Morocco is accepted into the EU

Hendryk

Banned
Let's say that Morocco was accepted into the EU, when it applied in 1987. What would Morocco, and the EU, be like now? Would Morocco have reached first world status?
Morocco could not have been accepted in the EEC for political reasons that have already been mentioned (it wasn't a democracy) and for obvious geographic reasons. Look at how difficult it is for Turkey to even be considered a suitable potential candidate for membership (its first application was made in 1987, same as Morocco), despite the fact that it has arguably been a European power since 1453.
 

Jomazi

Banned
A non-democratic totalitary state filled with non-europeans situated in north Africa.... Lets do it!

"Former Roman territory".... What a load of...opinions I don't agree with.
 
Look at how difficult it is for Turkey to even be considered a suitable potential candidate for membership (its first application was made in 1987, same as Morocco), despite the fact that it has arguably been a European power since 1453.

I think Turkey's been a European power before that...

At least since the Battle of Pločnik in 1386, which led to the Ottoman dominance in the Balkans...
 

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
A non-democratic totalitary state filled with non-europeans situated in north Africa.... Lets do it!

"Former Roman territory".... What a load of...opinions I don't agree with.

Well for those of us who couldn't give a rat's arse either way about the EU and the pro and anti debates because we've been put off it by those at either extreme, I guess I don't care much who's let in and who's not anymore. Hence the levity. Still in this case, it makes both sides hot under the collar about admitting them so that makes it interesting in terms of the debate and reasoning if they are let in.


Sargon
 
Last edited:

Hendryk

Banned
I think Turkey's been a European power before that...

At least since the Battle of Pločnik in 1386, which led to the Ottoman dominance in the Balkans...
And even then, it hasn't been good enough for its application to EU membership to meet with approval. So a North African country simply doesn't stand a chance.

Besides, the way the question was formulated, it seems that EU membership is considered a simple procedure--you send your application, and bang, you're in. Well, no. It took Spain and Portugal 8 years of negociations and legal harmonization before they could join in 1986, and 11 years for Poland and the other central European members who joined in 2004. It's a dauntingly complex and protracted process.
 
Besides, the way the question was formulated, it seems that EU membership is considered a simple procedure--you send your application, and bang, you're in. Well, no. It took Spain and Portugal 8 years of negociations and legal harmonization before they could join in 1986, and 11 years for Poland and the other central European members who joined in 2004.

It took Greece even longer than that. But the thing about Morocco is that it could apply as a dictatorship and be let in as a democracy. Democratization would be an obvious prerequisite for membership. And if they could have been able to pull it off, this was really a missed opportunity.
 

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
And even then, it hasn't been good enough for its application to EU membership to meet with approval. So a North African country simply doesn't stand a chance.

Besides, the way the question was formulated, it seems that EU membership is considered a simple procedure--you send your application, and bang, you're in. Well, no. It took Spain and Portugal 8 years of negociations and legal harmonization before they could join in 1986, and 11 years for Poland and the other central European members who joined in 2004. It's a dauntingly complex and protracted process.

Hendryk is quite right. It is a thorough and lengthy process and it can take a lot of time to be in. The EU makes pretty sure it covers all the bases when it comes to applications for membership.

Still, as long as the country meets the criteria, it might have a chance to be let in. It's not very likely that a North African country, or others such as in the Levant would be let in, but it's not impossible. The Greek part of Cyprus is in, and that's not classed as being geographically European. A country that becomes democratic and meets the criteria in those areas could apply, and it would be interesting to see what happens.

Now, seeing as Israel is included in Eurovision, then they could possibly apply for the EU.

I do have a suspicion though that it is a 'majority Christian only club', and that no matter if somewhere like Turkey (which has territory in Europe and thus can't readily be denied on geographical grounds especially since Cyprus and Malta are in) easily met all the criteria, there would be strong elements at work in other parts of the EU never to accept them no matter how democratic and human rights conscious they are. An element of culturalism and racism at work perhaps...

It doesn't matter anyway. In 1000 years or so, there may not even be nation states as we know them and we could be so intermixed no-one would raise an eyebrow. So fighting against it either way and from whatever position one comes from may well ultimately be a waste of time.


Sargon
 
Hendryk is quite right. It is a thorough and lengthy process and it can take a lot of time to be in. The EU makes pretty sure it covers all the bases when it comes to applications for membership.

Still, as long as the country meets the criteria, it might have a chance to be let in. It's not very likely that a North African country, or others such as in the Levant would be let in, but it's not impossible. The Greek part of Cyprus is in, and that's not classed as being geographically European. A country that becomes democratic and meets the criteria in those areas could apply, and it would be interesting to see what happens.

Now, seeing as Israel is included in Eurovision, then they could possibly apply for the EU.

I do have a suspicion though that it is a 'majority Christian only club', and that no matter if somewhere like Turkey (which has territory in Europe and thus can't readily be denied on geographical grounds especially since Cyprus and Malta are in) easily met all the criteria, there would be strong elements at work in other parts of the EU never to accept them no matter how democratic and human rights conscious they are. An element of culturalism and racism at work perhaps...

It doesn't matter anyway. In 1000 years or so, there may not even be nation states as we know them and we could be so intermixed no-one would raise an eyebrow. So fighting against it either way and from whatever position one comes from may well ultimately be a waste of time.


Sargon

How do you know that the nation-state will be gone,it seems to be the most efficient type of sate,multi-ethnic states like Austria-Hungary and the Soviet Union have all fallen.
 

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
How do you know that the nation-state will be gone,it seems to be the most efficient type of sate,multi-ethnic states like Austria-Hungary and the Soviet Union have all fallen.

Read what I wrote. I didn't say I KNOW it WILL be gone, only that it might. None of us truly know what'll happen in the future, but it is a possibility.

And the way things are becoming intermixed these days with such things as more interracial relationships, migrations made a lot easier by modern travel, and people mixing in with other cultures (I have a friend in Canada who is now a proud Canadian citizen and gave up their Chinese citizenship to do it, even though they miss and like China - and will probably have mixed race children, plus another Japanese friend here in the UK who is now a British citizen), there's certainly a start to the trend.

Just because something happened in the past is no guarantee it won't happen in t'future tha' knows. And the reverse is also true.

Personally, I hope that culture isn't subsumed into a huge melting pot and lost forever as there are things to celebrate and it would be a great shame to lose, but with the advance of modern technologies, travel and greater education we are seeing things change a lot, especially in western countries these days. That sort of thing may well spread to other countries over time, and then it could become a universal trend. And if you don't like 1000 years, let's try 10,000, or 100,000. There's likely to be a lot of change in such a time period, we may not even easily recognise what we've become after 100,000 years.


Sargon
 

Hendryk

Banned
How do you know that the nation-state will be gone,it seems to be the most efficient type of sate,multi-ethnic states like Austria-Hungary and the Soviet Union have all fallen.
Go to Africa and see whether the nation-state is all that efficient. As for multi-ethnic states, they are very much around. Britain is one, and so are the US, Canada, Russia, China, India, Brazil, etc., etc...
 

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
Go to Africa and see whether the nation-state is all that efficient. As for multi-ethnic states, they are very much around. Britain is one, and so are the US, Canada, Russia, China, India, Brazil, etc., etc...

Good points. Although a lot of trouble in African states can plausibly be laid at the door of artificially created states lumping different ethnicities together, the remark about Canada, China, US etc., stands true.


Sargon
 
Go to Africa and see whether the nation-state is all that efficient. As for multi-ethnic states, they are very much around. Britain is one, and so are the US, Canada, Russia, China, India, Brazil, etc., etc...

Africa does not have nation states,tell me how many nationalities are in Nigeria or democratic Congo.Many of these multiethinc sates like Russia or China are held together by force of arms.
 

Hendryk

Banned
Africa does not have nation states,tell me how many nationalities are in Nigeria or democratic Congo.
My point exactly. Upon decolonization, the nation-state model was grafted on newly independent African countries, and it has been a disaster. And if one tried to apply the concept of "one nation: one state" in a place like Africa, it would make the Balkans look like a congenial tea party.
 
My point exactly. Upon decolonization, the nation-state model was grafted on newly independent African countries, and it has been a disaster. And if one tried to apply the concept of "one nation: one state" in a place like Africa, it would make the Balkans look like a congenial tea party.

I think that Africa will be less destroyed by conflicts if the large multiethnic states like democratic Congo,Sudan and Nigeria would be broken in small ethnic based states.
 
Go to Africa and see whether the nation-state is all that efficient. As for multi-ethnic states, they are very much around. Britain is one, and so are the US, Canada, Russia, China, India, Brazil, etc., etc...

And don't forget your southern and northern neighbours....
 
I think that Africa will be less destroyed by conflicts if the large multiethnic states like democratic Congo,Sudan and Nigeria would be broken in small ethnic based states.

Oh yeah, let's break them up into rump states that either lack the resources to survive or the ability to defend them from foreign exploitation. Brilliant idea. And then let's take it one step further and break them up according to tribes, since Somalia's such an obvious example of how little ethnic homogeneity has to do with successful statehood.

And I'd really like to see you break up Rwanda and Burundi between their 2 dominant ethnicities. You'd have the border going 3 times through the same neighborhood.
 
Top