Search

Some elements of EU assistance to the countries of MENA have become more politicized in recent years. This is largely because sharper differences of opinion have emerged over EU funds being used to limit migration and for security aims. Contestation has intensified horizontally between different EU institutions and European governments. However, this politicization varies across different policy areas and different parts of the MENA region, and in some instances remains relatively muted. After outlining the general increase in salience and wider institutional engagement; we then contrast this with the more measured increase in the third dimension of politicization, namely polarization over the EU's MENA aid policies. We offer three examples of the way that internal policy-making dynamics have softened polarization and discuss implications for the broader analysis of EU foreign and security policy. We conclude that different kinds of dynamics both drive and limit politicization within the EU's external policies.

The EU’s entangled relationship with Turkey and its future direction has been puzzling many scholars and policymakers alike for some time now. On the one hand, the multi-layered relations are inext...

The professionalization effect of foreign funding is one of the prominent issues in the critical literature on donor/recipient relations. Despite growing attention on this topic, the link between European Union (EU) funding to Turkish civil society organizations (CSOs) and their professionalization remain understudied. This article fills this gap. Drawing on an original set of interviews with leaders of 45 CSOs in Turkey, this article finds that EU-funded projects have not led to the professionalization of Turkish CSOs. This article suggests several reasons for this and also discusses the broader impact of EU funds in relation to CSO’s professionalization.

The twists and turns of Turkish foreign policy under Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule have been a matter of interest not only in the scholarly literature, but also in common discourse. This article traces the unfolding of this policy in Turkey’s neighbourhood and in relation to its quest for EU membership, particularly since 2006, and also discusses the milestones that have been shaping it. Drawing upon the categories of change Charles Hermann identified, this article illustrates the magnitude and direction of change in Turkish foreign policy during this period and critically evaluates its implications for this policy today.

‘Golden goose’ of European integration for some time now, EU’s civil society policy displays a vivid example during Turkey’s accession. This article queries the impact of this policy in the Turkish context, ultimately showing its limited extent on Turkish civil society organizations (CSOs) and illuminating its real constraints in the Turkish context. Drawing on interviews with CSOs, this article argues that the EU could not accomplish its expected objectives set within its civil society policy in Turkey due to its neo-Tocquevillian conceptualization that overlooks at the constraints on civil society actors and disregards civil society’s political nature and its CSOs’ autonomous character.