A Transnational Cleavage Across the Bosphorus? the Role of Globalizing Forces in Turkish Politics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A TRANSNATIONAL CLEAVAGE ACROSS THE BOSPHORUS? THE ROLE OF GLOBALIZING FORCES IN TURKISH POLITICS Edgar Owen Kinnier IV A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of the TransAtlantic Masters in the Department of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences Chapel Hill 2020 Approved by: Gary Marks Ann-Kristin Jonasson Liesbet Hooghe John Stephens © 2020 Edgar Owen Kinnier IV ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Edgar Owen Kinnier IV: A Transnational Cleavage Across the Bosphorus? (Under the direction of Gary Marks) The pressures of a world-wide financial crisis, mass migration, and a globalizing economy have created a new transnational cleavage between the “winners” and “losers” of globalization. While European and North American democracies are not the only states to feel the pressures of globalization, the emergence of a transnational cleavage has been under- examined outside of these areas. One clear candidate when examining transnational forces on political parties is Turkey. In Turkey, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) has moved from pro-European “Muslim Democrats” to defensive nationalism, while the opposition, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), has attempted a pivot toward “new left” politics. Can the pressures of an emerging transnational cleavage explain party movement in Turkey? This thesis finds partial support for the theory that globalization drives positional realignment amongst Turkish parties, but further research is needed on how party positions toward immigration are shaped in the Turkish system. iii “Caught as the city is between traditional culture and Western culture, inhabited as it is by an ultra- rich minority and an impoverished majority, overrun as it is by wave after wave of immigrants, divided as it has always been along the lines of many ethnic groups, Istanbul is a place where, for the past hundred and fifty years, no one has been able to feel completely at home.” - Orhan Pamuk, Istanbul: Memories and the City iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis, like all works of scholarship, was not made alone, but with the help and tutelage of smart and caring people who have guided me along the way. First, I want to heartily thank both of my advisors, Ann-Kristin Jonasson and Gary Marks, who not only helped this paper immeasurably but remained dedicated to keeping a close advising relationship even as we were forced to do so at a distance due to the public health crisis. I also want to give a special thanks to Sam Barber, Simon Fredholm, Klas Grinell, Klara Höglund, Arvind Krishnamurthy, and Katie Leonard for their time, advice, and helpful comments on the paper. Finally, I want to thank the family and friends who have supported (and put up with) me throughout the research and writing process for this work. I am immeasurably grateful to have had the opportunity to research, write, and produce this thesis on three continents. It is my sincere hope that it can be of some use in future studies. v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................................viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.........................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2: CLEAVAGE THEORY AND GLOBALIZATION: THE EMERGENCE OF A TRANSNATIONAL DIVIDE..............................................................5 CHAPTER 3: GAPS IN THE RESEARCH: IS THE TRANSNATIONAL CLEAVAGE A WESTERN DIVIDE..............................................................................................8 CHAPTER 4: THE TURKISH CASE............................................................................................12 “A Troubled Democracy”: Turkish Party Competition and Electoral System....................14 Cleavages and Current Parties............................................................................................17 Implications of the Turkish Electoral System.....................................................................21 CHAPTER 5: HYPOTHESES.......................................................................................................23 CHAPTER 6: DATA AND METHODOLOGY............................................................................26 The Global Party Survey Data (GPS).................................................................................27 Manifesto Project Data.......................................................................................................28 Methods of Analysis...........................................................................................................29 CHAPTER 7: RESULTS...............................................................................................................32 Hypothesis 1.......................................................................................................................32 Hypothesis 2.......................................................................................................................35 CHAPTER 8: DISCUSSION.........................................................................................................38 APPENDIX....................................................................................................................................43 vi REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................46 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 — Turkish Party Positions on GAL/TAN Dimension......................................................13 Figure 2 — Support for EU/Supranationalism vs. GAL/TAN........................................................34 Figure 3 — Support for Immigration vs. GAL/TAN......................................................................34 Figure 4 — Net Positive Multiculturalism References in Manifestos 2002-2018...........................36 Figure 5 — Net Positive EU References in Manifestos 2002-2018................................................37 Figure 6 — Net Positive Immigration References in Manifestos 2015-2018..................................37 viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AKP Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi (Justice and Development Party) ANAP Anavatan Partisi (Motherland Party) AP Adalet Partisi (Justice Party) BDP Barış ve Demokrasi Partisi (Peace and Democracy Party) CHES Chapel Hill Expert Survey CHP Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (Republican People’s Party) DP Demokrat Parti (Democrat Party) DYP Doğru Yol Partisi (True Path Party) EFTA European Free Trade Agreement EU European Union GAL Green/Alternative/Libertarian GPS Global Party Survey HDP Halkların Demokratik Partisi (People’s Democratic Party) MHP Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi (Nationalist Action Party) MP Manifesto Project NSC National Security Council RP Refah Partisi (Welfare Party) TAN Traditionalist/Authoritarian/Nationalist TGNA Turkish Grand National Assembly ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Across Europe, vote shares for traditional parties have plummeted as the salience of the party platforms on which they were established has declined (Hooghe and Marks, 2018). Political competition in Europe and North America has increasingly been centered around immigration, supranational governance, and globalizing trade as opposed to traditional economic issues. Scholars have defined the cause of this to be a new globalization/transnational cleavage: a societal divide that separates voters into the “winners” and “losers” of globalization, and structures party competition around those blocs (Kriesi et. al, 2008; Teney et. al, 2014; Hooghe and Marks, 2018; Strijbis et. al, 2018).1 But globalization, supranational governance, and increased immigration are not trends that are exclusive to Europe and North America. Can transnational forces explain party movement outside of these regions? This thesis will examine a case that is both ripe for analysis of the transnational cleavage, and one with massive implications for the future of the European Union (EU): Turkey. Using a mixture of expert survey data and manifesto coding, this thesis will answer the question: Are the transnational forces driving change in EU member state parties driving change in Turkish parties as well? 1 Kriesi et. al (2008) provide a framework for profiling the voters who fit into these two camps. It is worth quoting at length from their definition: “...the likely winners of globalization include entrepreneurs and qualified employees in sectors open to international competition, as well as cosmopolitan citizens. Losers of globalization, by contrast, include entrepreneurs and qualified employees in traditionally protected sectors, all unqualified employees, and citizens who strongly identify themselves with their national community,” (p. 8). 1 In Turkey, the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP) has occupied government for the last eighteen years, with the Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, CHP) in opposition. Throughout their first term in government, the AKP was a pro- Europe party, intent on making the democratic reforms necessary to join the EU. It was the CHP, traditionally associated with Kemalism, that engaged in “soft-Euroscepticism” (Öniş, 2007).2 Now the AKP, and its leader President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, have clearly and publicly moved away from Europe and