At a time when an attempt is being made to bury Turkey in internal politics again and especially when new hopes are being pumped up by producing elitist Gandhis, important ruptures should not be overlooked. At least essential global discussions at the bottom of the agenda should not be overlooked by intellectuals. 

Not one new word was spoken about a world vision or national issues by the new CHP leadership, but still we are being dragged through an apolitical ambience into which hope is being pumped. AKP and CHP politicians in particular must carefully calculate the point where Europe will arrive or not arrive at over a mid-term and long-term and then adjust the country’s position according to that. Neither an Ergonekon-like turn inwardly nor liberal irresponsibility that leaves all the initiative to the West can be an avenue of vision.

Before anything else, following the debates in Europe started by some people would help to comprehend many things. For instance, it can be considered a first step in realizing that the Greek crisis is a harbinger of a European crisis or, more accurately, that this deep crisis reveals a great crack.

The nationalists’ internally oriented opposition to Europe and the liberal scatteredness that perceives everything as western-oriented make discussion of big issues in the political arena impossible. Without thinking long and hard, neither anything new can be said in internal politics nor can a strategy be formed regarding how the world, particularly the Europe project, will shape up in the middle and long range. Moreover, we are in an environment where the strategic weaknesses cannot even be seen without challenging the global values –which they put their faith in- of the West and European civilization where the country’s future is seen.

In a country where seeing and thinking of the world as European centered still carries intellectual weight, our westernization-modernization adventure since the Ottomans or, in other words, our making historical interpretation along this axis prevents questioning from the outset. For instance, the westernization projects that began with the Constitutional Government and that put the Ottomans in a semi-colonial position being perceived as a success story – even by the conservative segments- prevents them from being questioned and allows them to be seen from this perspective. Without the West’s giving account for the destruction of an empire and a process that resulted in a division of the spoils, the Europe project cannot be evaluated in a healthy way. The objection of those who advise us not to get hung up on history but who never forget their own history is not sufficient to correct our shortsightedness and open our closed consciousness.

However, Europe itself has come to look at the Europe project with very serious misgivings. Particularly when Europe was faced with the drawbacks of its constitution, the thesis “Europeans never believed in the Europe project” once again led to debates. Historically struggling with blood and fire in the grasp of nationalism, Europe politically wanted to realize Rome. All attempts from Napoleon to Hitler were actually initiatives to give new life to the Roman Empire. At the moment it appeared that the attempt to establish Rome would succeed without a fight, they had to deal with great cracks and schisms.

The crack made apparent by the economic crisis showed the economic weakness of the Europe project. The constitutional crisis revealed the political division and lack of will of the Europe project, and this crack is not the kind that can be closed. For example, in Richard Haass’ article, “Farewell to Great Europe,” he points out this great split and claims that Europeans never believed in Europe, the biggest reason for which is the continuation of the nationalist influence. If Europeans were serious on the subject of becoming a big power, Britain and France’s permanent membership in the UN Security Council should have turned into permanent membership for Europe. But such a thing is not even talked about.

The ability of a Europe bereft of international operational possibility and a united army to influence world balances was limited. This situation was a position of seeking opportunities behind America’s power which covered up this situation. Knowing its limits of power well, America would not hesitate to use this situation for its own strategic interests. It would eagerly embrace a divided Europe tactic. This was accomplished with the encouragement of the expansion of the EU with the end of the cold war. At the same time encouragement of the EU’s becoming a member of NATO, as they were, led to the clumsiness of the Europe project. It weakened the Union.

Saying with poetical and pensive intuition almost a half a century ago that Europe was finished, Sezai Karakoç wrote, “Europe was the biggest myth of the 20th century.” Having come to a halt in regard to civilization, Europe’s being able to unite by producing a political and economic value would have been a contradiction in history. When the terrible memories of two world wars that repressed the nationalism in their genes began to fade, natural reflexes kicked in.

The end of the Europe myth should be one of the basic topics debated in the coming period in Turkey, which is pushed towards the EU by USA support and the influence of the western myth.

�lgili Yaz�larDünya, Düşünce, English, Siyaset