THE DETERMINANTS OF ETHNIC MINORITY PARTY FORMATION AND SUCCESS IN EUROPE BY DANAIL L. KOEV DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2014 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Associate Professor Carol Leff, Chair Professor Robert Pahre Professor William Bernhard Associate Professor Milan Svolik ii Abstract Why do some ethnic minority groups in Europe form political parties of their own in order to obtain political representation, whereas others choose to work within the confines of established, mainstream political parties? Further, why do some ethnic minority parties (EMPs) achieve electoral success, whereas others fail? In addressing these questions, I incorporate insights from history and social psychology to develop an original theory of EMP emergence and success. I argue that an ethnic minority group’s historical background influences its political engagement strategies through sociopsychological processes. I propose that native groups (those that inhabited the territory of the modern-day state in which they reside prior to that state’s establishment) and groups with historical experiences of autonomous self-rule are more likely to form ethnic minority parties, and that EMPs formed by such groups are more likely to enjoy electoral success. I argue that groups possessing one or both of these characteristics are more likely to exhibit the traits of positive distinctiveness and shared grievances, contributing to the development of a salient collective political identity. Ultimately, groups that perceive themselves as native to their state and that have enjoyed autonomy are more likely to feel entitled to the unique form of representation provided by an ethnic minority party, and more likely to generate sufficient electoral support to sustain such a party. In contrast, groups lacking these traits are likely to either have non- politicized identities or to approach the political process from an individual, rather than collective, perspective. This makes them more prone to seek participation in established, mainstream political parties. In addition to this original theory, I consider existing theories regarding the role of the political opportunity structure and the role of international organizations such as the European Union. I test my predictions with a mixed-methods approach combining a large-N, cross- national quantitative analysis with a detailed case study focusing on Bulgaria. The quantitative portion of my analysis uses an original dataset of European elections in the period 1990-2012. I test my predictions regarding the determinants of EMP entry and success using generalized linear mixed models, finding substantial support for the influence of the two historical variables. For the qualitative case study, I performed a month of field research, conducting semi-structured elite interviews with leading Bulgarian political figures with expertise in the country’s ethnic politics. I sought to determine why the country’s Turkish minority has produced one of the most successful ethnic parties in Europe, whereas the country’s Roma population remains without a notable political party. The case study confirms many of the findings of the quantitative analysis and allows a deeper exploration into the complex causal mechanisms behind EMP emergence and success. iii Table of Contents I. Introduction…….………………………………………………….1 II. Theory…….…..………….………………………………………12 III. Quantitative analysis…….……….……..………………………..56 IV. Ethnic Minority Politics in Bulgaria….……….………………..118 V. Conclusion…………………………….………………………..189 VI. Appendix A…………………………….……………………….201 VII. References…………………………….………………………...243 1 I. Introduction Contemporary Europe, Eastern and Western alike, is characterized by the presence of sizable ethnic minority groups living within otherwise ethnically homogenous nation-states. Although there is great diversity among these minority populations, one nearly universal trait they share is concern over the protection of their rights and interests within their host nation. This concern is motivated by an actual or perceived inequality of treatment between the majority ethnic group of the state and its ethnic minorities, and allegations of both de jure and de facto discrimination are commonplace. In Western Europe, Muslim immigrants have objected to a number of legislative initiatives limiting freedom of religious expression, arguing that such laws discriminate against adherents of Islam in particular. In Eastern Europe, the fall of Communism introduced political pluralism into many states with unresolved ethnic tensions, and numerous governments have enacted laws regarding language, religion and citizenship that are argued to constrain the liberty of the ethnic minorities residing within them. Further, ethnic minorities in this region—particularly the Roma—suffer considerable de facto discrimination even in the absence of de jure discrimination. To combat these real and perceived threats, ethnic minorities across Europe have sought to engage the political system of their state and influence government policy. The democratic systems of most European countries offer opportunities for minority groups to attempt to achieve their goals through electoral politics. However, different minorities have sought to accomplish these goals in strikingly different ways. At the most basic level, two broad models of ethnic minority political mobilization can be distinguished. 2 The first model is more prevalent in Western Europe and is epitomized by the case of the United Kingdom, where migrant minority groups (Indians, Pakistanis, Afro- Caribbeans) have sought to influence politics by working within the already existing party system of the state. Since the 1970’s, there has been a concerted effort by these groups to participate in the politics of the Labour party, and to use the party as a promoter of minority rights. As a consequence, the number of UK members of parliament (MPs) belonging to these minority groups rose substantially, and the political discourse of the state shifted from one generally dismissive or apathetic toward the rights of immigrants to one more accepting of multiculturalism (Garbaye, 2003). More recently, however, British Prime Minister David Cameron has advocated for a “muscular liberalism” entailing more restrictive and assimilative policies toward migrants, 1 and the representation of ethnic minorities in the UK parliament still falls considerably short of their share of the general population. 2 Similar patterns of ethnic minority participation are present in much of Western Europe (Turks in Germany’s Social Democratic Party, Muslims in the Netherlands’ Labour Party), as well as parts of Eastern Europe (for instance, Russians in the Estonian Centre Party). The general pattern is one of ethnic minority participation almost exclusively within the most popular existing center-left or liberal party of the state. This entails a symbiotic relationship where on the one hand liberal and left-of-center parties solidify their support among certain sectors of the electorate, and on the other ethnic minorities obtain some (usually limited) parliamentary representation and government 1 “State Multiculturalism Has Failed, Says David Cameron.” BBC News . 5 Feb 2011. Web. 30 May 2014. 2 Anwar, Muhammad. “The participation of ethnic minorities in British politics.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 27.3 (2001): 533-49. 3 policy influence. An alternative model of ethnic political mobilization is evident predominantly in Eastern (but also some Western) European states. In former Warsaw Pact states, many minority groups quickly adapted to the collapse of Communism. Making full use of the nascent political pluralism, they formed political parties that would exclusively represent their interests in government. Although the magnitude of electoral support ethnic minority parties (EMPs) enjoy is naturally limited by the size of the ethnic groups they represent, these parties have gained prominence as pivotal coalition partners for mainstream parties in states like Bulgaria, Slovakia and Romania. As such, they have seized control of numerous ministerial positions and have had substantial influence over government policy-making. Further, successful EMPs have enabled ethnic minority groups to achieve levels of parliamentary representation not generally observed in states without such parties. For instance, ethnic Turks control 14.6% of seats in Bulgaria’s 42 nd National Assembly, 3 well above their 8.8% share of the country’s population, whereas Turks in Germany control only 1.7% of seats in the 18 th Bundestag 4 despite comprising 5.2% of total population. Similarly, Swedes control 4.5% of seats in the 36 th Finnish Eduskunta through the Swedish People’s Party, 5 slightly higher than their 4.3% share of population, while ethnic Finns constitute only 1.5% of the current Swedish Riksdag, 6 3 “Members of Parliament,” National Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria . Web. Accessed June 10, 2014. <http://www.parliament.bg/en/MP> 4 Varli, Ali. “Eleven Turks Enter German Parliament,” Hurriyet Daily News . Web. Accessed June 10, 2014. <http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/eleven-turks-enter-german-parliament- .aspx?PageID=238&NID=55013&NewsCatID=351> 5 “Dataset: Finland: Parliamentary Election 2011,” European Election Database. Web. Accessed June 10, 2014. <http://eed.nsd.uib.no/webview/index.jsp?v=2&study=http%3A%2F%2F129.177.90.166%3A80%2