Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi The Journal of Defense Sciences Mayıs/May 2016, Cilt/Volume 15, Sayı/Issue 1, 55-77. ISSN (Basılı) : 1303-6831 ISSN (Online): 2148-1776

A Comparative Study of the Impact of Defense Expenditures on in Indonesia and Turkey Anton Abdul FATAH1 Salih SALIHOGLU2 Abstract Indonesia and Turkey have several similarities from the defense perspective, such as geographic strategic positions and emerging democratic nations, and Muslim domination populations. Therefore, both countries need idiosyncratic policies to establish national defense stability. This paper examines the impact of defense expenditures on economic growth in Indonesia and Turkey. The literature is divided on this impact. Some studies find a negative impact while others find a positive correlation between defense expenditures and economic growth. Several studies find an inconclusive effect or no effect at all. This paper posits that economic growth is associated with defense expenditures, oil prices (Indonesia is an oil producing country, while Turkey is not), external balance of trade, investment, and fiscal and monetary policy. Estimation uses time series methods and annual data from 1988 to 2014. The estimated effect is opposite in these two countries. There is a positive correlation between defense expenditures and GDP growth in Indonesia. However, the relationship is negative between defense expenditures and GDP growth in Turkey. Both are statistically significant at p<0.01. Keywords: Defense Expenditures, Economic Growth, Time Series Methods.

1 Address: Fulbright Scholarship Awardee from Indonesia, Student of Martin School of Public Policy and Administration-University of Kentucky, Kentucky, USA, [email protected]. 2 First Lieutenant, Turkish Gendarmerie General Command, Student of Martin School of Public Policy and Administration - University of Kentucky, Kentucky, USA, [email protected]. Retrieved Date: 05.10.2015 Accepted Date: 02.03.2016 56 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Endonezya ve Türkiye’de Savunma Harcamalarının Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerine Etkisini İnceleyen Karşılaştırmalı Bir Çalışma Öz Endonezya ve Türkiye’nin savunma perspektifi açısından birçok benzerlikleri bulunmaktadır. Türkiye Asya, Avrupa ve Afrika kıtalarını birbirine bağlayan bir konumdayken, Endonezya Orta Doğu, Orta Asya ve Australya’nın ortasında yer almaktadır. Ayrıca, bunlar müslüman nüfusun yoğun olduğu demokratikleşmekte olan ülkelerdir. Bu nitelikler ve jeopolitik konumlarından ötürü, Endonezya ve Türkiye millî savunma tutarlılığını sürdürebilmek için kendilerine has politikalara ihtiyaçları vardır. Bu çalışma, Endonezya ve Türkiye’deki savunma giderlerinin ekonomik büyüme üzerine etkisini analiz etmektedir. Bazı çalışmalar savunma harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasında negatif, bazıları da pozitif ilişki bulmuştur. Buna karşın, bir sonuç ya da etkinin bulunmadığı çalışmalar da mevcuttur. Bu çalışma, ekonomik büyümenin savunma harcamaları, petrol fiyatları (Endonezya petrol üreten bir ülke iken Türkiye değildir), dış ticaret dengesi, yatırım ve mali politikalar ile ilişkisini göstermektedir. Değerleme için zaman serileri methodu kullanılmış ve veriler yıllık olarak 1988 ile 2014 arasını kapsamaktadır. Değerleme etkisi her iki ülkede de zıt yöndedir. Endonezya’da savunma harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme arasında positif bir ilişki görülürken Türkiye’de bu ilişki negatiftir. Her iki değerleme de p<0.01 seviyesinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlıdır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Savunma Harcamaları, Ekonomik Büyüme, Zaman Serileri Metotları. Introduction Defense expenditures are one of the main concerns of many countries because the defense sector forms a crucial part of countries’ budgets. This concern became more important after the end of the because people living in many countries have begun to request decreases in defense expenditures to spend on other non- sectors, such as education and health. However, the need for security still causes governments to spend an important portion of their national budget on defense expenditures. Early in the post-Cold War period, the trend of global defense budget is slackening but after the 21st century era, it started rising considerably (SIPRI Military Expenditure Database 2014). The tendency of

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 57 defense expenditures also varies depending on countries’ safety concerns and necessities for dealing with conflicts they face both from internal and external sources. Landau (1993) emphasizes that the essential influencing factor that affected military expenditures is the potential external threat; for, the location of a nation contributes to its decisions in defense expenditures. Located astride the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, Indonesia is a strategic country which links East Asia and Australia, and is a key actor in the geopolitical interaction between those two regions. Indonesia is the biggest archipelago in the world with 17,508 islands, and it is the world’s fourth-most populated nation with hundreds of tribes. Also, Indonesia has the world’s largest Muslim population, and is one of the world’s largest democracies. On the other hand, Turkey is located in a strategic position linking three continents (Asia, Europe, and Africa) and plays a key role in the middle of four regions (Balkans, Caucasus, Middle East, and Gulf). In addition, Turkey is a secular and democratic country, which is also dominated by the Muslim population. Indonesia and Turkey are also facing separatism issues. In the last three decades, Indonesia has been confronting several separatist groups such as The Free Aceh Movement (Indonesian: Gerakan Aceh Merdeka or GAM), The Republic of South Maluku, and the Free Papua Movement which creates a big concern for Indonesian national defense. In the same time span, Turkey also has been dealing with the separatist and radical groups such as The Kurdistan Workers' Party (Kurdish: Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan or PKK). Indonesia and Turkey need idiosyncratic policies to establish their national defense stability. The main purpose of defense expenditures is security, but there might be major impacts on GDP. This study compares findings in those two countries. This study scrutinizes defense expenditures and GDP in Indonesia and Turkey from 1988 to 2014. The trends of defense expenditures as a share of GDP in both countries are decreasing, while the trends of GDP growth in both countries differ. In Indonesia, there is a parallel trend between GDP growth and defense expenditures as a share of GDP as shown in the graph (below). In the economic crisis of 1998 in Indonesia, there was a sharp decrease of economic growth, despite the fact that the defense expenditures grew. 58 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Figure 1. World Bank Data Base 2015 and SIPRI Military Expenditure Database 2014 Graph 1. Indonesia GDP Growth and Defense Expenditures as a Share of GDP On the other hand, Turkey’s economic growth has been fluctuating, resulting in a positive trend. Nevertheless, the defense expenditures` trend has been diminishing significantly from 11.75 percent in 1994 as the highest point to an average of 2 percent in the last five years. The interesting fact is that in every descending point of negative GDP growth (1994, 1999, 2001 and 2008-9), the defense expenditures as share of GDP rose (below).

Figure 2. World Bank Data Base 2015 and SIPRI Military Expenditure Database 2014 Graph 2. Turkey GDP Growth and Defense Expenditures as a Share of GDP The objective of this paper is to examine the impact of defense expenditures on economic growth, taking into consideration other factors, in Indonesia and Turkey. Additionally, both countries will be compared in

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 59 terms of this impact, since they have several similar geo-political and social situations.

This paper postulates that economic growth is associated with defense expenditures, oil prices (Indonesia is an oil producing country, while Turkey is not), the external balance of trade, investment, and fiscal and monetary policy. There are four questions that will be examined in this study. First, what and how significant is the impact of defense expenditures on economic growth in Indonesia and Turkey? Second, as an oil producing country, how does this variable create differences for Indonesia compared to Turkey? Third, how is the comparison between Indonesia and Turkey related to this impact? Finally, how do the events, such as economic crises or conflicts, influence the defense expenditures in both countries?

Impact of Defense Expenditures on Economic Growth

According to the previous studies, there are different results that show the relationship between defense expenditures and economic growth. To begin with, some authors support that the relationship between defense expenditures and economic growth is positive and significant; this means that there is a positive correlation between them. However, other authors find that the relationship is negative and significant, which means that defense expenditures dissuade economic growth. Finally, some other people argue that the relationship between defense expenditures and economic growth is not significant, which means there is no evidence for correlation, positive or negative. Firstly, there are numerous explanations that support the positive relationship, mentioned above. Mylonidis (2006), as quoted in Tian (2013), mentions that economic growth is supported circuitously by government activities, such as the stipulation of national defense, that protect property rights by augmenting the incentive for citizens to manufacture and to accrue investment. Also, defense expenditures maintain interior and exterior security, which is very crucial for economic activities (Sandler and Hartley, 1995). Dunne (1990) claims that in order to avoid a war, which would influence the economy negatively, providing defense as a result of defense expenditures is necessitated. Defense expenditures in developed countries are required to uphold the establishment of governments, which will result in economic costs (Hall and Jones, 1999). According to Benoit (1973, 1978), defense expenditures are associated with the capacity utilization, furthermore a growth in defense expenditures will improve the economy in 60 | Fatah ve Salihoglu case of an economic recession. In terms of , Blank and Rothschild (1985) state that a large capacity of the U.S. armed forces creates many job opportunities as a result of defense programs. On the other hand, Gold and Adam (1990) maintain that defense manufacturing leads to technological inventions in the U.S. and causes progression through a byproduct effect on the private sector. Conversely, some people assert that there is a negative correlation between defense expenditures and economic growth. Hong (1979), as quoted in Heo (2009), claims that there is a resource alteration from civilian to defense use, resulting in a productivity decrease. Also according to a study by Aizenman and Glick (2003), the effect of defense expenditure on economic growth is negative and not significant. Moreover, Kaldor (1976) finds a negative correlation between defense burden and the economic growth rate after testing forty least developed countries from 1963 to 1973. Defense expenditures have a major negative impact on economic growth through investment even if they have a minor positive impact through modernization effects. Consequently, the net impact on economic growth is negative (Deger and Smith, 1983). Any increase in defense expenditure leads to either a higher tax burden or a larger government budget deficit because defense expenditure is a government expenditure (Chan, 1987). Countries facing civil war cannot convalesce simply because their human and material resources have been eradicated. Depending on the intensity of the war, economic growth becomes more negative (Murdoch and Sandler, 2002). Additionally, Melman (1983), as quoted in Chairil, et.al. (2013), maintains that highly qualified employees are attracted to defense industries, which leads to a draining impact on human capital for the private sector. Finally, there are some arguments claiming that there is no significant correlation between defense expenditures and economic growth. Biswas and Ram (1986) find that the coefficient for defense expenditures for low-income least developed countries is neither significant nor consistent after estimating Benoit`s results again for fifty-eight countries over the years 1960-1970 and 1970-1977. Payne and Ross (1992) test if defense expenditure and economic growth in the have any significant correlation by running vector auto-regression analysis, and the results demonstrate that there is no significant relationship between economic growth and defense spending. The estimated effect of defense expenditure as part of GDP on the growth rate is seldom positive but not statistically significant (Landau,

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 61

1986). Gerace (2002) asserts that in the United States, defense expenditure per capita does not have a significantly big impact on economic growth because of its not being big enough. The model that used in the studies mentioned above vary. Dunne at. al. (2005) emphasize that the Feder-Ram model are primarily utilized in the defense economic. This model suggest that it is important to consider the effect of external balance as a variable on research of the effect of military spending and economic growth. Dunne at. al. (2005), however, suggest that there are “two models that have a stronger pedigree in the growth literature.” First, the augmented Solow growth model by Mankiw et al. (1992), which used by Knight et al. (1996) in predicting the impact of military expenditure on growth. This model mainly concentrate on aggregate real income, real capital stock, labor, and technology parameter. Second, is the Barro Model, which mainly concentrate on per capita GDP, education, population growth and the investment sharing.

Indonesia Case Study

Most of the studies related to the relationship between defense budget and economic growth in Indonesia lie in the research of regional studies especially the data on Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. The study by Hirnissa and Baharom (2009) finds that since only economic growth affects military expenditure, in Indonesia there is an unidirectional causal effect between those two elements and this contradicts the findings of Frederiksen (1991). In another study, Pradhan (2010) investigates the nexus of defense spending and economic growth in five countries in South East Asia, including Indonesia. Interestingly, he found that the direction of causality between those two elements affects one another. In his summary, he states: “The error correction model confirms the presence of unidirectional causality from economic growth to defense spending in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. This suggests that economic growth is very responsive to defense spending in the ASEAN-5. Philippines shows the feedback between defense spending and economic growth. The bidirectional causality is also found at the panel of ASEAN-5. This represents that economic growth affects defense spending and defense spending can affect economic growth. That means defense spending is a limiting factor to economic growth and economic growth is also a limiting factor to defense spending.” (Pradhan, 2010, p. 306)

62 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Khan and Yap (2000) emphasize that there is a negative relationship between two components, however they could not find that strong support for a disproportionate military expenditure would discourage economic growth. Conversely, research by Chairil et al. (2013) finds that the relationship between defense expenditure and economic growth in Indonesia is positive.

Turkey Case Study

The impact of defense expenditures on economic growth in Turkey has been analyzed by some researchers. But depending on different methodologies used and different time periods, the results vary. According to the findings of Sezgin (1997), there is a positive correlation between defense expenditures and economic growth in Turkey, using a `Feder-type model` over the period 1949-1993.Also, Sezgin (2001), as quoted in Tekeoglu (2008), used ‘Deger Model’ to estimate the correlation between defense and growth between 1956 and 1994. A positive relationship was found between defense and economic growth, but there was no significant impact on investments and the balance of trade. However, Ozsoy (2000) finds no significant impact using the same method but different time period. By using a Granger causality model, Dunne et al (2001) and Sezgin (1999) obtain a statistically significant and negative impact of defense expenditure on growth for Turkey. Additionally, Sezgin and Yildirim (2002) maintain that defense expenditures seem to have a positive effect on growth in the short range and in the long range, using a vector autoregressive model for 1949-1994. By using cointegration and causality tests, Karagöl and Palaz (2004) find that there is a long-range balanced correlation between GNP and defense expenditures in the years between 1955 and 2000. They also claim that there is one direction causality from defense expenditures to growth by looking at short-term causality tests. Tekeoglu (2008) maintains that there is a negative correlation between GDP growth and defense expenditures, and also he assesses defense welfare relationships by using a causal multiple regression method. Data and Methodology This paper posits that economic growth is associated with defense expenditures, oil price (Indonesia is an oil producing country, while Turkey is not), external balance on goods and services, money supply growth rate and foreign direct investment.

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 63

To examine the impact of defense expenditures on economic growth, the following model is estimated;

Gdpgrowtht=α0 + α1defexppctgdpt + α2oilpricet + α3extbalpctgdpt + α4fdiusdt + α5m2growthratet + εt - Gdpgrowth= growth rate of - Defexppctgdp= defense expenditures as a share of gross domestic product - Oilprice= selected spot crude oil prices (usd per barrel) - Extbalpctgdp= external balance on goods and services as a share of gross domestic product - Fdiusd= foreign direct investment (Current US dollars) - M2growthrate= money and quasi money (M2) growth rate GDP growth rate is the dependent variable. Defense expenditures variable is the independent variable that is focused on in this study; for, other variables are controlled. The model here is GDP growth rate as a function of defense expenditure (as a percentage of GDP), oil prices, the external balance (exports minus imports as a percentage of GDP), foreign direct investment, and money supply growth rate. Foreign direct investment (FDI) is selected as an indicator of investment. It is the amount of equity capital, reinvestment of wages, other long-term capital, and short-term capital as shown in the balance of reimbursements. External balance on goods and services represents the difference between exports and imports of goods and services. If external balance is positive, this shows that exports of goods and services are more than imports of goods and services, and vice versa. Defense expenditure as a share of GDP is utilized to gauge the fraction of whole economy that is bestowed on defense expenditures. According to the World Bank, Money and quasi money (M2) is defined as that which encompasses the amount of currency outside banks, demand deposits other than those of the central government, and the time, investments, and foreign money deposits of resident sectors other than the central government. The data of growth rate of GDP, external balance on goods and services as a share of GDP, foreign direct investment and money supply are taken from the World Bank database. The data of defense expenditures are taken from The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) 64 | Fatah ve Salihoglu database. Oil prices are taken from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) database. The data are from Indonesia (country 1 in the data) and Turkey (country 2 in the data). The data are annual from 1988 to 2014. The descriptive statistics summary is presented in the appendix for both countries. The foremost purpose of this paper is to examine the causality association between defense expenditures and economic growth. The association will be examined by using Prais-Winsten estimation model, conceived by Sigbert Prais and Christopher Winsten (1954). The variables are examined for stationarity and order of integration by using Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) Unit Root Test (Dickey and Fuller, 1981). Time series considerations here include the usual unit roots: GDP grows over time, as do most of the variables included here. In addition, GDP growth is likely to be auto correlated, as growth (or recession) factors usually take more than one year to have their full effect. So the disturbances can be auto correlated. The usual method here is to look at the Durbin-Watson statistic to discover the presence of autocorrelation in the residuals (prediction errors). In summary, there are unit roots as usual, differences or percentage changes are substituted, and the model is estimated with auto correlated residuals. The estimation (Prais for Prais-Winsten) allows for auto correlated residuals. Otherwise, it is the same as OLS regression. Empirical Results Table 1. Summary Output for the Impact of Defense Expenditures to Economic Growth (growth rate of GDP) in Indonesia Explanatory (lagged) Coef. Std. Err. t p-value Defense exp as % GDP 510.28 217.68 2.34 0.030 Oilprice .03 .04 0.92 0.369 External balance as % GDP. -.32 .23 -1.36 0.191 Fdi in $billion. .055 .17 0.28 0.784 M2 growth rate -.15 .06 -2.68 0.015 _cons 8.60 1.98 4.34 <0.001 Autocorrelation .72 Durbin-Watson statistic after AR(1) is estimated 1.53. R-squared: 0.74. Test of the regression: F(5, 19) = 10.99, p<.01.

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 65

Defense expenditures and monetary growth affect GDP growth with statistically significant estimated effects. Defense expenditures have a positive effect (p=.030), while monetary growth has a negative effect (p=.015). Table 2. Summary Output for the Impact of Defense Expenditures to Economic Growth (growth rate of GDP) in Turkey

Explanatory (lagged) Coef. Std. Err. t p-value| Defense exp as % GDP. -344.23 188.37 -1.83 0.083 oilprice. -.02 .07 -0.23 0.818 External balance as % GDP -.88 .21 -4.15 0.001 Fdi in $billion. .30 .20 1.41 0.174 m2 growth rate .003 .016 0.18 0.862 _cons 3.45 1.12 3.09 0.006

Autocorrelation -.1718456

Durbin-Watson statistic after AR(1) is 1.90. R-squared: 0.67. Test of the regression: F (5, 19) = 7.95, p=0.0003 Defense expenditures have a negative effect on GDP growth (p=.083), while external trade balance has a negative effect (p=.001). None of the other explanatory variables has a statistically significant effect. The theory is that GDP might grow faster or slower given defense expenditure depending on whether the main effect is fiscal policy, i.e. government expenditures encourage growth in a Keynesian sense, or displacement of more productive private activity. Defense expenditures are the point of this research. External balance raises growth if growth is export development. 66 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Some FDI is more relevant to creating sales or profits for the country providing the FDI. Monetary policy does not change the effect to the defense spending. Increases in money supply have a negative effect in Indonesia, probably because this is not monetary policy in the usual sense but more inflation finance with large increases in money supply interfering with growth (but defense spending is still expansionary). The money supply appears not to matter in Turkey, but again, the increases were very large at times, and in such cases, money separates from the real economy. Our results show that two factors matter in both countries, but not in the same way. External balance as a percentage of GDP has a negative effect in both countries, with more exports being associated with less growth. That is consistent with growing economies and might or might not be a problem in the future depending on investment taking place as a result. It is not the main point of this research. Discussion The point of this research is to ask what the effect of defense expenditures is, net of other factors, and to compare Indonesia and Turkey. They increase GDP growth in Indonesia and decrease GDP growth in Turkey. The estimated effect is opposite in these two countries. The standard errors are small enough that the difference between these estimated effects is statistically significant at p<.01 (compare the point estimates and standard errors above; the theory is the same as for a difference of means test). As expected, there is autocorrelation which is eliminated after one autocorrelation term is included. That means that GDP growth is affected by the same unobserved factors for two consecutive years, but not longer than that. During the time span of the analysis, Indonesia has been facing internal security threats such as Free Aceh Movement, Free Papua Organization, Communal and religious violence, and also terrorism attacks especially in the last decade (Sukma, 2010). In addition, the occurrence of natural disasters is frequent in Indonesia, since this country is categorized as the “ring of fire.” The earthquake and tsunami of Aceh in 2004 and several volcanic eruptions are devastating natural disasters that frequently happen in this country. Even though those threats caused significant troubles for the

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 67 national defense and security. The Indonesian government has policies to deal with that. The empirical findings of this research show that in Indonesia, the government spending on defense has established a national security stabilization which has created a conducive situation for economic activities. This is in line with the finding from Baran and Sweezy (1966), Sandler and Hartley (1995), and Hall and Jones (1999) which stated that military spending is critical to secure the national defense and its stability will support the economic activities. The foreign direct investment data that are used on this paper is the strong evidence on this situation. The stabilization of defense and security in Indonesia create a confidence market trust to invest in Indonesia; for, the trends of investment increase significantly, especially after the economic crisis in the early 21st century. The other consideration is that Indonesia has sharply increased its defense budget in the last decades. This increase is to modernize and augment their military equipment and strengthening the military organizational and administrational capacity (The Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Indonesia, 2008). To modernize their equipment, Indonesia try to optimize their state-own military company including utilizing local raw materials. These initiatives became stronger after the enactment of the law number 16 year 2012 of the Indonesian Defense Industry. The goal of these initiatives is to reduce the dependency of imported military equipment. In addition, the defense budget is also strengthening the military organizational and administrational capacity through the establishment of several defense-related research and study center and also capacity development for the military official (The Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Indonesia, 2008). In 1980, Turkey commenced an economic liberalization and has experienced excessive interest rates, high unemployment rates, high fiscal shortfalls, and instable growth rates during this period. But still Turkey has not been decreased armaments imports. Defense expenditures as a share of GDP have always been comparatively higher than the most of the European and NATO countries even though it has differed over time (Tekeoglu, 2008). Even during the period of economic crises, Turkey’s high standing defense millstone had resumed. There were sharp fluctuations in the economy because of economic crises in 1994, 1999, 2001 and 2008-9. As a result, GDP growth decreased sharply at those years. According to the results, diminishing defense expenditures can be anticipated to augment growth because of the negative correlation between 68 | Fatah ve Salihoglu defense expenditures and economic growth. This result is conceivable, if capital reserves are used more in the civilian economy following defense spending reductions. The actual decision to reduce defense spending must take into account both external and internal security affairs, but the effect of GDP is a part of the process. Conclusion The main purpose of this study was to test the relationship between military expenditures and economic growth. The study tested that economic growth is connected with defense expenditure, oil prices, external balance on goods and services, foreign direct investment and money supply growth rate. Results for each model were statistically significant. For Indonesia, the correlation between defense expenditures and economic growth is positive. On the other hand, the correlation is negative for Turkey. As an oil exporter, oil has a positive effect on economic growth in Indonesia and conversely as an oil importer, the effect of oil on economic growth is negative in Turkey. The positive association between investment and economic growth demonstrates that investment is a crucial component of growth. Also, the model presented that the external balance on goods and services has a negative effect on economic growth in both countries. They both import more goods and services that they export. As money supply growth rate is associated with economic growth negatively in Indonesia, it seems that it doesn’t have an impact in Turkey. Acknowledgements This research was supported by the Institute of International Education (IIE) through the Fulbright South East Asia Grant. I thank my colleagues from the Martin School of Public Policy and Administration, University of Kentucky who provided insight and expertise that greatly assisted the research. We thank Professor J.S. Butler (Martin School of Public Policy and Administration) for assistance with econometric analysis, and his contributions for comments that greatly improved the manuscript.

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 69

References Aizenman, J. and Glick, R. (2003). Military expenditure, threats, and growth. NBER Working Paper Series (No. w9618). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org /papers/w9618.pdf Ateşoglu, H. S. (2004). Defense spending and investment in the United States. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27(1), 163. Ateşoglu, H. S. and Mueller, M. J. (1990). Defense spending and economic growth. Defence Economics, 2(1), 19-27. Baran, P. A., & Sweezy, P. M. (1966). Monopoly capital: An essay on the American economic and social order (Vol. 73). NYU Press. Benoit, E. (1978). Growth and defense in developing countries. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 271-280. Benoit, E. (1973). Defense and economic growth in developing countries. Mass., Lexington Books. Biswas, B. and Ram, R. (1986). Military expenditures and economic growth in less developed countries: An augmented model and further evidence. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 34(2), 361- 372. Blank, R. and Rothschild, E. (1985). Effect of United States Defence Spending on Employment and Output, The. Int'l Lab. Rev., 124, 677. Chairil, T., Sinaga, D. and Febrianti, A. (2013). Relationship between Military Expenditure and Economic Growth in ASEAN: Evidence from Indonesia, Journal of ASEAN Studies, 1(2), 90-105. Chan, S. 1987. “Military Expenditures and Economic Performance,” in World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Deger, S. and Smith, R. (1983). Military expenditure and growth in less developed countries. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 27(2), 335-353. Değer, S. (1986). Economic development and defense expenditure. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 35(1), 179-196. Dickey, D. A. and Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1057-1072. 70 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Dunne, P. (1990). The political economy of military expenditure: an introduction. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 395-404. Dunne, J. P., Nikoalaidou, E. and Vougas, D. (2001). Defence spending and economic growth: A causal analysis for Greece and Turkey. Defence and Peace Economics, 12(1), 5-26. Dunne, Paul. J., Smith, R. and Willenbockel, D. (2005) Models of Military Expenditure and Growth: A Critical Review. Defence and Peace Economics, 16(6) 449-461. Frederiksen, P. C. (1991). Economic growth and defense spending: evidence on causality for selected Asian countries. Journal of Philippine Development, 18(1), 131-147. Gerace, M. P. (2002). US military expenditures and economic growth: some evidence from spectral methods. Defence and Peace Economics, 13(1), 1-11. Gold, D. and Adams, G. (1990). Defence spending and the American economy, Defence and Peace Economics, 1(4), 275-293. Hall, R. E. and Jones, C. I. (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? NBER Working Paper Series (No. w6564). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w6564 Heo, U. (1998). Modeling the defense-growth relationship around the globe. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42(5), 637-657. Heo, U. (1999). Defense spending and economic growth in South Korea: The indirect link. Journal of Peace Research, 36(6), 699-708. Heo, U. (2009). The relationship between defense spending and economic growth in the United States. Political Research Quarterly, vol. 63, No. 4 (Dec. 2010), pp. 760-770. Hirnissa, M. T., Habibullah, M. S. and Baharom, A. H. (2009). Military expenditure and economic growth in Asean-5 countries. Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(2), p192. Kaldor, N. (1976). Inflation and recession in the world economy. The Economic Journal, 703-714.

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 71

Karagöl, E. and Palaz, S. (2004). Does defence expenditure deter economic growth in Turkey? A cointegration analysis. Defence and Peace Economics, 15(3), 289. Khan, H. and Yap, W. Y. (2000). Defense spending and economic growth: further evidence with the asean data. Business and Behavioral Sciences Track Section of Economics and Economic Geography, 7(9), 28. Kwabena, G. (1989). Defense spending and economic growth in sub- Saharan Africa: An econometric investigation. Journal of Peace Research, 26(1), 79-90. Landau, D. (1986). Government and economic growth in the less developed countries: an empirical study for 1960-1980. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 35-75. Landau, D. L. (1993). The economic impact of military expenditures (Vol. 1138). World Bank Publications. Lim, D. (1983). Another look at growth and defense in less developed countries. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 31(2), 377- 384. Mahaztra, D. A. (2015). Analisis Terhadap Program Revitalisasi Industri Pertahanan Periode 2010-2014. Jurnal Ilmiah Universitas Bakrie, 3(03). Murdoch, J. C. and Sandler, T. (2002). Economic growth, civil wars, and spatial spillovers. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46(1), 91-110. Özsoy, O. (2000). The defence growth relation: Evidence from Turkey. In J. Brauer and K. Hartley. Amsterdam (Ed.), In the economics of regional security: NATO, the Mediterranean, Southern Africa (pp. 139-159). Harwood Academic. Payne, J. E., & Ross, K. L. (1992). Defense spending and the macroeconomy. Defence and Peace Economics, 3(2), 161-168. Pradhan, R. (2010). Modelling the nexus between defense spending and economic growth in asean-5: Evidence from cointegrated panel analysis. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 4(8), 297-307. Prais, S. J. and Winsten, C. B. (1954). Trend estimators and serial correlation (Vol. 383). Cowles Commission discussion paper. 72 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Sandler, T. and Hartley, K. (1995). The economics of defense. Cambridge University Press. Schneider, E. (1988). Causal factors in variations in US postwar defense spending. Defense Analysis, 4(1). Sezgin, S. (1997). Country survey X: Defence spending in Turkey. Defence and Peace Economics, 8(4), 381-409. Sezgin, S. (1999). Defence expenditure and economic growth in Turkey and Greece: a disaggregated analysis. In Arms Trade, Security, and Conflict Conference, Middlesex University Business School, London, June (pp. 11-12). Sezgin, S. and Yildirim, J. (2002). The demand for Turkish defence expenditure. Defence and Peace Economics, 13(2). Shieh, J., Lai, C. and Chang, W. (2002). The impact of military burden on long-run growth and welfare. Journal of Development Economics, 68(2), 443. Sukma, R. (2010). Indonesia’s Security Outlook, Defence Policy, and Regional Cooperation. National Institute for Defense Studies, Japan, Joint Research Series, 5, 3-24. Tekeoglu, E. (2008). Defense expenditure and economic growth: empirical study on case of Turkey. The Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Indonesia. (2008). Buku Putih Pertahanan 2008. Jakarta: Kementerian Pertahanan. Tian, N. (2013). Military spending, economic growth and endogeneity a panel analysis 1988-2010.

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 73

APPENDIX

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics-Indonesia

Variable Mean Std. Dev. Min Max gdpgrow 5.328 4.107 (13.130) 9.080 defexppctgdp 0.015 0.003 0.010 0.021 oilprice 43.875 34.778 12.310 116.600 extbalpctgdp 3.280 3.336 (1.330) 10.520 fdiusd 5,040,000,000.00 7,380,000,000.00 (4,600,000,000.00) 23,000,000,000.00 m2growthrate 19.984 12.165 4.760 62.760 The data are annual from 1988 to 2014.

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics-Turkey

Variable Mean Std. Dev. Min Max gdpgrow 3.969 4.597 (5.700) 9.360 defexppctgdp 0.042 0.011 0.027 0.059 oilprice - - - - extbalpctgdp (2.990) 3.036 (8.671) 4.126 fdiusd 6,020,000,000.00 7,160,000,000.00 350,000,000.00 22,000,000,000.00 m2growthrate 53.645 39.142 10.420 144.800

The data are annual from 1988 to 2014.

74 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Genişletilmiş Özet Endonezya ve Türkiye’de Savunma Harcamalarının Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerine Etkisini İnceleyen Karşılaştırmalı Bir Çalışma Giriş Savunma harcamaları bir çok ülkenin temel endişelerinden biridir, çünkü savunma sektörü ülkelerin bütçelerinin önemli bir kesimini oluşturmaktadır. Bu endişe Soğuk Savaştan sonra daha da önemli hale gelmeye başladı. Çünkü bir çok ülkede, yaşayan insanlar eğitim ve sağlık gibi diğer harcamalar için savunma harcamalarının azaltılması isteğinde bulunmaya başladı. Bununla birlikte, güvenlik ihtiyacı hala hükümetlerin bütçenin önemli bir kısmını savunma harcamaları için kullanmasına neden olmaktadır. Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemin başlarında, küresel savunma bütçesi akımı hız kesti, fakat 21’inci yüzyıldan sonra tekrar belirgin bir şekilde yükselmeye başladı (SIPRI, 2014). Savunma harcamaları eğilimi, ülkelerin iç ve dış kaynaklardan gelen tehditlere bağlı olarak değişen güvenlik endişeleri ve gerekliliklerine göre farklılık göstermektedir. Endonezya, Doğu Asya’yı ve Avustralya’yı birbirine bağlayan ve bu iki bölge için de jeopolitik öneme sahip olan bir konumda yer almaktadır. Ayrıca yüzlerce kabilesiyle dünyanın en kalabalık dördüncü nüfusuna ve 17,508 adasıyla en büyük adalar ülkesi ünvanına sahiptir. Bunun yanısıra, dünyanın en büyük demokrasilerinden biri ve en fazla müslüman nüfusuna sahip ülkesidir. Diğer taraftan Türkiye, Asya, Avrupa ve Afrika kıtalarını birbirine bağlayan ve Balkanlar, Kafkasya, Orta Doğu ve Körfez’in ortasında yer alan stratejik bir konumdadır. Ayrıca, Türkiye de müslüman nüfus çoğunluklu, laik ve demoktik bir ülkedir. Diğer yandan, Endonezya ve Türkiye bölücülük sorunlarıyla yüzleşmektedir. Son otuz yıl içerisinde, Endonezya, millî savunmasını tehdit eden Özgür Aceh Hareketi, South Maluku Cumhuriyeti ve Özgür Papua Hareketi gibi birçok bölücü grupla mücadele etmektedir. Aynı zaman sürecinde, Türkiye de Kürdistan İşçi Partisi (PKK) gibi bölücü örgütlerle mücadelesini sürdürmektedir. Endonezya ve Türkiye, millî savunmalarındaki istikrarı sağlamak için kendilerine özgü politikalara ihtiyaçları vardır. Savunma harcamalarının temel amacı güvenliktir, fakat GSYİH üzerinde de büyük etkileri olabilir. Bu çalışma bu iki ülkedeki bulguları karşılastıracaktır.

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 75

Bu çalışma, Endonezya ve Türkiye’deki savunma giderlerinin ekonomik büyüme üzerine etkisini analiz etmektedir. Bazı çalışmalar savunma harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasında negatif (Deger, 1986; Deger & Smith, 1983; Heo, 1999; Kwaben, 1989; Lim, 1983; Shieh et al., 2002), bazıları da positif (Ateşoglu, 2004; Ateşoglu & Mueller, 1990; Benoit, 1978) ilişki bulmuştur. Buna karşın, bir sonuç ya da etkinin bulunmadığı çalışamalar da mevcuttur (Biswas & Ram, 1986; Heo, 1998). Savunma harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiye yönelik yapılan çalışmaların çoğu Güneydoğu Asya Ülkeleri Birliği’nin sahip olduğu veriye dayanılarak yapılmıştır. Hirnissa ve Baharom (2009)’un yaptığı çalışmaya göre Endonezya’da sadece ekonomik büyümenin savunma harcamalarını etkilediği yönünde tek taraflı bir nedensellik ilişkisi vardır. Başka bir çalışmada, Pradhan (2010) Güneydoğu Asya’daki Endonezya dâhil beş ülkenin bağlantı noktalarını incelemiş ve bu iki element arasında birbirini etkileyen bir nedensellik ilişkisi bulmuştur. Khan and Yap (2000) savunma harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasında negatif bir ilişki olduğunu vurgulamıştır. Buna karşın, orantısız savunma harcamalarının ekonomik büyümeyi olumsuz etkilediğini gösteren güçlü bir sonuç bulamamıştır. Türkiye’de savunma harcamalarının ekonomik büyüme üzerine etkisi bazı araştırmacılar tarafından analiz edilmiştir. Fakat, kullanılan farklı metodolojilere ve farklı zaman aralıklarına bağlı olarak sonuçlar da değişkenlik göstermektedir. Sezgin (1997), 1949 ile 1993 arasındaki periyodu kapsayan dönemi Feder tipi model kullanarak analiz ettiğinde savunma harcamaları ile ekononik büyüme arasında pozitif bir bağlılaşım bulmuştur. Ayrıca, Sezgin (2001), Tekeoğlu (2008)’de belirtildiği şekliyle, 1956 ile 1994 yılları arasındaki dönemi analiz etmek için Deger modeli kullanmıştır. Sonuç olarak, savunma harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme arasında pozitif bir ilişki bulunmuştur, fakat savunma harcamalarının yatırım ve dış ticaret dengesi üzerinde herhangi bir etkisi bulunmamıştır. Bu çalışmada dört soru analiz edilecektir. İlk olarak, Endonezya ve Türkiye’de savunma harcamalarının ekonomik büyüme üzerine etkisi nedir ve ne kadar anlamlıdır? İkinci olarak, petrol üreten bir ülke olan Endonezya için petrol fiyatı değişkeninin Türkiye ile karşılaştırıldığında etkisi nedir? Üçüncü olarak, bu etkiye bağlı olarak Türkiye ile Endonezya arasındaki karşılaştırma nasıldır? Son olarak, ekonomik krizler ya da çatışmalar gibi olaylar her iki ülkedeki savunma harcamalarını nasıl etkiler?

76 | Fatah ve Salihoglu

Metodoloji Bu çalışma, ekonomik büyümenin savunma harcamaları, petrol fiyatları (Endonezya petrol üreten bir ülke iken Türkiye değildir), dış ticaret dengesi, yatırım ve mali politikalar ile ilişkisini göstermektedir. Değerleme için zaman serileri methodu kullanılmıştır. GSYİH büyüme oranı, GSYİH’nın bir payı olarak mal ve hizmetlerin dış ticaret dengesi, dolaysız dış yatırım ve para kaynağı verileri Dünya Bankası veritabanından alınmıştır. Savunma harcamaları verileri, Stockholm Uluslararası Barış Araştırma Enstitüsü (SIPRI) veritabanından alınmıştır. Petrol fiyatları verisi, Petrol İhraç Eden Ülkeler Teşkilatı (OPEC) veritabanından alınmıştır. Veriler 1988’den 2014’e kadar yıl bazındadır. Bu çalışmanın ilk amacı, savunma harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisini araştırmaktır. Bu ilişkilendirme Prais- Winsten tahmin modeli kullanılarak yapılacaktır. Değişkenlerin durağanlık ve bütünleşme sırası durumları Augmented Dickey-Fuller Birim Kök testi yapılarak analiz edilecektir. Tahmin hatalarındaki özilinti sorununun varlığını test etmek için Durbin-Watson istatistik metodu kullanılacaktır. Sonuçlar Endonezya’nın sonuçlarına göre, savunma harcamaları ve para kaynağı büyüme oranı GSYİH’nı istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede etkilemektedir. GSYİH’nı savunma harcamaları positif olarak etkilerken, para kaynağı büyüme oranı negatif olarak etkilemektedir. Türkiye’nin sonuçlarına göre, GSYİH’nın üzerinde savunma harcamalarının negatif ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etkisi mevcutken, dış ticaret dengesinin de negatif bir etkisi bulunmaktadır. Diğer bağımsız değişkenlerin hiçbirinin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etkisi bulunmamaktadır. Teori şudur ki GSYİH, savunma harcamalarının asıl etkinin mali politika olup olmamasına bağlı olarak yavaş ya da hızlı büyüyebilir. Örnek olarak, hükümet harcamaları Keynesçi yaklaşıma göre ya da daha üretken özel faaliyetlerle yer değiştirmesine göre büyümeyi teşvik eder. Dış ticaret dengesi bir çok faktöre dayanmaktadır. Petrol fiyatlarının ülkelerin ihracatçı ya da ithalatçı olmasına göre positif ya da negatif etkisi olabilir. Bir ekonomide yatırımlar güncel GSYİH’yı artırabilir ve verim artırıcı sermayeyi geliştirebilir. Yatırımların payı ne kadar yüksek olursa, üretkenliği artıracak ekonominin hacmi de o kadar yüksek olur. Bu da

Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, Mayıs 2016, 15 (1), 55-77. | 77 ekonomik büyümeyi beraberinde getirir. Dolaysız dış yatırım, eğer yerel çalışanlara iş imkanı sağlarsa GSYİH’yı artırabilir. Mali politikalar savunma harcamalarına olan etkiyi değiştirmemektedir. Para kaynağındaki artışların Endonezya’da negatif bir etkisi vardır. Fakat bu etki genel anlamdaki mali politikadan ziyade para kaynağındaki büyük artışlar içeren enflasyon finansından dolayı olabilir. Beklendiği gibi, bir özilinti dönemi dahil edildikten sonra ortadan kalkacak özilinti mevcuttur. Bu GSYİH büyümesinin ardarda iki yıl için aynı gözlemlenmemiş faktörlerce etkilendiği anlamına gelmektedir. Bu araştırmanın ana konusu savunma harcamalarının etkisinin ne olduğunu sorgulamak ve bu etkiyi görmek için Endonezya ve Türkiye’yi karşılaştırmaktır. Savunma harcamaları GSYİH büyümesini Endonezya’da artırırken Türkiye’de azaltmaktadır. Tahmin edilen etkiler her ülkede de ters yöndedir. Standart hatalar tahmin edilen etkilerin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı olması için yeterince küçüktür.