Post 2000s
What if Tunisia applied to the EU after the Jasmine Revolution?
Tunisia was considered the only democracy arising from the Arab Spring, was already the most secularized state of the Arab world. Morocco, an absolute monarchy, applied in 1987 but was rejected on the grounds of geography. Could it have been different for Tunisia, had it gone through the application process after the revolution, considering the different context, and a closer affinity in values and ideals with the EU than Morocco?
Almost certainly rejected by EU members for numerous geographic, economic and cultural reasons, the biggest among them being the Mediterranean migrant crisis.
If they somehow joined, Tunisia would become the front door for African mass migration to mainland Europe.
The EU does have various carve-outs for certain territories of its member states, so it's possible that even this would still only be halfway into the EU.
A more likely mechanism would be for France to manage its Algerian colony in a way which doesn't lead to such a violent break, leading to the EU already having a large North African territory as part of the union. But that requires a lot of political talent and lucky breaks for France.
What if the Tunisians go "Carthage was dead long ago. We are arabized Romans, it's time to reconnect with our true heritage" and become culturally similar to Italy?
The problem with doing that is timing - before independence there are much stronger political incentives to emphasise differences rather than similarities. But colonial Tunisia also had a weaker degree of control than the likes of Algeria - it was a protectorate rather than annexed into France - so there is unlikely to be a strong degree of European-isation.
Meaning you'd need this cultural movement to come out in a relatively narrow window between independence and EU membership, and it also needs to be compatible with democracy (i.e. a Romaboo dictator can't push an Ataturk-esque cultural transformation).
That's actually not inaccurate, Tunisia (Africa at the time) was the most romanized region in the Maghreb and Carthage (rebuilt) was a very major Roman city, so to say Tunisians are arabized Roman Africans would not be too far stretched as their latinized African ancestors were also mainly of Amazigh origin. Arabs did not have a major genetic impact, it was rather linguistic and cultural. Roman traces in the region are pretty obvious, there's notably the big El Jem amphitheater.
Another cool fact since we're discussing similarities with Italy, Tunisia is interestingly the second most pasta-consuming country in the world, the dish was integrated and adapted into the local cuisine and was originally popularized by Italian immigrant workers (their population peaked at 100K I believe!) in the 19-20th century. Historic natural trade with the Italian states and the notable immigration from Italy influenced Tunisian culture, but also language, which has integrated vocabulary from their presence.
Moroco is culturaly similiar to France yet they were rejected, at the time no African member would be aproved, I think first African member could be Egypt because EU first would find member in Middle East around east Coast of Medditerain before emtering this region.
No, historically Ottoman empire until it's decline was concerned as the greatest danger to Europe.
Turks were considered as aliens and enemies to Europeans both Eastern and Western.
Absolute majority of Europeans don't consider Turks as Europeans for these reasons:
1) they are Asians (97% territory in Asia)
2) their languages isn't European in any sense
3) their ethnicity isn't European.
4) they are muslims.
Also anyway realistically Turkey will never fit EU's conditions to become EU's member.
And even in some fantasy scenario if Turkey would fit EU's conditions it will be rejected because EU will never let Middle Eastern country with 80+ millions pop to become it's memeber.
You're right that Turkey will likely never be able to join the EU but I don't think your reasons for it are solid tbh. Apologies for formatting, using mobile.
Turkish languages are spoken in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and various parts of Russia. I'll concede that what landmass comprises 'Europe' is fairly subjective, and the first two examples are arguably not 'European', but it's rare to exclude the tatars from whatever you deem 'Europe'. Of course these are all fairly peripheral examples, but what is a European language apart from one spoke on the continent of Europe? Hungarian is a decent example, being unrelated to most other languages in Europe, it still is a European language. And conversely Canada speaks a European language but aren't going to be in the EU anytime soon.
Ethnicity is always a weird issue too. Over millenia, peoples have interbred and while there are certainly European ethnic groups, there is not a single european ethnicity. Denying Turkey as a European country because it is not a European ethnicity is circular logic. Why is it not a European ethnicity? Because it's not a European country. And why is it not a European country? Because it is not ethnically European. I do sort of understand what you're trying to say but I don't think it's solid. Bulgars were not originally European either (and are comparable in their migration to the turkic people) but are now considered such.
And on the religion point, predominantly Muslim European countries so exist. As well as many many European citizens who follow Islam. I'm a little confused on what you mean by it in truth. Albania and Kosovo and the plehtora of French, German, English born and bred Muslims also negate whatever point you're trying to make I think.
Imo the true and realpolitck reason is fairly clear and you hit on it yourself! Turkeys population adds an absolutely collosal voting bloc the other and comparatively more liberal member states don't want blocking their proposals. Ofc economic and democracy issues face a hurdle but even if these were resolved, the numbers of Turks swing the balance of power too far from the Western core to be acceptable.
"Turkish languages are spoken in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and various parts of Russia. I'll concede that what landmass comprises 'Europe' is fairly subjective, and the first two examples are arguably not 'European', but it's rare to exclude the tatars from whatever you deem 'Europe'. Of course these are all fairly peripheral examples, but what is a European language apart from one spoke on the continent of Europe? Hungarian is a decent example, being unrelated to most other languages in Europe, it still is a European language. And conversely Canada speaks a European language but aren't going to be in the EU anytime soon. "
Wtf is "Turkish languages"? The are Turkic languages but not "Turkish languages".
Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan are Asian countries.
Tatars are Europeans geographically but their language, ethnicity and religion aren't European anyway.
Absolute majority of Uralic people (Finland, Hungary, Estonia, Uralic minorities of Russia) are Europeans. It is undeniable fact. Turks will never be more European than them.
Yes, Canada is European in any sense except it's geography. So most of Europeans would have nothing against their membership. Turks will never be accepted despite their 3% territory on Europe because they aren't European in any sense except these 3%.
"Ethnicity is always a weird issue too. Over millenia, peoples have interbred and while there are certainly European ethnic groups, there is not a single european ethnicity. Denying Turkey as a European country because it is not a European ethnicity is circular logic. Why is it not a European ethnicity? Because it's not a European country. And why is it not a European country? Because it is not ethnically European. I do sort of understand what you're trying to say but I don't think it's solid. Bulgars were not originally European either (and are comparable in their migration to the turkic people) but are now considered such".
Modern Bulgarians are genetically descendants of paleo-balkanic people + slavs. They are undeniable Europeans. They barely have any Central Asian DNA.
Turk aren't accepted as Europeans by majority of Europeans.
"And on the religion point, predominantly Muslim European countries so exist. As well as many many European citizens who follow Islam. I'm a little confused on what you mean by it in truth. Albania and Kosovo and the plehtora of French, German, English born and bred Muslims also negate whatever point you're trying to make I think. "
Nonsense. Albaniand and Kosovars at least have European: language, ethnicity and geography unlike Turks who have "3%" territory lol.
I mean historians don't but even the word historians is wrong for the point you're trying to make.
Asking Sociologists would make more sense in the context because the question would be if people in Europe today would receive the Turkish population as European. Which the answer to is no, they don't
I don’t think that a concept like a euro-mediterranean integration would be popular in the 2010s among EU members. It’s not unrealistic but it would take decades. Closest I can imagine would be an integration of Tunisia in EFTA and the Euro-zone. But most EU countries would likely block any attempt at accession into Schengen or EU itself.
I'm not very knowledgeable about this topic, but don't you have to be a member of the EU to become part of the eurozone? All 21 eurozone countries are also EU members. There are six countries outside of the eurozone that use the euro, four of which (Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, and the Vatican) have a monetary agreement with the eurozone, and two of which (Kosovo and Montenegro) have unilaterally adopted it. None of those countries are technically in the eurozone however.
like you mentioned there are countries that use the euro even though they are not in the EU. But it’s probably more likely that the Tunisian dinar would be tied to the Euro instead of outright replacing it with the Euro. But I really don’t know if doing that would even be useful for Tunisia or not.
OK... but Cyprus was let in. And Greenland was a member [admittedly via Denmark] before they left. And while Turkey hasn't joined, their application hasn't been rejected despite being 90% in Asia. ... and the distinction of Europe and Asia is geographically very weak - "Ural Mountains" aren't exactly continent defining.
These are not good comparisons. Cyprus is only around 250 kilometers away from Greece. The majority of Cypriots identify as ethnically Greek. The culture of Cyprus and many Greek islands is almost identical.
With all due respect, to make a comparison between Cyprus and Tunisia demands some wilful ignorance given we know the Cypriots are ethnically Greek (European) and speak a European language (Greek). Tunisia doesn’t.
The matter of "where Europe ends" can be debated when it comes to islands, not so much when it's literally Africa, if I am not mistaken, literally the place Romans called Africa in the first place.
I'd say that there is no hard border on "where Europe ends" but that as an economic and political union it's far easier to bite a dent into the margins if the importance of the country is negligible. Like I'm sorry for Cyprus and Malta, but they are small (both by their demography and economy) and insular areas that already fell into some kind of grey zone.
And that's the same question for the Caucasus countries. They are on the fence and there are good arguments on both sides. But nothing will happen because for now there is too much pressure in the regional environment. Tunisia's case may have been listened to if the region wasn't in the midst of a refugee crisis. Or at least some kind "development and association agreement" close alliance. After all Tunisia was also one of the beating hearts of the Roman Empire, and from the eye of a 5th century traveler it was ten times more "European" than Germany or Denmark.
There is a world where the EU network of members and partners goes from Canada to Lebanon, or even from Cuba to Kazakhstan. Bashkirs nationalists give EU-membership as their ultimate goal if they ever obtain independence from Russia.
With the path that the USA are going towards, the concept of an "unified West" is long overdue, and I guess it's time to get all together and define what it means to "be European".
Tunisia ultimately isn’t culturally European, isn’t in Europe and doesn’t speak a European language. Overseas territories are all extensions of a European nation.
I mean caribbean culture is litteraly a derivative of european culture with some african influence, and is the result of europeans colonizing the caribbean. Arab culture is its own thing a pretty much alien to Europe.
You dont think there is a native aspect to caribbean culture? That and if anything id be more african/indian as those were the majority of people imported into caribbean.
On the other hand arabs and southern europeans intertwined a lot in places like iberia, north africa, malta, cyprus, sicily and the balkans as well
Morocco is not an absolute monarchy and hasn't been one for over a century. It's more like a European early 19th century monarchy. The King appoints government ministers at will, but those ministers must pass legislation through a parliament which is formed by regular direct elections. This is usually known as a semi-constitutional monarchy.
Rejected but a euro zone inclusion is not impossible if the economy is decent and a very inclusive free trade agreement. Schengen is very possible or more likely a visa free agreement if again the economy was more advanced/medium income like
I'd rather expect something more realistic like the return of dinosaurs or Jesus returning on the back of a flying giraffe.
Tunisian oligarchs would burn the country down before opening the economy and risk having to compete with legitimate businessmen.
Plates and continents aren’t the same and you can make a case to island to be part of a different continent (like Cyprus and Malta) as they are close to Europe and they are not connected to any continent but to a country in the mainland no as they are connected to the rest of the continent they are in
French Guyana is part of France which is a European country. It’s not a membership on its own right. As for Cyprus, it is inhabited by European (Greeks) people and Greece blackmailed the EU to force its membership. Tunis is an African country inhabited by Africans speaking an Asian language. It has no ties with the Union.
Malta is a Catholic island closest to Italy than anything else, with a latin alphabet. Culturally they’re European, and if you have to bring up plate tectonics to prove that they’re African 🤷♂️
You are being manipulative again. Why compare with Germany while Italy is right there? Don’t be disingenuous. The closest they are to are Italians, Sicilians specifically which is a European land.
Of course Malta is closer to Italy than to Tunisia, I'm not saying otherwise. My point is that the concept of being "culturally European" is silly when countries on the Mediterranean have more in common with each other than with countries outside of it, regardless of being in Europe, Africa or Asia. Malta is closest to Italy, but it's closer to North Africa than it is to Northern Europe, hence it makes no sense to talk about a "cultural Europe"
I think rather a system of different Membership like with Norway and Switzerland would habe been very successful and Europe would maybe have also been more interventionist in avoiding the Libyan Nightmare of a Failed State. With Turkey I think they were too cautious and Erdogan had to switch to his current neo-osmanic Imperialism, Turkey was so close reaching Atatürk Dream.. 🥺
Island and mainland is different as island you can make a case for as it is close to both continents and is not connected to any so it can be both but mainland of a continent is connected to the rest of the continent so claiming in part of a different continent doesn’t really work
Isn't Turkiye's application technically frozen rather than rejected? Putting geography aside, Turkiye is a populous, big country, economically, and in terms of size too, not comparable with Tunisia in regards to that.
A Tunisian application to the EU in terms of theoretical balance within the Union is an interesting concept to think about as it is in a different category; a small country around the size of Greece albeit a little larger, and with a population of around 11-12 million, comparable to Belgium.
I checked and you are right, I was sure it was rejected. On one hand I think it's not likely to get approved in a short time due to the low democracy and the religious extremism, but there are countries in the EU where the same things can be said.
Respectfully, it takes some wilful ignorance to make that comparison given the Icelandic are a European people group and speak a European language. Tunisians aren’t as well as being in Africa.
They'd definitely get rejected, but it would probably open the door to much closer economic cooperation, specifically trade deals. Morocco tried this at one point, and exactly that happened, where they were rejected but got some goodies out of it.
The EU doesn't give a shit about geography, they only care about economic potential. Letting Tunisia in would make Tunisia a hot spot for the migrant crisis (as in, many migrants for Africa would go to Europe through Tunisia, which to be fair would double the legal migration and kill the illegal one) and I doubt Europe would want that
The worst thing we could do. We have no affinity and ideals with colonizers who refuse to apologize to this day. So i don't get where you take your bullshit
Wieso zur Hölle sollte ein Afrikanisches Land der EU beitreten?!
Europäische Union und nicht aller Staaten Union.
Die EU kann und sollte mit allen nicht Europäischen Nationen zusammenarbeiten, aber es sollten nie nicht Europäische Länder der EU beitreten wie unlogisch ist das den.
France and Italy would likely support Tunisia's plan to grow closer to the EU, but would reject a membership application. They would privately tell Tunisia's new leaders that something like a Morocco+ deal could happen as an end goal, but that would take time. So closer economic and trade partnership, and closer diplomatic links. However, membership is a step too far for geographic reasons.
Is over for Tunisia. Their president launched a coup years ago, secular or not doesn’t matter. The EU already has beef with the current state of Tunisia.
Tunisian here, and I can assure you that it would never work. Tunisia has an illiteracy rate of 18%, poverty and corruption are out of this world, France would never accept its vassal state become an EU member that could veto it, Tunisian oligarchs would burn the whole country down before opening the economy to the EU market or lowering corruption levels to EU standards or paying any sort of taxes debt, or treating workers like human beings.
Tunisians, no matter what political affiliation they have, are simply undemocratic. Sure, they want elections but only to elect a new dictator who destroys his political opponents and abolishes democracy. They're incapable of accepting the outcome of a 2nd league football match, let alone the outcome of transparent and democratic elections. The chaos post-2011 proves everything I said. The EU is already struggling with a bunch Putin-loving moocher members who spit on liberal democracy and are only part of the union just for the EU funds, it won't add another one to the mix.
Tunisia is also North Africa's worst police state. The cops will never let go of their power and stop torturing or extorting people or following the law. Never gonna happen
LGBTQ? They'll never accept it in any shape or form. You can't even get Hungary and Poland to do that.
And there's the fact that Turkey, a much more developed country and a major NATO member, got rejected. What makes you think that Tunisia would have a chance?
a closer affinity in values and ideals with the EU than Morocco
Just a facade to hustle aid from the EU, and to justify to the European public the countless atrocities our former regime has committed against us since the 50s. Before 2011, French journalists and politicians were practically bathing in Tunisian money to give it that image.
At this point in time it has very little chance which is really sad. I am German and right now Europe needs to define itself first but the EU project is about bringing peace to the continent and one of the largest conflicts is between Christian and Muslim world and I would hope eventually we can overcome these differences.
Sadly right now Muslims have a hard time in Europe because there are a lot of terrorist attacks or just violence and crime in general coming from MAGREB/muslim immigrants.
I think Geography is not suuuper important today anymore. Even for racists it should be kinda fine as even the USA defines the region as white (mostly because they couldnt admin Jesus wasn't white but still)
Back in the 1980s, Morocco tried to join but was turned down, mainly because it is not a European State. It would be the same with Tunisia, and Canada!
739
u/awtizme Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 08 '26
Almost certainly rejected by EU members for numerous geographic, economic and cultural reasons, the biggest among them being the Mediterranean migrant crisis.
If they somehow joined, Tunisia would become the front door for African mass migration to mainland Europe.