Surveying Turkish influence in Western Balkans

Here Nik appears to be right.

A Pew Research Center demographic study from 2009 put the percentage of Muslims in Albania at 79.9%. The CIA World Factbook gives a distribution of 70% Muslims, 20% Eastern Orthodox, and 10% Roman Catholics.

Turkey is making a partial comeback, that's not a secret, and it may become a major force again. But, its not there just yet.

It has to be examined in a wider contest.
While ago Arnold Joseph Toynbee, british historian brought about the term "clash of civilisations" with dominance of Western civilisation being imminent. Others would gave in, and adopt to it, and disappear. As an example, he was examining Turkey and Ataturk's reforms.
That was widespread belief decades ago.

In recent Huntington's (also British) book about clash of civilisations he is arriving to the opposite conclusion - non-Western civilizations do not surrender, do not disappear. Today some are so powerful that are taking the lead, and the Western world is in danger of colossal historic defeat.

One of the conclusions was that Islamism in Turkey is inevitable, because oridinary people want it.
Kemal Ataturk removed Islam from public life completely, but the common man does not exclude Islam in Turkey. Thus, reforms are doomed to fail.

In "bigger picture" we are witnessing restructuring of the world's economic (to be followed by military) power, as US will gradually loose its near-total control of the planet.
In the near future there will be several major economic/military powers besides North America - India, China, Latin America gathered around Brazil and some others.
Most likely there will be an Islamic state, which will bring together a billion Muslims in the world. Malasia perhaps? So far, Turkey has the best chance.
Turkey is using American support to its advantage, but ultimatelly, their leadership now understands that their rise to a great power depends on its ability to make itself a centre of entire islamic world .
US is still trying to push Turkey into Balkan, Caucaus, Central Asia, but it discourages it from turning to Middle East and Izrael. And that is exactly what Turkey is doing more and more often.
It spoiled US plan for new sanctions against Iran at the UN, it created great PR for itself with aid ship for Gaza strip, etc.
Why?
Only Islamism introduce Turkey to the club of great powers.

When it comes to EU, it will distance itself from US as there will become more and more involved into Afghanistan-style conflict, and will seek to establish itself as one of the new economic/military powers. On the other hand Russia is rapidly loosing population and is trying to regain the control of former Soviet Union countries or even unite all the Slavic nations in one powerful economic/military block.
Neither EU nor Russia are very pragmatic at the moment, but soon, they might be on the way to create one powerful block from british isles to Sea of Japan.

How will all this affect Balkans?
I have to agree with Nik that The Second Balkan War set most of the traps for future co-operation.

Region is just not ready to get over it.
Europe at one point said - "enough of borders, wars among us, etc. Let past be past."
Here it was understood- "Let's first change outcome of Second Balkan War, WW1, WW2. Let's draw new borders. etc. - THEN let's kiss history goodby."
Just recently I was unpleasantly surpised to find out that appearantly 40% of Bulgarians hate Serbs, too, because of Second Balkan War and injustice they have been done to them at the time.It only goes to show that NOBODY in the region is ready to understand EU message.

In righting those wrongs, they have created new wrongs. In uniting Albanians, they are forgeting that Serbs are now being divided, etc.
In one voice they are now saying that borders don't matter (why make them then?), it doesn't matter that so many Serbs are left in several other countries, etc.
I'm affraid that it is too late for that.
Serbs are not much different then their neighbours, you see.

Bulgarians did some massacres, for example. Just because I mentioned Bulgaria before. In fact massacres by Croats,Bosniaks, Hungarians and Albanians by far exceed anything done by Bulgarians.

If all the massacress and hatered by Bulgarians is justified because we divided them, then all the massacress by Serbs, done in the future, are justified too, because we are being divided now.

That is the common thinking, I'm affraid.

Again, Serbs are not better then Bulgarians or anybody else, and are not more capable to accept outcome of the 90's then others were to accept outcome of Second Balkan War.
Traps for future co-operation are there.
Even Tadic more and more often travels to Turkey. He is feeling cornered with nowhere to go and abandoned by those who suppose to be his friends.

The lack of strategy between the Christian states on the Balkans may lead to the return of the Turkish influence. After all the analysis misses the most important moment of the early 20-th century history. When the Christian states on the Balkans acted together during the First Balkan War. Unfortunately the co-operation did not last long. The Second Balkan War set most of the traps for future co-operation. As far as Albania is concerned it is not entirely a Muslim country – at least a quarter of the Albanians are Christian.

Serbian and Macedonian campers as there were Greek. There were no arguments along the quay about the Second Balkan War, or about Kosovo’s independence, or even about Macedonia,s name. People were talking about the size of the fishes they caught, the weather, whether it was cheaper to buy at Lidle or in Carrefour… everybody seamed friendly with everyone. Within the framework of free travel, I am sure the people on the Balkans will have no trouble with each other. How to achieve the framework, this is the question! "Let's first change outcome of Second Balkan War, WW1, WW2. Let's draw new borders. etc. - THEN let's kiss history goodby." Every of those wars changed in some way the outcome of the previous one. The End of the Cold War inevitably brought changes. Unitary Yugoslavia collapsed in WWII while the Yugoslavian federation was a completely different structure and it was then when the Serbs were divided! It collapsed after the end of the Cold War. The Balkan tragedy of the 90’s was the incapability of all subjects of the collapsing Yugoslavian federation to agree that all it has to do is to shift the powers of the Federal government from Belgrade to Brussels (an offer made by then president of the EEC commission Jacques Delores) As for the bigger picture – the “clash of civilizations” Huntington is right. The West could not impose its dominance over the world but could guarantee its future only if it unites). So the rise of China, India and the Muslim world may be countered by a confederation between EU, USA, Canada and Australia. Russia, Brazil and others may prefer to be its allies rather than its enemies. China and India may also prefer to be its partner. Huntington excludes most of the Balkans from the Western civilization, but most of the Orthodox are already in the EU and NATO (Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Cyprus) The Serbs may follow. They have no “Orthodox” option because Russia could not create a strong “civilization bloc”, not only due to its falling population, but because it thinks only in terms of strength. It mistreats its allies (especially if they depend on it) and courts its enemies, or those who do not depend on it at the expense of its allies. It has always proved incapable of creating an attractive social system. So may be we are looking for a round EU reaching the borders of Turkey (and its Central Asian and Middle Eastern allies) and the Russian lead Commonwealth of Independent states (perhaps with Georgia as its Caucasian outpost), trying to avoid quarrels with those two neighbors, but connected more with its transatlantic (and transpacific) daughter counties.

As far as Albania is concerned it is not entirely a Muslim country – at least a quarter of the Albanians are Christian.
(nik, 3 September 2010 06:30)

You seem to be totally ignorant about us, nik. Nervermind the rest of your "analysis".

Just to fix a misunderstanding. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk did not erase islam from daily life, he found a new "secular republic" with his friends. Which the state respects every religion and guarantees their practice but doesn't accept any religious rules in the constitution or in any law.

As far as Albania is concerned it is not entirely a Muslim country – at least a quarter of the Albanians are Christian.
(nik, 3 September 2010 06:30)

You seem to be totally ignorant about us, nik. Nervermind the rest of your "analysis".

Here Nik appears to be right.

A Pew Research Center demographic study from 2009 put the percentage of Muslims in Albania at 79.9%. The CIA World Factbook gives a distribution of 70% Muslims, 20% Eastern Orthodox, and 10% Roman Catholics.

Turkey is making a partial comeback, that's not a secret, and it may become a major force again. But, its not there just yet.

It has to be examined in a wider contest.
While ago Arnold Joseph Toynbee, british historian brought about the term "clash of civilisations" with dominance of Western civilisation being imminent. Others would gave in, and adopt to it, and disappear. As an example, he was examining Turkey and Ataturk's reforms.
That was widespread belief decades ago.

In recent Huntington's (also British) book about clash of civilisations he is arriving to the opposite conclusion - non-Western civilizations do not surrender, do not disappear. Today some are so powerful that are taking the lead, and the Western world is in danger of colossal historic defeat.

One of the conclusions was that Islamism in Turkey is inevitable, because oridinary people want it.
Kemal Ataturk removed Islam from public life completely, but the common man does not exclude Islam in Turkey. Thus, reforms are doomed to fail.

In "bigger picture" we are witnessing restructuring of the world's economic (to be followed by military) power, as US will gradually loose its near-total control of the planet.
In the near future there will be several major economic/military powers besides North America - India, China, Latin America gathered around Brazil and some others.
Most likely there will be an Islamic state, which will bring together a billion Muslims in the world. Malasia perhaps? So far, Turkey has the best chance.
Turkey is using American support to its advantage, but ultimatelly, their leadership now understands that their rise to a great power depends on its ability to make itself a centre of entire islamic world .
US is still trying to push Turkey into Balkan, Caucaus, Central Asia, but it discourages it from turning to Middle East and Izrael. And that is exactly what Turkey is doing more and more often.
It spoiled US plan for new sanctions against Iran at the UN, it created great PR for itself with aid ship for Gaza strip, etc.
Why?
Only Islamism introduce Turkey to the club of great powers.

When it comes to EU, it will distance itself from US as there will become more and more involved into Afghanistan-style conflict, and will seek to establish itself as one of the new economic/military powers. On the other hand Russia is rapidly loosing population and is trying to regain the control of former Soviet Union countries or even unite all the Slavic nations in one powerful economic/military block.
Neither EU nor Russia are very pragmatic at the moment, but soon, they might be on the way to create one powerful block from british isles to Sea of Japan.

How will all this affect Balkans?
I have to agree with Nik that The Second Balkan War set most of the traps for future co-operation.

Region is just not ready to get over it.
Europe at one point said - "enough of borders, wars among us, etc. Let past be past."
Here it was understood- "Let's first change outcome of Second Balkan War, WW1, WW2. Let's draw new borders. etc. - THEN let's kiss history goodby."
Just recently I was unpleasantly surpised to find out that appearantly 40% of Bulgarians hate Serbs, too, because of Second Balkan War and injustice they have been done to them at the time.It only goes to show that NOBODY in the region is ready to understand EU message.

In righting those wrongs, they have created new wrongs. In uniting Albanians, they are forgeting that Serbs are now being divided, etc.
In one voice they are now saying that borders don't matter (why make them then?), it doesn't matter that so many Serbs are left in several other countries, etc.
I'm affraid that it is too late for that.
Serbs are not much different then their neighbours, you see.

Bulgarians did some massacres, for example. Just because I mentioned Bulgaria before. In fact massacres by Croats,Bosniaks, Hungarians and Albanians by far exceed anything done by Bulgarians.

If all the massacress and hatered by Bulgarians is justified because we divided them, then all the massacress by Serbs, done in the future, are justified too, because we are being divided now.

That is the common thinking, I'm affraid.

Again, Serbs are not better then Bulgarians or anybody else, and are not more capable to accept outcome of the 90's then others were to accept outcome of Second Balkan War.
Traps for future co-operation are there.
Even Tadic more and more often travels to Turkey. He is feeling cornered with nowhere to go and abandoned by those who suppose to be his friends.

The lack of strategy between the Christian states on the Balkans may lead to the return of the Turkish influence. After all the analysis misses the most important moment of the early 20-th century history. When the Christian states on the Balkans acted together during the First Balkan War. Unfortunately the co-operation did not last long. The Second Balkan War set most of the traps for future co-operation. As far as Albania is concerned it is not entirely a Muslim country – at least a quarter of the Albanians are Christian.

Just to fix a misunderstanding. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk did not erase islam from daily life, he found a new "secular republic" with his friends. Which the state respects every religion and guarantees their practice but doesn't accept any religious rules in the constitution or in any law.

Serbian and Macedonian campers as there were Greek. There were no arguments along the quay about the Second Balkan War, or about Kosovo’s independence, or even about Macedonia,s name. People were talking about the size of the fishes they caught, the weather, whether it was cheaper to buy at Lidle or in Carrefour… everybody seamed friendly with everyone. Within the framework of free travel, I am sure the people on the Balkans will have no trouble with each other. How to achieve the framework, this is the question! "Let's first change outcome of Second Balkan War, WW1, WW2. Let's draw new borders. etc. - THEN let's kiss history goodby." Every of those wars changed in some way the outcome of the previous one. The End of the Cold War inevitably brought changes. Unitary Yugoslavia collapsed in WWII while the Yugoslavian federation was a completely different structure and it was then when the Serbs were divided! It collapsed after the end of the Cold War. The Balkan tragedy of the 90’s was the incapability of all subjects of the collapsing Yugoslavian federation to agree that all it has to do is to shift the powers of the Federal government from Belgrade to Brussels (an offer made by then president of the EEC commission Jacques Delores) As for the bigger picture – the “clash of civilizations” Huntington is right. The West could not impose its dominance over the world but could guarantee its future only if it unites). So the rise of China, India and the Muslim world may be countered by a confederation between EU, USA, Canada and Australia. Russia, Brazil and others may prefer to be its allies rather than its enemies. China and India may also prefer to be its partner. Huntington excludes most of the Balkans from the Western civilization, but most of the Orthodox are already in the EU and NATO (Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Cyprus) The Serbs may follow. They have no “Orthodox” option because Russia could not create a strong “civilization bloc”, not only due to its falling population, but because it thinks only in terms of strength. It mistreats its allies (especially if they depend on it) and courts its enemies, or those who do not depend on it at the expense of its allies. It has always proved incapable of creating an attractive social system. So may be we are looking for a round EU reaching the borders of Turkey (and its Central Asian and Middle Eastern allies) and the Russian lead Commonwealth of Independent states (perhaps with Georgia as its Caucasian outpost), trying to avoid quarrels with those two neighbors, but connected more with its transatlantic (and transpacific) daughter counties.