It has been argued that the examination of historical arguments is in this debate essential, by exploring the similarities and differences between Turkey and Europe from historical point of view. (7) The current Turkey has been regarded as the inheritor of the Ottoman and even the earlier Byzantine empire, which both shaped the European history. (1) As a result, it has been assumed that the integration of current Turkey within the Europe had earlier been underpinned on historical roots, which refer to those empires. (3)(2)
In relation to the question of Islamic Turkey, It must be stated that the ancient involvement of its Islamic features in the process of shaping the European history, was in a past perceived in a negative light. (7) Concretely, It was the Muslim world which was seen as a threat to Christendom. (13-p.25)As a result, Europeans started subjectively defining Islam as „the other" based on its incompatibility with the European values.(11) (13-p.5) Consequently it is thought that this experience associated European identity with christianity and thus contributed to the applying the prejudice of „others" to Islam and nowadays to Muslim Turkey. (13-p.26)
All in all, this ancient association of Europe with Christianity and civilisation led to formation of geographical boundaries of Europe. (13-P.66) Hence, it can be argued that the „other", in our case became the crucial for the creation of contemporary Europe, which provides another argument suggesting that Islam has played a big role in construction of Europe.(13-76) Thus, this can be indirectly regarded as the argument which supports the belonging of Muslim Turkey in Europe.
Furthermore, the fact that the contemporary history of Turkey has been based on the European model, however provides an extensive support to the argument of Europe incorporating Turkey. Hence, when Mustafa Kemal, also known as Ataturk took his role to build a new country from the ruins of Ottoman Empire, his ambition was to build up a modern democratic state based on Western european model and european idelas. (17-p.5) As a result, the newly proclaimed republic of Turkey in 1923 carried amongst a many, notably the modern european feature of secularism - division of religion and state, which arguably made Turkey more european.(7) Therefore, notably this conversion from traditional Muslim values towards secular european is one of the strongest arguments in this debate, supporting the claim of the Turkey´s place in contemporary Europe. (17 - p.11)
From the geographical point of view, the European eastern border is claimed to be the area of Bosphorus and Dardanelles (3), which classifies Turkey as mostly Asian country. (1). However, this geographical assumption is opposed in many ways. For instance (1) argues that there are in fact no definite borders between Europe and Asia. This argument is clarified by the (12-p.32) stating that it is in fact the natural eastern border which Europe lacks. Furthermore, the Ural mountains which are currently regarded as the part of border between Asia and Europe are also questioned and doubted to serve as the proper barrier defining the continent, in comparison to the coastlines, which is of course not the case of Europe and Asia (13-p.4)
Therefore, it has been argued that any attempts to define Europe and its boundaries, in fact, include the issues of inclusion and exclusion, which we have earlier explored from the historicasl point of view and which immediately raise the question of the subjectivity of judgement (13-p.1) Thus, the same idea of „other" even nowadays seems to be involved in this debate about inclusion of Turkey within Europe, from the geographical point of view. (8) This is widely criticised by (16-p.238) arguing that this way of creating the boundaries between Turkey and Europe is still based on ancient inward-looking and defensive manner, as it was firstly in the case of ancient Greece, when separating themselves as the centre of civilisation from non-civilised other. (13-Laeng:11)(13-p.18)
All in all, as he adds, in relation to the contemporary debate, this inward looking and irrelevant attitude of forming the borders between Turkey and Europe is based on distorted assumption of homogeneous Europe. (16-p.239)
Therefore, the argument against this distorted view of homogeneous Europe given by (14-p.60) in fact supports the inclusion of Turkey within Europe. Hence, it is the reference to the culturally diverse Balkan states, which even in spite of their cultural diversity and some of them even being related to the Muslim background are still being recognised and included within the European boundary. This fact implies that even the Islam, perceived as the „other" by the Europeans, in fact has been present in current Europe for centuries, undermining any considerations of geographical boundaries of Europe being defining on the „other" MUSLIM argument.
Examining the cultural perspective of this debate, the role of Islam which fundamentally shaped the history of Turkey shall be discussed. As we have noticed earlier, the participation of Islam in Turkish society, is wrongly perceived as the hugely different aspect separating the Turkey from homogeneously perceived Christian Europe. Infact, it has been argued that the idea of Europe has in recent years gradually moved away from Christian values. (4-p.419) Hence, at this time it is ambiguos to negate Turkey´s belonging within the Europe based on Islam argument. On the contrary, Islam is interestingly argued to share with Christianity the common inheritance in Judaism and thus it has been even argued as the part of European civilisation. (15-p.38) COnsequently, it comes as no surprise that as Ugdul states, the Islam shall be today regarded as the domesticated European religion, thus opposing any arguments that boundaries of Europe are based solely on Chrsitian values. (3) He similarly as (14-p.60) refers to some of the Balkan states and their oriental roots, which imply that there is no reason to refuse to incorporate Turkey within European borders based on its majorly ISLAMIC cultural foundations.(3)
Furthermore, even (14-p.217) argues that Muslim populations are in great extent „the cultural heirs of the Hellenic world...the world in which Europe claims to have its roots. Thus, it is argued that Islam is also to be regarded as the form of „carrier civilisation" which has brought an important elements into Europe. Thus, (16-p.248) argues that for instance the cultural interactions between the ancient Ottoman empire and Europe existed long time ago and contributed to the construction of cultural heritages. Morever, it is even argued that there were in some cases greater interactions and links between the Ottomans and some current European states, than between some Europeans themselves. (2) Hence, this clearly suggests that any claims of united and homogeneous European culture are only a myth, which emerged in order to allow for creating the boundaries. (13-p.129) In fact, (15-p.34-5) recognsies the contribution of Muslims to the cultural meaning of Europe arguing that Europe has always been of multicultural nature, noting that interactions between Muslims and Christian Europeans permanently changed the European culture.
In the end, even when approaching this debate from cultural point of view, it can be seen that Turkey is still wrongly perceived by Europe as cultural „other" mainly refering to its Islamic cultural foundations. (7) Thus, we may share the opinion of (1) arguing that Turks are sociologically European even though they may be less urbanised or following different religion as the majority of Europeans. In particular she (1) refers to some Turks living around the coastal areas, arguing that they have more i ncommon with Greece than with their Syrian neighbours. The fact that this commonality exists even in spite of the Islamic religion shared between Turkey and Syria, strenghtnes the argument for the Turkey´s right to be included in Europe, and thus stop associating it wrongly with the unknown „other" which has nothin in common with Europe from cultural point of view.
To sum up, (3) argues that no one has ever managed to define the European boundaries in a precise manner, which indirectly suggests that arguments contributing to the answering the question of Turkey´s place in Europe should be primarily extratcted from analysis of historical and cultural aspects.
All in all, as it was discussed throughout the whole essay and from different aspects, the ancient prejudiced view of Turkey as the„other" seems to be still in place in relation to Europe. The arguments provided in this essay helped to negate this past legacy and furthermore suggested the high level of shared commonality between Turkey and Europe in various spheres, which were explored.
Furthermore, based on contemporary nature of this debate, the old and prejudiced view of Turkey as the „other" can be regarded as irrellevant, when Europe is, and supposingly has always been a multicultural and diverse society.(3) Moreover, the fact that current Turkey is based on European ideals, being „civilised" in the European way and as Davidson (3) argues compatible with the shared European values, provides an additional support to the Turkey´s claim to be regarded as the part of Europe.
Eventually, this is suported by Taspinar (3) who argues that Turkey as a secular and dmeocratic country is in fact the exception amongst the other countries in the similar Muslim world, which makes it definitely more closer to Europe than Asia.
