Europe: A continent of 43 or 52 countries?

[🇺🇦 Purple 🦄 Unicorn 🇮🇱]

43 countries are definitely European:

26 EU member countries (excl. Cyprus)
  5 mini-countries
  5 Balkan-countries (excl. Kosovo)
  4 Western European countries (Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, UK)
  3 Eastern European countries (Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus)

What about the other countries I have listed in the poll?

What do you think?

You can vote Yes/No for each of the 9 countries in question.

[🇺🇦 Purple 🦄 Unicorn 🇮🇱]

Kosovo is not an independent country, but they think it is. The majority of countries do not.

Geographically, it is Europe of course. But the normalisation-process with Serbia will still take a long time, and eventually it will be recognized as independent and as a sovereign UN member (unlike Taiwan).

Therefore I would rate it as "belonging to Europe".

The only other country on that list I would agree belongs to Europe is Cyprus, because it is a European Union member country.

I don't see Turkey or the Caucasus as European. And Russia is more of an Asian country, like the Kazakhs.

[CumbrianLefty]

Russia is culturally and politically European, not Asian. Putin's excesses should not obscure that.

Personally would include the Caucasus states as well as Kosovo and Cyprus.

Turkey and Kazakhstan are mostly Asian in geography, and culturally too. Israel is Asian, period.

[Sol]

The border of Europe is extremely constructed of course, so this is all an exercise in what your particular view of the construct is.

However, I really don't understand people who don't think Russia is European.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Geography is clear-cut; anything with a toe-hold in geologic Europe is in, albeit with asterisks. That includes Russia, Turkey, and Kazakhstan, but excludes the South Caucasus. Culturally, politically, civilizationally, and aspirationally it is a different story. That brings in two South Caucasus countries (if barely), but boots Turkey.

Israel is perhaps the most interesting question on the list. While it is geographically in the Middle East, and the Jewish people's history finds its routes firmly in the region, many modern residents of the territory of Israel have ties to Europe and other continents, the country in the personal sphere is quite liberal, and Judaism sets it apart from what is now the conventional Middle Eastern cultural identity--Islam. This puts them in a somewhat similar group as, say, Lebanese Catholics or Armenians, but still one that is very distinct. That said, at the end of the day its location, security architecture, history, and lack of European aspirations set it apart from countries in peripheral Europe like Georgia and cement its place in Asia.

[Torie]

I voted Georgia and Armenia in, but they are out. I thought maybe the line should be somewhere between the Black and Caspian Sea watersheds, but no.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe

[Sol]

I don't really get defining Europe geographically; it's only very meaningful in the context of culture. Why are the Urals and the Bosphorus the dividing line, and not, say, the Don or Rioni, which were both used historically? Europe isn't like Australia or even South Asia, where the cultural unit corresponds to an obvious physical demarcation.

[Хahar 🤔]

Yes for all the Christian states and no for all the other states except in the case of Kosovo, which is well within the limits of Christian Europe despite not being itself Christian. As Sol has pointed out in the past, Europe is simply the Chalcedonian portion of the Old World.

[Lord Halifax]

Yes for all the Christian states and no for all the other states except in the case of Kosovo, which is well within the limits of Christian Europe despite not being itself Christian. As Sol has pointed out in the past, Europe is simply the Chalcedonian portion of the Old World.

why would history be particularly relevant for the definition of 21st century Europe? there are very few European countries were a majority of the population are practicing Christians (arguably none apart from the Vatican depending on your defintion), so religion seems like an odd thing to focus on.

[TheReckoning]

Yes for all the Christian states and no for all the other states except in the case of Kosovo, which is well within the limits of Christian Europe despite not being itself Christian. As Sol has pointed out in the past, Europe is simply the Chalcedonian portion of the Old World.

When has Ethiopia ever been considered European?

[Хahar 🤔]

Yes for all the Christian states and no for all the other states except in the case of Kosovo, which is well within the limits of Christian Europe despite not being itself Christian. As Sol has pointed out in the past, Europe is simply the Chalcedonian portion of the Old World.

why would history be particularly relevant for the definition of 21th century Europe? there are very few European countries were a majority of the population are practicing Christians (arguably none apart from the Vatican depending on your defintion), so religion seems like an odd thing to focus on.

What exactly would you focus on if not religion? What is your alternate concept?

Yes for all the Christian states and no for all the other states except in the case of Kosovo, which is well within the limits of Christian Europe despite not being itself Christian. As Sol has pointed out in the past, Europe is simply the Chalcedonian portion of the Old World.

When has Ethiopia ever been considered European?

Do you know what Chalcedonian means? It's okay to say that you don't.

[bagelman]

Kosovo is part of Europe, regardless of whether it is a truly independent nation, part of Serbia, or part of a greater Albania.

Turkey occupies part of Europe but is not "European", in the same way that Russia dominates northern Asia but is not "Asian". Both have valid claims of existing in both continents geographically however, so it depends. If you believe that Russia is an Asian country as well as a European country, then Turkey would be the same. I would exclude Turkey from Europe because they have an adversarial relationship with many indisputably European countries such as Greece and they are mostly west Asian, with their capital located in Ankara.

Kazakhstan occupies an area that may be considered part of continental Europe according to some definitions but has far less of a claim to being European than Turkey does. Turkish controlled Europe includes Istanbul, which was once the Queen of Cities and a prime candidate for capital of the world until the rise of nationalist Turkey homogenized and ruined it. Thus it is a non-European city located geographically in Europe with European heritage remaining. Kazakh controlled Europe is just western Kazakhstan beyond the Ural river, the city of Oral has never been considered to be a Queen among cities and has little European heritage besides once being called Uralsk.

Cyprus is European in the sense that is is generally Greek, and Greece is obviously European, but it is an edge case at best as geographically it is much closer to west Asian. Northern Cyprus is not a country and should be returned to Cyprus by any means necessary.

East Armenia (the west under Turkish control in a successfully surviving equivalent to Reichskommissariat Moskowien) is about as European as (west) Lebanon, who together are the last footholds of Christianity in western Asia. Azerbaijan and Israel are also non-European. I reject the idea that Europe geographically exists directly south of the Caucasus mountains.

Religion cannot be the primary defining factor of Europe, otherwise Estonia (majority secular) would be non-European. Islam also does not automatically make someone non-European, Albania is obviously European.

Ultimately the definition of Europe is always going to be a little arbitrary and plenty of my claims may be incorrect for some reason or another. Unlike the clear to anyone with eyes separation between the two American continents, the Old World is a mess.

[Lord Halifax]

Yes for all the Christian states and no for all the other states except in the case of Kosovo, which is well within the limits of Christian Europe despite not being itself Christian. As Sol has pointed out in the past, Europe is simply the Chalcedonian portion of the Old World.

why would history be particularly relevant for the definition of 21th century Europe? there are very few European countries were a majority of the population are practicing Christians (arguably none apart from the Vatican depending on your defintion), so religion seems like an odd thing to focus on.

What exactly would you focus on if not religion? What is your alternate concept?

a mixture of geography and institutions.

Geographically Europe is a sub-continent with some outlying islands (it's only classified as a separate continent because the classification was made by Europeans), and there is a standard geographical definition of Europe. If you follow that Armenia and Israel are fully in Asia and Cyprus is off the coast of Asia and as such Asian, while Georgia and Azerbaijan only have tiny slivers of land north of the Greater Caucasus watershed, Kazakhstan has more territory in Europe but it is thinly populated and only make up a very small part of a large country. Only 3% of Turkey is in Europe, but it includes the main part of the country's biggest city which is also one of the biggest metropoles in Europe.

Institutionally the three Caucasus states, Turkey and Cyprus are members of the Council of Europe, and the CoE recognizes Kosovo, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Russia as European countries (and Russia is an ex-member). So by the institutional definition only Israel is non-European. If you accept that countries can be part of two continents that's the most sensible definition.

If you want to exclude the geographically Asian and the mostly Asian transcontinental states that leaves out Israel, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Cyprus and Turkey (capital and vast majority of the population in Asia and only a small share of its territory in Europe). Russia makes up around 40% of geographical Europe and its capital and more than 3/4 of its population are in Europe, so there is no way Russia is not a European country despite having most of its territory in Asia, share of territory doesn't work as the sole criteria when dividing transcontinental states if the population is very unevenly distributed. Kosovo is European by any definition (it seems silly to include Israel and Kosovo in the question).

Institutionally: All of them apart from Israel.

Geographical Europe & primarily European transcontinental states: Russia and Kosovo.

The second works as a narrow definition and the first as a pragmatic Greater Europe definition. Those in between are too arbitrary and aren't particularly useful.

[Bismarck]

The caucuses are the hardest part for me. I lean yes for them. Any of the central Asian stans is clearly a no. Israel is a no. Istanbul is in Europe but Asia Minor is not.

[The Mikado]

I can't accept Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia as "European" in any real sense, sorry.

Doesn't mean that Georgia shouldn't eventually be admitted into the EU, ofc.

[CumbrianLefty]

I can't accept Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia as "European" in any real sense, sorry.

Well for one thing they are next to *European* Russia, and were part of the Greek/Roman sphere of influence back in the day. Even if you disagree, its not an intrinsically outrageous argument.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Azerbaijan and Khazakstan are going to need much hotter Instagram models before they can be considered part of Europe.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I don't really get defining Europe geographically; it's only very meaningful in the context of culture. Why are the Urals and the Bosphorus the dividing line, and not, say, the Don or Rioni, which were both used historically? Europe isn't like Australia or even South Asia, where the cultural unit corresponds to an obvious physical demarcation.

Maybe this is me being a map-loving autist (then again, you also are...) but I normally think of this in geographical terms because it's what makes intuitive sense to me. I agree with you that using the Urals as opposed to the Don doesn't make sense from any perspective, and something feels off about Soči being Europe for the same reason it feels off about Batumi or Tbilisi, but the big appendix of many seas and peninsulas (which is what geographic Europe essentially is) has to start/end somewhere. Turkey is more interesting - the Bosphorus is an easy border because it's technically the sea and connects to the Black Sea but it is certainly unsatisfactory. Ultimately you're right that it is very constructed, I just like geographic constructs.

[It’s so Joever]

Europe is not a continent, it is a cultural region much like the Middle East. The caucuses are the edge still with Georgia/Armenia being the borderland. Coastal Turkey is an edge region as well.

[CumbrianLefty]

Europe is not a continent, it is a cultural region

It is both.

(unless Asia isn't a continent either and only "Eurasia" counts)

[It’s so Joever]

Europe is not a continent, it is a cultural region

It is both.

(unless Asia isn't a continent either and only "Eurasia" counts)

Your unless is my understanding.

[Rocky Rockefeller]

Kosovo is not an independent country, but they think it is. The majority of countries do not.

101 nations out of 193 UN member states or 52.3% recognize Kosovo as an independent nation.

Not an argument for the legitimacy of Kosovo just pointing out that a majority of nations do infact recognize it.

[DavidB.]

Only Kosovo and Cyprus. Georgia/Turkey/Russia are borderline cases, but going for no. The others clearly not.

[rc18]

Except Kosovo, and probably Russia, none of these are what I would consider European. I guess I mostly base it on geography, and where there are overlaps then the historical cultural focus of the polity.

The border of Europe is extremely constructed of course, so this is all an exercise in what your particular view of the construct is.

However, I really don't understand people who don't think Russia is European.

The biggest culture shock I've personally experienced within geographic Europe is Russia; plenty of non-European countries have felt more "European", culturally speaking.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's odd that people get so funny about this. Europe existed as a geographical concept before it came to exist as a political one (and the development of Christendom was indeed essential to this) and is actually an entirely logical and obvious one, it's just that it has fuzzy boundaries. The fuzziest bit isn't really the Eastern frontier - Siberia was historically a bigger geographical dead zone than the average ocean and about as wet! - but the Aegean and thus Asia Minor. The idea that there are a series of well-defined Proper Continents doesn't pass muster: in landmass terms, North and South America were connected before the construction of the Panama Canal as were Africa and Asia before the building of the Suez Canal, and in geological terms there is no united 'Eurasia' as the Indian Subcontinent and Arabia are both separate from the Eurasian Plate, the North American Plate actually includes the Eastern end of Siberia and as there are lots of smaller plates in somewhat random places elsewhere, including Central America.