CYPRUS POLICY of TURKEY in the 2000S: HAS the “NATIONAL CAUSE” BECOME an “IMPEDIMENT to PROGRESS”?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CYPRUS POLICY OF TURKEY IN THE 2000s: HAS THE “NATIONAL CAUSE” BECOME AN “IMPEDIMENT TO PROGRESS”? A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY ÖZGE YAKA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SEPTEMBER 2006 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Sencer Ayata Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. Prof. Dr. Feride Acar Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. Prof. Dr. A.Ra şit Kaya Supervisor Examining Committee Members Prof. Dr. A.Ra şit Kaya (METU, ADM) _______________ Assist. Prof. Dr. Galip Yalman (METU, ADM) _______________ Assist. Prof. Dr. Ferdan Ergut (METU, HIST) _______________ I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: ÖZGE YAKA Signature : iii ABSTRACT CYPRUS POLICY OF TURKEY IN THE 2000s: HAS THE “NATIONAL CAUSE” BECOME AN “IMPEDIMENT TO PROGRESS”? Yaka, Özge M. Sc., Department of Political Science and Public Administration Supervisor: Prof. Dr. A. Ra şit Kaya September 2006, 147 pages This study claims that there has been realized an obvious transformation in the way in which the Cyprus question is perceived and handled in Turkey, both in official state policy and popular opinion, during 2000s. It is aimed in this study to depict this transformation with its different dimensions and analyze this transformation with a historical perspective in terms of the actors and dynamics involved. The social and political dynamics which brought about such a transformation are investigated and the positions and attitudes of certain social actors, with special reference to big capital and its representative TÜS İAD, are disclosed within the scope of this study. It is maintained in this study that in order to understand and analyze the transformation in the Cyprus policy of Turkey and the public opinion, it is necessary to relate this process with general political atmosphere of the country as well as the hegemonic visions/projects/opinions of the period. In this case, it is actually impossible to understand and analyze the transformation of the official policy and public opinion on Cyprus separate from the EU membership project specifically in 2000s. This study analyzes this transformation as a dimension of a general process that is the construction of EU membership objective as a hegemonic project. Antonio Gramsci’s theory of hegemony and Bob Jessop’s conceptualization of hegemonic project have been utilized in this analysis. Keywords: Cyprus question, Turkey’s EU membership process, TÜS İAD, hegemonic project. iv ÖZ 2000’li YILLARDA TÜRK İYE’N İN KIBRIS POL İTİKASI: “ULUSAL DAVA” “GEL İŞ MEN İN ÖNÜNDE B İR ENGEL”E M İ DÖNÜ ŞTÜ? Yaka, Özge Yüksek Lisans, Siyaset Bilimi ve Kamu Yönetimi Bölümü Tez Yöneticisi: Prof. Dr. A. Ra şit Kaya Eylül 2006, 147 sayfa Bu çalı şma, 2000’li yıllarda Türkiye’de Kıbrıs sonunun hem resmi devlet politikası ba ğlamında hem de kamuoyunda algılanı ş ve ele alını şında bariz bir dönü şüm ya şandı ğı iddiasındadır. Bu çalı şma söz konusu dönü şümü de ğişik boyutlarıyla betimlemeyi ve tarihsel bir perspektif ı şığında analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu çalı şma kapsamında böylesi bir dönü şümü do ğuran siyasal ve toplumsal dinamikler ara ştırılacak ve büyük sermaye ile onun temsilcisi olan TÜS İAD ba şta olmak üzere bazı toplumsal aktörlerin tavır ve pozisyonları gösterilecektir. Bu çalı şmada Türkiye’nin Kıbrıs politikasındaki ve kamuoyunun konuya bakı şındaki dönü şümü anlamak ve analiz etmek için, sürecin ülkenin genel siyasi atmosferi ve dönemin hegemonik vizyon/proje/görü şleri ile ili şkilendirilmesinin gereklili ği savunulmaktadır. Bu örnekte Kıbrıs hakkındaki resmi politika ve kamuoyu görü şünün özellikle 2000’li yıllardaki dönü şümünü AB üyelik sürecinden ba ğımsız olarak anlamak ve analiz etmek mümkün de ğildir. Bu çalı şmada söz konusu de ğişim genel bir sürecin bir boyutu olarak analiz edilmektedir: AB üyelik hedefinin bir hegemonik proje olarak kurulması. Bu analiz için Antonio Gramsci’nin hegemonya teorisinden ve Bob Jessop’un hegemonik proje kavramla ştırmasından yararlanılmı ştır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Kıbrıs sorunu, Türkiye’nin AB üyelik süreci, TÜS İAD, hegemonik proje v To My Parents vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am very grateful to Prof. Dr. Ra şit Kaya for his excellent guidance and commentary throughout the research. Beyond the supervision of this study, he supported and encouraged me not only academic but also in personal matters. I wish I could have deserved his compassionate and patient approach, wise commentary and excellent supervision. I wish to express my thanks to Assist. Prof. Dr. Galip Yalman not only for his invaluable critiques and suggestions but also for making the major contribution to my intellectual being with his lectures and for supporting me both in my undergraduate and graduate education. I would like to thank to Assist. Prof. Dr. Ferdan Ergut, for indicating very significant points with his questions, comments and critiques. I would like to thank to my friends Cemil Yıldızcan, Duygu Türk, Özge Özyılmaz, Mehmet Emin Türkmen and Ça ğda ş Sümer for their support and friendship, to Yelda Kaya and Ruhi Demiray for being there to encourage me in a very hard day and to Bülent …. For helping me in a tight time. I owe so much to the moral and technical support of Yi ğit Karahano ğulları. And, of course, Onur Küçükarslan… The enthusiasm he brought made it difficult to focus on studying; but his existence made it easier to handle the difficulties of writing process by surrounding me with love and compassion. Thank you! Lastly, I wish to express my love and indebtedness to my parents for enduring all the difficulties of living with me and handling my crises of pessimism and despair with love and patience during all my academic life so far. This study is dedicated to them. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS PLAGIARISM.............................................................................................................iii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………iv ÖZ…………………………………………………………………………………….v DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………….vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................... vii TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………..viii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................1 2. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CYPRUS PROBLEM......................17 2.1. Half Century-Long History: The Period of 1950-1999..................................17 2.1.1. The period before the Turkish Intervention: 1950-1974 .........................19 2.1.2. The period after the Turkish Intervention: 1974-1999 ............................23 2.2. The Period of Transformation: 1999-2004....................................................31 2.2.1. Formation of the Reaction against the Official Cyprus Policy: 1999-2002 .......................................................................................................................33 2.2.2. Transformation of the Official Policy: 2002-2004..................................41 3. ANATOMY OF THE TRANSFORMATION PERIOD: ACTORS AND DYNAMICS...........................................................................................................52 3.1. Preamble......................................................................................................52 3.2. Formation of a Consensus towards the Settlement of Cyprus Problem on the way to EU Membership ......................................................................................54 3.3. Components of the Consensus......................................................................55 3.3.1. The Big Capital .....................................................................................56 3.3.2. AKP Government..................................................................................74 viii 3.3.3. Liberal Intellectuals and Mainstream Media Circles...............................80 3.4. The Opposing Camp.....................................................................................87 3.4.1. Political Parties......................................................................................89 3.4.2. Nationalist Media, Intellectuals and Organizations ..............................100 3.5. General Assessment ...................................................................................108 4. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................120 REFERENCES.....................................................................................................131 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Cyprus question has always been one of the major policy issues for Turkey, which had significant repercussions in terms of both domestic and international politics, since 1950s. Many generations have grown up with the belief that Cyprus question is a matter of national cause which should be defended at any costs. Significance of the Cyprus question went beyond a desire to