Search

This paper offers a critical review of an interdisciplinary body of research on Islam and democracy and develops theory in order to explain the emergence of Turkey?s ruling AKP (Justice and Development Party) and to interpret to what extent this contributes to Turkey?s liberal-democratic consolidation. The paper shows that the AKP has so far featured a significantly more liberal-democratic and pro-West discourse and program than its predecessors have. It identifies the political-economic and institutional conditions that appear to have facilitated the AKP?s emergence, and places special emphasis on the EU as an external anchor and on the intended and unintended consequences of past secularist pressures. Political and theoretical implications of the case of Turkey are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Turkey's accession to the European Union has been the subject of much debate and controversy across regions. However, diverse governmental and non-governmental actors, interviewed by us in May 2010, emphasized the distinction between the EU accession process from actual membership and the profound impact that this process has already had on the country. This paper draws on interviews and meetings conducted with political officials and civil society actors at the national and local level and members to explore how the EU process affects democratization efforts in Turkey, particularly in the Kurdish region. The paper applies the two-level game to explore how domestic debates regarding identity issues, women's empowerment, the role of religion in politics and local development are all framed as essential to democratization in an effort to appeal to wider domestic and international audiences. While many different political and civil society actors coopt the term "democracy" in presenting their own demands, they are quick and forceful to downplay the democratic credentials of political opponents. We work to parse out the different stakeholders, their unique and shared perspectives on democracy, their individual investment in the EU process and commitment to actual accession. We focus on the following question: what is the impact of the EU accession process on democratization in Turkey? We present our argument using evidence from interviews conducted at the national and local level in Turkey, newspaper accounts, EU reports, and additional secondary sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Turkey's decision on its role in the Iraq war in 2003 illustrates the power -- and limits -- of parliaments as actors in foreign policy. Traditionally, national assemblies are not seen as important players in the foreign policies of parliamentary democracies. Instead, the cabinet is generally considered the locus of policymaking authority. Parliaments are seen as forums for debate, and if the government enjoys a parliamentary majority, legislatures are expected to support the cabinet, if they are brought into the process at all. In Turkey, the president and the military have also been considered more important actors than parliament. But the March 1, 2003 vote by the Turkish parliament to not allow the United States to use Turkey as a base challenges this conventional wisdom on parliamentary influence (in addition to interest-based explanations of foreign policy). This paper examines this decision in the context of the role of legislatures in the foreign policies of parliamentary democracies and explores the relationships between parliamentary influence, leadership, intraparty politics, and public opinion. This paper uses this case to offer ideas on when and how parliaments are influential in foreign policy. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the major turning points for Turkish politics is the opening of its accession negotiations for European Union membership in 2005. The EU has significant leverage on countries aspiring for membership due to its political conditionality and through the applicant country's adaptation of its rules and laws to those of the EU. Thus, the process of membership negotiations impacts the applicant country's political process in a significant fashion. This paper proposes that as Turkey moves towards meeting the EU's standards in democracy as part and parcel of its accession requirements, the underlying anti-democratic tendencies and tensions in Turkish politics come to the fore front with the unexpected result that the process of democratization carries the danger of threatening the basis of individual rights and liberties in Turkey. This is because the democratization process that gained momentum in 2002 has led to a high degree of polarization in Turkish politics with the Islamists and secularists located at the opposite ends. This paper analyzes the main cleavages in Turkish politics; the Islamists versus the secularists and nationalists versus the globalists with respect to the issues of gender equality, the Kurdish problem and the role of the military in politics. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper deals with the contentious issues of Turkey's accession to the EU. While it is clear that all candidate countries have to fulfill the formal criteria of joining the EU there seem to exist also informal criteria that in the case of Turkey cause some hesitation as regards Turkey's accession to the EU. The paper takes under review arguments that are most often voiced in connection with strong reluctance to Turkish membership in the EU: the Muslim faith, not being a European country, geopolitical risks, size of the country, democracy and human rights and the issue of Cyprus. Each argument is analyzed separately and shows how it may be viewed from a different perspective and how drawbacks may also be seen as advantages. The paper argues that Turkish accession to the EU would be an asset to the EU and that the EU bears a responsibility towards the world at large and especially towards its neighborhood. EU's enlargement is in the end a political decision and Europe's political elites bear the primary responsibility for European unification and peace and development in the region. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many recent events seem to indicate a change in Turkey's foreign policy orientation: Turkey's reactions to the occupation of Iraq by the United States, the notable deceleration in Turkey's adoption of the EU acquis, rapprochement with countries in the Middle East, especially with Syria and Iran, and a much stronger criticism of Israel's foreign policy, which led to repetitive crises with Israel. All these have engendered doubts regarding Turkey's long-cherished association with the West. This paper argues that Turkey's Middle Eastern-centered foreign policy does not mark a departure from Western orientation that has been pursued since the wake of the Cold War. Turkey's location in the Middle East has long been used as a bargaining chip in Turkey's relations with the West. The marketing of Turkey's location, identity, and status in the region is one of the continuous elements of Turkish foreign policy. While Turkey hoped to obtain a place within the West by playing on its geopolitical location and links with the countries outside West's reach, what has driven Turkey towards these measures has been Turkey's uneasy identification with the West/Europe as well as the difficulties Turkey has faced in reconciling domestic and international challenges. During the last decade, Turkey has reconfigured its alignment within its Westernist axis by orienting its foreign policy towards the goal of EU membership rather than giving an unconditional support to the U.S. policies. On the other hand, Turkey's new configuration seems to have its own limits so long as Turkey continues to rely on its traditional tactics to enhance its geostrategic importance at the expense of domestic reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Privatizations have often been chastised for their pernicious effects on social development and democratization. The main reasons for the negative reputation of privatizations have been downsizing and increased unemployment in the post-privatizations period and lack of transparency and increased corruption during their implementation. This paper looks at the impact of privatizations on democratization by carrying out a comparative study of the transformation of labor unions in the post-privatizations period in Turkey and Argentina. It concludes that labor unions in these two utterly distinct countries and cultures have changed their structure, internal workings and external relations with other governance actors towards more democratic stands. Based on in-depth interviews with over fifty labor union leaders at different levels of union hierarchy, the study concludes that privatizations can democratize institutions by rendering them more active, more collaborative and more competitive in social, political and economic terms. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper attempts to understand how domestic security threats shape state institutions and regime structures. More specifically, it discusses the impact of insurgency movements on the nature of civil-military relations and democratic openings in a country. This is an important theoretical question with great policy relevance. For centuries, civilian leaders have struggled with the problem of subordinating militaries to their authority. The lack of civilian control has become a major factor that blocked the consolidation of democracies in numerous countries. Political science literature has, so far, failed to provide a well-developed answer to this research question. Although the majority of the scholars believe that domestic security threats inevitably lead to an increase in the political involvement of the armed forces (Huntington, 1962; Stepan, 1976; O’Donnell, 1979; Hunter, 1997; Desch, 1999; etc), similar levels and types of internal security threats have, in fact, divergent effects on civil-military relations and broader regime-related questions. To understand the causes of this variation, I conduct a comparative case study by focusing on two countries, namely Turkey and Peru, which have fought against Kurdistan Workers’ Party and Shining Path insurgents, respectively, from the 1980s onwards. With this study, I intend to show that the presence of an internal threat is not a sufficient condition to account for changes in civil-military relations and regime structures. Instead, I discuss the importance of strategic interests and calculations of civilian governments and their armed forces, as well as the silent bargaining process between these actors in explaining this research question. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a conference paper titled "Religiosity and Protest Behavior: The Case of Turkey in Comparative Perspective," prepared for presentation at the ISA Convention in Hawaii. It focuses on the assessment of the role that religiosity in Islamic communities play in the decision of protest behavior to measure its effect against the other independent variables. It says that it is probable to explain political participation by reference to factors in Turkey that are parallel to unified democracies of Europe and the U.S.

Turkey has recently been taking steps towards greater democratization and increased recognition of Kurdish rights, whilst also facing a steeply rising tide of Turkish nationalism and anti-Kurdish sentiment. The process itself in fact involves a historical dimension, requiring the dominant identity, namely 'Turkishness', to engage critically both with its past and with modernity, as well as with the sphere of 'Kurdishness' especially the official construction of Turkish history and the place of 'others' within it. It also necessitates 'solidarity trading zones' to be established and for hegemonic relations to be re-ordered. Through employing an 'epistemology of interaction', namely the Second Language Learning Thesis (SLLT), the paper will explore these interlinked spatial and temporal processes by examining strategies of exclusion and strategies of involvement, border re-making, solidarity-building between the two identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Turkey formally applied for full membership of the EC in April 1987. Much has been said about the benefits of integrating Turkey. It would provide Western Europe with an extremely young working force, renewing a stagnated population structure, not to mention the economic benefits of a market with 76 million consumers. One cannot forget the benefits that would stem from its strategic position, militarily and, namely, as a gateway for gas and oil pipelines. On the other hand, there is the case for denying Turkey's accession. The arguments are multiple. Firstly, there is the religious issue: for many, the EU is a Christian club. On the other hand, the country's demographic weight (reaching 100 million people in 2050) would have to be translated in EU institutions, conceding Turkey the largest share of votes in the Council and seats in the European Parliament. Additionally, Turkey would become the country with the largest army in the EU. Also, the Cyprus problem has yet to be solved, although it was the Greek population that declined the UN-sponsored solution. Human rights issues have also been invoked to delay Turkey's accession. On the other hand, there is the case for denying Turkey's accession. The arguments are multiple. Firstly, there is the religious issue: for many, the EU is a Christian club. On the other hand, the country's demographic weight (reaching 100 million people in 2050) would have to be translated in EU institutions, conceding Turkey the largest share of votes in the Council and seats in the European Parliament. Additionally, Turkey would become the country with the largest army in the EU. Also, the Cyprus problem has yet to be solved, although it was the Greek population that declined the UN-sponsored solution. Human rights issues have also been invoked to delay Turkey's accession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Turkey's membership in the European Union (EU) is contingent on economic, political, and cultural factors. Rather than a geographic area with a particular cultural and religious history, the EU defi nes "Europe" as a political project that espouses values such as human rights, pluralist democracy, and a liberal economy. However, Turkey's EU accession process highlights the cultural and religious dimension through which "Islam" and "Europe" may be mutually redefined. Th is article examines how Turkish Muslim immigrants in Europe have become an example of the compatibility of "Islam" and "Europe." It is concluded that opposing Turkey's EU membership based on essentializing arguments of cultural and religious difference is misleading and counterproductive, as it fails to address the shift ing boundaries of Europe and of Islam. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The third wave of democracy largely missed the Muslim Middle East. The only democracy in the Middle East, Turkey, also faced difficulties in the same period: one direct military intervention in 1980, more indirect one in 1997, several closures of politica ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relationship between Islam and nationalism is still unsettled. It is claimed that because of its emphasis on tawhid Islam contradicts with the modern territorial state. This contradiction is argued to be a major obstacle in the modernization and democra ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nazli Sila CesurUniversity of Essx, UKReconsidering democracy in the contemporary European Union According to Ernesto Laclau, “There is no universality…except through equivalence between particularities.” Laclau reconsiders the universe such an ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the motivations of the European Union (EU) foreign assistance and whether the foreign aid decisions reflect its commitment in promoting democracy and human rights in Turkey. The nature of such decisions, including the union's assessment of its relation with Turkey and the political system of the latter, is explored. It presents an overview of literature on conditional foreign aid scholarship, as well as the human rights and democracy in Turkey.

This paper looks at the ways in which Turkey’s security discourses have been shaped by and have, in turn, shaped the transformation Turkey has gone through in recent years. Whereas the ‘Eurosceptics’ have underlined the need for a broad security agenda by making references to ‘globalised security’, while seeking to reshape practices in defence of ‘national security’, the ‘pro-EU’ actors have opened up Turkey’s definition of ‘national security’ for debate thereby sawing the seeds of an alternative security discourse. This is a significant departure from the earlier discourse of pro-EU actors who had refrained from using ‘security speak’ and sought to make the case for European Union membership on purely economic (welfare) and political (democracy) grounds. The point being that during the 1990s pro-EU actors in Turkey found the best way to bring about political change in Turkey as that of securitising economic issues and pointing to the economic costs of the existing conception of ‘national security’. The paper falls into three parts. Part 1 looks at the ‘traditional’ discourse on security (the discourse of politicians and civilian-military bureaucrats) that has prevailed during the republican era. Part 2 seeks to identify the 1990s changes in Turkey’s security discourses by focusing on the debates on the European Union membership. Part 3 suggests that a two-step strategy (first securitisation, then desecuritisation) might be the way out of the security dilemmas faced by developing countries like Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The difficulties that the development of western democracy faces in societies with a predominantly Muslim culture form some of the major divisions in current international politics. In this context, the “moderation” of Political Islam and democratic consolidation in Turkey is an invaluable example. This paper evaluates the sustainability of the moderation of Turkish Political Islam, by presenting and discussing the findings of an empirical project. This project systematically content-analyzes the discourse of major Islamic-conservative newspapers and social and economic associations in Turkey, between 1996 and 2003. The premise is that in order to be sustainable, the moderation of Islamist political parties should be preceded or accompanied by changes in the values of the party’s constituency. The content analysis reveals to what extent constituency values changed, in which areas (such as social and political pluralism, the image of the West, etc.) and how. Historical event analysis is employed to identify how change was affected by domestic and external mechanisms. The resulting causal explanation is compared to interviewed political-economic actors’ perceptions. Finally, the paper will discuss what the findings imply for the emergence of a “twin tolerations” between Islamic and secularist actors and institutions, which is necessary for democratic consolidation. Muslim societies involve major secularist actors and institutions, which are as much a product of the Muslim world’s historical engagement of western modernity as Islamists are. Thus, for democratic consolidation it matters greatly that Islamic and secularist constituencies trust each other and produce a “twin tolerations.” ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACTState, Civil Society and Political Participation in TurkeyStudents of Turkish politics, such as Özbudun, Göle, Toprak and others argued, on the basis of aggregate data and using historical analysis, that two phenomena have been responsible for the relative lack of scope and magnitude of political participation in Turkey. They are the vehemence of a strong, capricious state, and a shallow and frail civil society. The argument has been that under the awe of a strong and capricious state, Turkish citizens have been forced to political docility, and kept a low profile in politics. However, both the national and international press and the media kept reporting the notoriety of various acts of protest from rallies, demonstrations, boycotts to even assassinations taking place in the country. It seems as if either the frailty of civil society have recently been fostering protest potential in Turkey, or the country has recently been experiencing an increasing robustness and vigor of civil society, which in turn is providing for increased political participation in the country. In this paper, I will use the individual level data of a national survey conducted in March ? April 2006 to measure the strength of civil society, on the one hand, and the relationship between civil society and political participation on the other. In this paper a causal model that explicates the relations between such characteristics of civil society as associability, interpersonal trust, social tolerance, political efficacy, and political participation is being developed and tested. The findings of the paper are compared with earlier findings in Turkey and with earlier findings in consolidated democracies where similar studies of civil society and political participation are examined. Hence, the paper will be able to provide insight into the changes that are taking place in the Turkish political system and most specifically in Turkish democracy. The comparative findings of the paper will also point to the role that civil society plays in determining political participation in a newly industrializing and democratizing polity as Turkey. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On the basis of a joint analytical framework (Panel 1) and a number of research hypotheses this paper analyses the role of civil society in the peacebuilding processes in Turkey?s Kurdish conflict. It aims to study the issues that come into play in the post-conflict environments and different civil society functions within the highly-politicized Kurdish conflict in Turkey. The conflict between the PKK and the Turkish armed forces since 1984 started to de-escalate since the capture of the PKK leader, Abdullah Öcalan and after Turkey?s candidacy to the EU have been accepted in 1999. Since then the Turkish state has passed new legislations to ?democratize? the country while at the same time many civil society organizations tried to deal with different issues in the conflict; especially those that are not addressed by the state. The data for the paper are drawn from the author?s fieldwork in the southeastern Anatolia where the armed conflict take place as well as in Istanbul where many civil society organizations have their headquarters. The research focuses only on the post-conflict stage since civil society efforts have been hindered or were insignificant due to the state regulations. It also studies the civil society efforts to prevent the escalation of conflict. The conclusion part discusses the role of civil society in post-conflict and discusses the nexus between civil society and peacebuilding in highly politicized ethnic conflicts. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In his 1993 study about parliamentary democracies, Andrè-Paul Frognier suggested that despite the common view in the literature that the coalition governments are less likely to pursue effective policy goals due to usually more conflictual relations between or among the coalition members, decision making in single party governments is not very different. According to Frognier, the cabinet decision-making in both single-party and coalition governments is affected not necessarily by the number of parties involved but rather whether a) a cabinet is able to debate; b) there is the existence of arrangements designed to solve difficulties among cabinet members; c) the prime minister takes a more or less active role in resolution of conflicts and/or seeks consensus; and d) the likelihood of informal collaboration among the cabinet members. Taking cues from this early study and several other studies (i.e., Thièbault, 1993; Andeweg, 1993; Kaarbo, 1996), this paper examines a number of foreign policy issues from the Turkish context with the aim to specify the conditions under which single party and coalition governments may be expected to act more similarly than the current literature leads us to believe. In order come up with some contingent ? yet arguably limited ? conditions, the paper will analyze the foreign policy decision making process by the Justice and Development party-led Turkish government (AKP, single-party) since it rose to power in Turkey, following the 2002 national elections. The findings are then compared to the foreign policy decision making by the three coalition governments (DSP-MHP-ANAP [1999-2002]; ANAP-DSP-DTP [1997-1999]; and RP-DYP [1996-1997]) that led Turkey in the 1990s and early 2000s. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mexico and Turkey share a mixed-blessing due to their proximity to the hemispheric superpowers (the US and the EU, respectively). The two countries provide us a unique opportunity to observe the North-South encounter in various socio-economic and political aspects. This paper will particularly look at the post-1980 dynamics, as those decades mark the commencement of dual transitions in both Mexico and Turkey. Democratization and transition to market-oriented economies have dominated the agenda of both countries and neither of these two projects took place in isolation from the neighboring superpowers. This paper will compare and contrast the post-1980 reforms in Mexico and Turkey and the involvement of the US and the EU in this process. The critical argument raised in this paper is that; overtly political priorities and involvement of the EU in the Turkish case had a counterproductive effect and hindered the democratization process, whereas economic priorities of the US in US-Mexico relations in a way helped to create a favorable environment in Mexico for homegrown, grassroots demands for democracy. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on regime oscillation between authoritarianism and democracy. I argue that, both Turkey and Argentina during the post-WWII era constitute cases of regime oscillation, however, they have divergent patterns of oscillation. In Turkey, be ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes international influences on the Turkish transition to democracy after the military coup in 1980. It is our contention that the Turkish military intervention did not face significant opposition from the USA and the European states and institutions. In the Turkish case, the USA continued to grant aid to the military while the Europeans only cautiously expressed concern for the suspension of democracy. Yet, we argue that international actors still played important roles in the democratic transition. First, continuing assistance to the Turkish Armed Forces kept the relative balance of power among domestic groups in favor of the military. Economic accomplishments were achieved through considerable American, World Bank, and IMF assistance. As a result, the Turkish military was successful in restoring order, repressing opposition forces, and carrying out an economic adjustment program. This, in turn, gave the military generals confidence that they achieved their initial goals when they first planned the intervention, and therefore, they could lead a transition to democracy. A second impact of the international actors, especially the Europeans, was to pressure the military to keep its word in returning the country to democracy. The military generals had to frequently justify their actions in the international arena and assure that they do not want to stay in power for a long period of time. These gestures that were taken to satisfy the international community increasingly bound the military rulers by their own words to eventually hold relatively free and fair elections and consent to its results. The Turkish case contributes to the democracy promotion literature by demonstrating that economic, political, and diplomatic sanctions against authoritarian leaders are not the only necessary mechanisms for inducing a transition. Similarly, the Turkish case shows that democracy promotion through providing aid to opposition forces is not always beneficial. The international community influenced democratization in Turkey through providing aid to the military and only by gentle probing. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to prepare Turkey for European Union (EU) membership, currently more than 22 million euros is granted to Turkish non-governmental organizations (NGOs) by the EU. In accordance with the Copenhagen criteria, one of the main goals of these grants is to support the development of stable democratic institutions in Turkey by strengthening the civil society, rule of law and respect for human rights. By using the academic literature on NGOs, the purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the actual affect of these grants on Turkish civil society with a particular focus on issues such as downward accountability, representativeness, and internal democracy. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do Islamic movements operate in secular democracies? Are Islamic visions of politics and society compatible with liberal democracy? The resurgence of religious organizations into public sphere in the recent years has given special urgency to these questions. The appropriate role of religion in secular democratic states has rapidly emerged as an extraordinary divisive issue globally. The answer given to this question sheds light on the role of Islam in the process of defining the norms that regulate public life and the values that institute the political community. Some scholars have argued that the undemocratic nature of Islamic notions of society and politics are not compatible with the notions of democracy and human rights. Others have argued that notions of democracy and human rights are established in the Islamic political discourse and their exposition depends on history, social structure and context. Although this debate have produced fruitful outcomes that help us framing the role of Islam in the public sphere, both sides of the debate have generally focused on essential sources of Islam. This debate needs to be extended to the empirical realm by the study of Islamic movements comparatively. The best way to look at this is to examine the political behaviors of Islamic movements in democratic countries. This examination should consider environmental factors within which Islamic movements are located, the strategies that the movements employ, and the Islamic repertoire that the movements use in mobilizing their followers. In this paper, I examine these two questions by examining the political attitudes and behaviors of Islamic movements in public in Turkey and France. Since Turkey and France has a strong secular republican public sphere, Islamic groups’ positioning in the public debates in these countries is a good indication for whether or not they can develop democracy-friendly public reasoning. I critically examine the public discussions on democracy, secularism, cosmopolitanism and republicanism to trace the position of Islamic groups in public debates. My data comes from the interviews I conducted in Turkey and France, surveys done by other scholars, critical analysis of news media, and primary publications Islamic movements. This study makes two conclusions: (1) Even though the political discourse of Islamic groups is not normatively democratic; they develop new strategies to operate in a democratic environment, which transforms their discourse toward more democracy-friendly ones. Second, in a democratically designed environment, Islamic movements’ involvement in public debates forces them to confront and come to the terms of democratic normative structures. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why has the international community refrained from intervention in the Turkish-Kurdish conflict that has lasted for two decades? The conflict literature has not found an adequate answer to this question, mostly, I argue, due to the lack of domestic variables in intra-state conflict data sets. This paper builds on a new data set collected for all democracies from 1945 to 2004 that accounts for the rebels' participation in electoral politics and their recognition by the state. I show that domestic politics not only affect the severity and frequency of civil wars in the country, but also impinge on the decision of intervention of the international community. Following a brief formal representation of the preferences of the state, the rebels and the potential intervener, I use quantitative analysis to test the hypothesis that domestic variables such as regime type, political access of the rebels to the system and formal recognition of the rebels' identity by the state affect the decision-making of the intervener. Consequently, I discuss foreign policy implications of the findings with further support from my dissertation field work in Turkey, Syria and Iraq. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the critical problems that face new democracies is that of credible commitment: how could citizens and the losers of elections trust that the winners will honor the constitution and will not abolish political and civil rights once they gain control of state resources? The problem is even more pronounced if one or more of the groups competing for power present ideological platforms with ambiguous commitments to continued democracy. This is the common cooperation problem?there is no external enforcement mechanism and securing political power (particularly in a majoritarian system) essentially means gaining monopoly over the use of force. What is more, players in a young democracy lack the experience of repeated interactions and the advantage of established reputations. Although Turkey?as a not yet perfectly consolidated democracy?is often criticized for its history of military interventions, the military establishment has in fact been that enforcement mechanism and has kept civil administrations within the boundaries of the constitution. This has been traditionally interpreted as the failure of the Turkish democracy, given that military officers are not elected, and hence are not accountable to the people. Yet, the very independence of institutions responsible for ensuring that elected officials remain within constitutional boundaries?high courts?is one of the conditions commonly used to judge the democratic nature of polities. Furthermore, respectable polls in Turkey continue to show the military as the most respected state institution; all interventions had popular mandates and the military was quick to relinquish power as soon as they accomplished what they claimed to be their goal.In addition to presenting a formal model of the military?s role in the Turkish political system, this paper will demonstrate empirically that tense relations between the military and civil governments in Turkey correlate well with periods of intense public upheaval against the governments. The environments surrounding the military?s ?soft coup? against an Islamic party in 1997 and the lack of such an intervention against that party?s successor?the current administration of the Justice and Development Party (AKP)?in 2002 and later will provide additional support for this argument. I will be using machine-coded event data (using KEDS/TABARI) that span the period between 1995 and now. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Turkey, democracy was inaugurated immediately after WW II. After its initiation, it has been interrupted by three short-lived military interventions: 1960-1961; 1971-1973; and 1980-1983. However, closer examination reveals a more striking pattern. On the one hand, when competitive elections are held, the corollary democratic institutional setup repeatedly failed to flourish. On the other hand, none of the three military interventions culminated in fully institutionalized authoritarian regimes. In Turkey, when democracy has existed, it has constantly oscillated between two largely proceduralist conceptions: 1) minimalist, entailing free and fair competitive elections with inclusive suffrage; and 2) polyarchy, where the political order is composed of competitive elections and institutions that ensure genuine political competition (e.g., by securing particular conditions such as freedom of expression, alternative information, and associational autonomy). In short, considering 5 years of total military interregna and 50 plus years of democratic experience, over the last 57 years, the Turkish political regime has oscillated within the extremes of a not well-institutionalized military regime and a polyarchy; mostly vacillating between polyarchy and minimalist democracy. I argue that this pattern of oscillation does not illustrate a movement in between regime types, but a regime type in itself: the consolidation of a middle-ground position. Described as such, this phenomenon begs for an explanation. Modernization, structural, and contingency theories of democratization are inadequate in explaining this phenomenon. Instead, I offer the following hypothesis: The tension inherent in Turkey’s hegemonic ideology (Kemalism) between modernist nationalism and liberal institutions accounts for the noninstitutionalized military rule, the nonconsolidated democratic rule, and the oscillation between them. In this hypothesis, the concept of hegemony, is employed as it is used in social/political theory in its intellectual continuity from Gramsci to Laclau and Mouffe. The employment of this concept helps me to establish necessary relations in order to understand the particular development of democracy in Turkey: the mutually reinforcing and constitutive relations in between ideas, institutions and actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the beginning of the 21st century the democratic reformprocess in Turkey within the context of the accession of Turkey to theEuropean Union is marked by an unprecedented dynamism in the Turkish GrandNational Assembly. Leading to an enormous impro ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In his recent book, Democrcy, Charles Tilly suggests that a regime is democratic to the degree that political relations between the state and its citizens feature broad, equal, protected and mutually binding consultation. Tilly’s suggestion, of course, ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A new trend is observed in the Islamic world. That is the rise of "Muslim democracy" in countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, and Turkey. Turkey's conservative, center right Justice and Development Party (AKP) is regarded as "the mo ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the decline of the Ottoman Empire Europe has become a major source of inspiration for Turkey's reform-minded elites. In this regard two waves of reforms are of particular importance. First, the establishment of the Turkish Republic and the initial efforts of the Kemalists to create the preconditions for a well functioning democratic nation state through a remarkable list of secularizing reforms. Accordingly, the Kemalists described their authoritarian single party regime as a civilizing force - a view that has become widely accepted. The second wave occurred recently when nine harmonization laws were passed in order to satisfy the Copenhagen criteria for membership in the EU. Ironically, this step was carried out by the ruling Justice and Development Party, which is accused of hiding its reactionary agenda behind liberal reform packages. While the West, especially the US administration, hopes for the emergence of a loyal Muslim democracy, which could serve as a model for a free and democratic Middle East, the Kemalist elites, who had carried out the first wave of Turkish Europeanization reforms, fear the de-stabilization of the regime and the undoing of secular achievements. This conflict shows on the one hand that democracy is far from being a logical outcome of political engineering. On the other hand, it demonstrates that the consolidation of the Turkish democracy is not a matter of gradual reform. It is a matter of transforming the political system. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing discussions of the dissent/repression nexus are largely informed by rational choice arguments about reciprocal interactions. We argue that political regimes channel the interaction between dissidents and the state, creating distinctive interactions between dissidents and the state. Drawing on event data from the World Handbook of Political Indicators IV project to compare dissent and repression dynamics in a consolidated democracy (the U.S.), an emerging democracy (Turkey), an inclusionaryauthoritarian regime (Jordan), an exclusionary authoritarian regime (Egypt) and a hybrid state (Israel/Palestine), we find that the largestdifferences are the intensity of violence and the length of protest/violence cycles. Consolidated democracy creates lower levels ofcivil violence and shorter reciprocal cycles of dissent and repression. A hybrid state that combines democracy in one region and militaryoccupation in another creates the most intense violence and the longest duration protest/violence cycles. Nonviolent protest in all systems contributes to repressive state violence, especially in an authoritariancontext. We also look at the effects of state relaxations on civil action, finding that relaxations typically occur after a de-escalation of violence. Violence cycles appear to be rooted in fundamental conflictsover national identity and the definition of the state while disputes over incremental reforms are more likely to generate episodic andnon-reciprocated dissent and repression. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among few examples for those who argue that Islam and democracy can go together is the Turkish experience under the Justice and Development Party (JDP) government since November 2002. Yet, the Party itself disassociates the movement with a religious political background, and rather defines its political stand as a ?conservative democrat.? Notwithstanding repeated commitments to secularism and democracy, it is being defined as pro-Islamist, Islamic-oriented, moderate-Muslim party in the media outside of Turkey. This study aims to discuss the ambiguity in the media coverage of this rather recent political movement in Turkey, and find out if such discrepancies between the party's own description and its perception in the media occur with respect to certain issues, or if this occurs regardless of the subject matter. Using the LexisNexis database, a dataset is being created for the media's coverage (from the fall of 2002 through June 2006), to code for the labels used to describe JDP every time a news about the JDP appeared in the newswires. To find out if certain labels are more likely to be used in a given subject area, I will code the news for different issue areas (such as, domestic politics, the European Union accession, economic policy and crises, religion and social life, relations with the US). Findings will be compared with the Party?s official documentation (i.e. its political manifesto and government program). How similar are these with the party's own definitions of its political agenda? To what extent, or relating to what issues, is the party still perceived as a continuation of past political movement? When is it represented as a ?moderate? Islamic political movement? The conclusions will provide results regarding the wide array of descriptions of the media coverage on political Islam, and include policy implications for similar movements to address their ?image problem.? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The decision by the Turkish parliament on 1 March 2003 to reject a proposal to let thousands of U.S. ground troops already in the Mediterranean enter Iraq through Turkey was monumental. It gave the Turkish public, who had taken to the streets in protest of the government?s proposal, a sense of victory: democracy had prevailed over persistent US pressure and an aid package worth over $30 billion. Although Turkey eventually allowed the U.S. the use of its airspace, the event significantly strained the relations between the two long time allies. The decision was a major setback for U.S. military plans as access through Turkey would have enabled the military to place scores of troops in Northern Iraq as quickly as possible. The U.S. in this case faced an interesting paradox, not unlike the difficult position it has found itself in when dealing with many countries in the Middle East since the onset of its war against Iraq?pressuring governments to support the war it has waged in the name of democracy, when that support would come only in the face of strong counter public sentiments and would require the ruthless repression of public dissent in some cases.This is a decision-forcing case that focuses on this critical decision by the Turkish parliament. Students are exposed to a common dilemma faced by elected representatives all around the world, particularly in countries that rely heavily on foreign patronage?respond to the wishes of the citizens who will hold you accountable when the next elections come around or to the demands of the patron(s), whose continued financial support might hold the key to a sustainable economy. This teaching case study can be used in upper-level undergraduate courses on the comparative politics of democratizing or developing countries, Middle East politics, and foreign policy. It should also be of substantive interest to scholars of both US and comparative foreign policy due to its use of primary source materials not readily available in the US. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]