HOME / letter from london: The British scene.

Fried TurkeyHow it lost its shot at the European Union.

By Geoffrey WheatcroftPosted Wednesday, May 2, 2007, at 4:54 PM ET

(Continued from page 1)

RSS

No one would agree more strongly with that than Sarkozy. And although he has moderated the overt hostility toward America displayed by Jacques Chirac, the man he hopes to succeed, he would also agree with Chirac that it is no more the American president's business to tell Europe how to deal with Turkey than it's the French president's business to tell the White House how to deal with Mexico. Sarko doesn't even need to spell out the immense economic and social problems that Turkish membership would present. He only has to say that admitting Turkey would be a mistake, and he is saying something that a large majority of voters in France, and most other European countries, already think.

Not only Washington and Tony Blair—who really is an American neoconservative with a British passport—but also many other well-meaning people have made what could be called an ulterior case for Turkish membership. In a generally thoughtful Financial Times column, Gideon Rachman repeats the conventional wisdom: "The keystone of [European] efforts to prop up secular democracy in the Islamic world is the offer to admit Turkey to the EU. But Europe's obvious reluctance to live up to this promise has antagonised Turks of all persuasions."

Which is all very well, but when did propping up secular democracy in the Islamic world become the purpose of the European Union? From the original signatories of the Treaty of Rome just over 50 years ago until today, the leaders of Europe have seen their task as encouraging democratic peace and prosperity—in Europe, not in Western Asia or further afield. It would no doubt be nice if the United States could encourage democracy and economic growth in Latin America, but that was not and is not the purpose of the country created by the U.S. Constitution.

In any case, the Turks have been antagonized by more than this European backsliding. Washington has made life much more difficult—and the neocons have exposed another of their project's internal contradictions. They admire, or admired, Turkey as a secular state (and as a friend, or non-enemy, of Israel). But the invasion of Iraq angered all Muslims, including the Turks, while the encouragement of Kurdish secession that has been one of the consequences of the Iraq enterprise has gone beyond anger and turned Turkey. Opinion there has turned, that's to say, more sharply against America than for many years past, since a distaste for their own Kurdish secessionists unites most Turks, left and right, Islamist or secular.

So, we have a Europe growing ever more suspicious of Islamism or even of Muslims, regrettably but not surprisingly after sundry events from Sept. 11, to riots in France, to the conviction in London on Monday of five Muslim terrorists. For its part, Turkey draws away resentfully from the West. And those who direct U.S. policy are further than ever from their objectives. You might call it a vicious circle of unintended consequences—and another fine mess.