Union would benefit from Turkey’s membership in matters such as the refugee situation or the war on terror. However, Turkey’s continued strife with member-states does not bode well for its ability to work in sync with the European Union. In reality, the fact that Turkey is engaged in a dispute with Cyprus has only led to bad blood between the nations that will likely result in the Turkish accession process being vetoed at every step– moreover, the occupation of Cyprus was also followed by mass colonization by Turkey, which has further cemented the view of Turkey as a nationalist and aggressive state. As much of an issue this is, the real challenge it represents is Turkey’s inability, or lack of willingness, to negotiate with the European Union– on multiple occasions, Turkey has denied European efforts to bring a peaceful solution to the Cypriot problem. At the present time, Turkey’s accession is tied into a solution to the Cypriot problem, and for good reason– attempting to negotiate with a nation that refuses to compromise or admit fault is simply impossible and impractical, not to mention the bad blood it creates in political environments throughout the European Union. This problem is fundamentally tied into Turkey’s autocratic political system, and until it can be resolved peacefully, the European Union would be well advised to terminate the accession negotiations.

While Cyprus is a small European member-state both in terms of economic power and population, Turkey has a controversial relationship with another European member-state of far greater influence– Greece. Despite both belonging to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Greece and Turkey have an extensive history of border disputes and a historically poor relationship due to the legacy of the Ottoman Empire. In this case, Turkish military supremacy has led to a constant invasion against Greek sovereign airspace– knowing this, it is impossible to reasonably suggest that a nation which is arguably invading a European Union member-state should be admitted into the same union. While some may again bring up the benefit of gaining access to the Turkish military, and enforcing NATO alliances, it is currently not feasible to maintain the accession negotiations under the aggressive state of affairs. The problem with Greece is much the same as other Turkish disputes– an unrecognized claim being enforced through militaristic means. It is quite clear to see why such a foreign policy does not invoke confidence among the European Community, and why opposition to Turkish admission into the European Union averages around 70% across member-states.

Looking outside the European Union, Turkish foreign policy presents further issues in the Middle East, especially in the war-torn nation of Syria. With the theoretical admission of Turkey into the European Union, there would be a direct European border with Iraq, Syria, and Iran. The question must be asked; should the European Union involve itself further in the politics of the Middle East? This issue becomes further complicated when examining recent Turkish activity in the Middle East, specifically their fight against various factions in the Syrian Civil War. The European Union suffered great unrest and instability as a result of the Refugee Crisis, so it is not unreasonable to say that admitting Turkey into the European Union would further this issue by moving the front so much closer to the problem area. Not only could European Union expect a far larger number of refugees to enter into Europe through Turkey, but further involvement in Middle Eastern fighting could be expected as well. While it could be argued that Turkish accession would not necessarily include entry into the Schengen Area, it is still difficult to imagine a case where a member-state Turkey does not lead to further European involvement in the Middle Eastern situation. Indeed, Turkey has already proven that it does not have European interests in mind through their recent advance into Syria, which has been controversial due to the unrest that it has generated and the fact that it saw Turkish troops face off against Kurds. Ultimately, it seems that this is an issue without a viable solution, at least for the present time– by virtue of its geographical position, expansionist policy, and lack of consideration for European interests, Turkey cannot be currently trusted to converge effectively into European Union standards in the near future. So long as Turkey chooses to so heavily involve itself in Middle Eastern politics, which is a trend unlikely to be broken due to the fact that the vast majority of Turkish land is in the Middle East, the European Union would be best advised to keep Turkey at arms length to avoid any problematic entanglements.

Member-State Objections

As discussed previously, the admission of Turkey into the European Union is not a popular idea– European politicians and voter bases generally agree that the enlargement would be a negative development for the European Union. Largely, the arguments against Turkish membership focus on the economic consequences, cultural/religious incompatibility, and the issue of such a move disturbing the purpose that the European Union was intended to serve. Indeed, the admission of Turkey would represent a significant disturbance in the status quo of European politics, and possibly even trigger a change of sentiment against the European Union itself by right-wing conservative parties.

In the realm of economics, it cannot realistically be argued that Turkey’s current economic shortcomings are a reason to terminate the accession process– in fact, one of the purposes of the process is to converge the standards between the European Union and candidate nations. However, the real economic issue to consider in granting Turkey membership is the massive disturbance to the market that such a move would create– as a nation of 80 million people living with lower wages than the European average, the question of workers, wages, and mass immigration would have the potential to create the type of political instability that is simply not desirable for the European Union and its member states. While, of course, Turkey joining the European Union would create a powerful new consumer market, the potential for instability is simply not worth it at the current state. Indeed, the concerns of mass immigration are already a significant talking point for Eurosceptics; the fear of Turkish migration appears to be well outside the risk appetite for the European Union. If Turkey wishes to join the European Union, much more work must be done both at the Turkish level in converging economic standards, and at the European level in ensuring job security and stability for European citizens, lest such a disturbance cause a backlash among the population.

In a similar vein, the religious and cultural differences that Turkey has with the European Union as a whole simply prove to be too much of a hurdle at this time– no matter one’s opinion on diversity and inclusion, the entry of 80 million Muslim Turks into the European Union is very likely to cause backlash in a similar vein to that which was seen during the Refugee Crisis. The high population of Turkey is also important, as they would be the largest member state in the European Union, which comes with high voting privileges and a general strong control over the political process and direction of the European policy. This issue, paired with the vastly different culture present in Turkey, has the potential to break apart the unity and identity that the European Union has put significant effort into fostering. Whether overtly or not, political parties in Europe simply do not desire the entry of a culturally and religiously divergent country into the European Union. This issue, paired with the previously discussed lack of European political ideals leads to the concern that the Europeanness of the European Union is at risk with a potential Turkish enlargement. Moreover, there is question as to the directional precedent set by admitting Turkey, a nation mostly located in the Middle East geographically and culturally, into the European Union. In its current state, the European Union is already struggling to create a sense of identity amongst Europeans from the current member-states; it would be advisable to settle down and wait before considering future admissions, especially as the “obvious members” have already been admitted or offered admission. Enlargement fatigue is very much a real concern, and it is in the best interest of the European Union to put a hold on Turkish accession for as long as it takes to settle down the current political climate and overcome existing issues.

The European Union surely could benefit in many ways from the admission of Turkey– however, the challenges that still must be overcome both on Turkey’s and the European Union’s part represent a situation where the most advisable move at the time is to suspend or fully abort the accession negotiations with Turkey. The European Union has many pressing concerns on its table currently, including addressing democratic deficit, advancing European identity, and fostering cohesion within its own borders– at the present time, it is not advisable to add into the mix the controversies that come with admitting a culturally, politically, economically, and religiously divergent nation into the union.

Summary and conclusion

To conclude, it must be said that the European Union would be well-advised to terminate, or at least suspend indefinitely, the accession negotiations with Turkey, instead opting to remain allies without the commitment associated with membership. This conclusion is due to the myriad of controversies surrounding Turkey’s accession, including its political instability, ongoing disputes with European Union member-states, cultural and religious differences, as well as issues relating to its large population. While both pros and cons exist in regards to continuing the accession process with Turkey, it must be said that in the current context, the European Union should not continue their expansion attempts, and should place a higher priority focus on integrating and stabilizing the territory that they already hold.

Let me know if you agree of disagree, or if you have any other points you think should be made on this subject.

[fdhfjdafdajfa]

Speaking of global systems who wants to talk about Islamophobia. Everywhere I’ve ever been has had a horrific story to tell about Muslims. I grew up in USA watching it kill Muslims in droves. Then I watched it stand by while the people of Syria begged for years that USA should be so merciful to them as to give them the fate of the Iraqis or the Afghanistanis instead of the one on offer. Then I went to Greece and saw the concentration camps some of the refugees spend time in. Then I went to Cyprus -- didn’t see any there, because they all fled north where they live under military blockade imposed by their Greek Cypriot would-be genociders kept in check only by Turkey. So then I went to India which we're past the point of even being able to talk about, and Kashmir which is somehow even more overt. And these Brahmin keyboard warlords want to talk about anything except for Islam. Islam is only a small footnote in their neverending quest for social clout. The ongoing genocide of my people by theirs is a matter of such secondary importance compared to some massacre they gotta link me to a wikipedia article on because I never fuckin’ heard of it and it was a century ago. Boy, wish I had that luxury with the Meerut Pogrom.