Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Comparative Study of Amnesty International in Argentina and Turkey

Comparative Study of Amnesty International in Argentina and Turkey

CEU eTD Collection National Settings and Transnational NGOs: Comparative Study In partial offulfillment therequirements for degree ofMaster of Arts of Amnesty International in Argentina and DepartmentSociology of and Social Anthropology Submitted toCentral European University Supervisors: Prof. Vedres Balázs Supervisors: Prof. Don Kalb , 2010 Nil Uzun Budapest by CEU eTD Collection constrained and enabled by national institutional settings. are networks these within organizations of roles transnational so the that actors, transnational national and interactions of through the historically produced are structures network particular that Iargue cases, these investigating By characteristics. similar several present strikingly different positions in these two countries,AI occupies at that study reveals case the This comparative processes. samenational and transnational time fields local,connect that junctures critical the an which explores approach out seeks this research local organizations.in Amnesty role By analyzing of Argentina andTurkey, the International (AI) the and them between interactions of types the in return and NGOs transnational of role the influence might fields institutional and histories national in which ways fail to consider on historical national transnational local trajectories approaches while purely embeddedness similar outcomes the different of arguments, global tendtounderestimate approaches deductive patterns emerging introduce localto andcommunities different methodologies for studyingAmong them. these from they threats the provide, they opportunities the take, organizations different these roles the term, of the localities. definition several haveThe proliferation the of addressing so called NGOs discussions roused This study examines the Abstract i CEU eTD Collection whom this thesis is dedicated. Without them, Iwould notbe who I am now. Finally, Iam most thankful myto parents, my partners in crime, Rengin and each stepof this journey. I amheartily M grateful Gürkan to the until there were last moment,who forthose makingfor this processgrateful easier in any especially possibleam I way.year. the throughout by and challenged supported enthusiastically and constantly been have I whom with CEU of Anthropology I am thankful year. the throughout experience to mySociology and Social Anthropologyfriends who together enabled me to have of Department the staff of and academic a administrative the aswell friendlyas writing process the and peaceful andClarkeinvaluable Timarherhelp thesis; Eszter their for contributionstothis constant with colleagues in the Department of Sociology and Social I am appreciative of Ay I am of appreciative difficult and less fun. gone much beyond the project andher without help and friendship this wouldproject bemuch has Nataliasupport dearest Andrea can words Peral.to Hergenuine No express my gratitude Lucas Gilardone. AdrianaMartin Azcorra, LauraRodriguez, AslDemingo, thealso but field rights warmth human of complexities the about insight friendship. the only me not provided have In that A number of individuals,sense their and works in guidance , Budapestand Istanbul I am thankful to Güne on topic. insights the as well as his critical grateful to Don Kalb for his enthusiasm in my research, his constant support and accessibility, initialthe to finalthe enabled metodevelop an understanding subject.the Iam of also myI am supervisor to from profoundly BalazsVedres thankful andsupport whose guidance Acknowledgments ú e Ça ÷ lar, Prem Kumar Rajaram, Alexandra Kowalski and John Kowalski Rajaram,lar,Prem Kumar Alexandra Õ hç Õ for his for patience, understanding and in companionship ii ú Õ Pelit,Maria Baiocchi Lis and Çelikkol, Maria Lara Goyburu, ø brahim Uzun, to CEU eTD Collection EEECS...... 48 ...... REFERENCES APPENDICES...... 43 41 CONCLUSION...... HPE :HMNRGT ILSI RETN N UKY ETAIYO I..26 HUMAN FIELDS RIGHTS IN ARGENTINA OFAI.... 3: CENTRALITY ANDTURKEY: CHAPTER CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGICAL 21 DISCUSSIONS...... RETN N UKY...... 6 ARGENTINA AND ...... TURKEY OFNGOS THEORIES ALTERNATIVE ANDTHECOMPARATIVECASEOF 1: CHAPTER 1 ...... INTRODUCTION LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES...... TABLE OF CONTENTS...... ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... ABSTRACT...... Table ofcontents 3.2 3.1 1.3 1.1 1.2 C H A NGO H ENTRALITY OF ISTORICAL RGENTINA RGENTINA AND UMAN S AND R IGHTS A P LTERNATIVE RECURSORS AND AI M T OVEMENTS AND URKEY T ODAY ...... 18 ...... A ...... 34 ...... PPROACHES E MPIRICAL A MNESTY ...... 6 ...... R EMARKS I NTERNATIONAL iii ...... 27 ...... 15 ...... øøø ø øø V ø CEU eTD Collection STGM OD MULTECI MAZLUM KAOS IUIHHA IHOP IHH IHGD IHD HEL DOD BUIHHA AKDER AI Organizations inTurkey SERPAJ MEDH MADRES-F MADRES-A MABIERTA LIGA IIDH HIJOS FAMILIARES EQN CPM CELS APDH AMBRU AI AEDD ABUELAS Organizations inArgentina List ofAbbreviations Figure 2Network of human organizationsrights inTurkey based on web links Figure 1 Network of human organizationsrights inArgentina basedonweb links Figures Argentina in organizations rights human of set Data 2: Table Table 1Dataset of organizationshuman inTurkey rights Tables List ofTables and Figures Sivil Toplum Geli Toplum Sivil Özgür Dü Özgür Mültecilerle Dayan Mültecilerle ø Derne Kaos Gey ve Lezbiyen Kültürel Uygulama Merkezi ø ø ø ø ø Helsinki Yurtta Helsinki Dü Merkezi ø Ayr Af Örgütü Fundación Servicio, Paz y Movimiento Ecuménico por los Derechos Humanos Madres dePlaza deMayo– LíneaFundadora Asociación Madres de Abierta Memoria Liga Argentina por los Derechos del Hombre Humanos Derechos de Interamericano Instituto Hijos por la Identidad y la Justicia contra el Olvido y el Silencio y porRazonesFamiliares Políticas deDesaparecidos Detenidos Equipa Nizkor Comisión por la Memoria Centro deEstudios Legales y Sociales Asamblea Permanente por los Derechos Bru Humanos Miguel Asociacion inArgentina Internacional Amnistia Asociación Desaparecidos de ExDetenidos Abuelas de Plaza de Mayo nsan Haklar nsan stanbul Üniversitesi nsan Haklar nsan nsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri vensan ve Hürriyetleri Hak nsan Haklar nsan nsan Haklar stanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi ú Õ ünce Özgürlüünce mc ÷ i ÕOÕ÷ ú ünce ve e a Kar Õ Õ Õ Õ ve Mazlumlar için Dayan için Mazlumlar ve Ortak Platformu Ortak Gündemi Derne Gündemi Derne ú úÕ lar Derne iv ÷ Kad ú ü Derne tirme Merkezi tirme Õú ÷ ÷ ma Derne ø i itim itim Haklar nsan Haklar Õ n Haklar ÷ ÷ ø i nsan Haklar i ø nsani nsani Yard ÷ ÷ i i Õ Derne Õ Derne Õ HukukuAra úWÕ rmalar ve Dayan Õú ÷ Õ ÷ HukukuAra Õ i ma Derne m Vakf i úWÕ Õ , rma ve ÷ i úWÕ Õú rma ma CEU eTD Collection and different national outcomes. national and different similar in produce and return, processes local connect transnational that and junctures critical fordoing an both thatseeks qualitative the I argue quantitative analysis,approach out and localby one, approach and againstapurely Against(ibid:contexts” deductive aglobal 441). takes differentforms in kindsdifferent of organizations andin cultural different historical that practice isawidespread “vernacularization that claiming differences on the concentrate global is and in transformed response” (Levitt Merry studiesmostly2009:443). Butthese andhow the ideasandnorms, make senseof global (…) how“local organizations highlighted critically studies anthropological several hand, other locales.the On indifferent interactions these of outcomes similar the dismiss and forces transnational and national between considerinteraction fail the to approaches local purely Also, local scales. and transnational on interactions of occur kinds andwhat upon bringprocesses impactspolicy-making they what operate, institutions generalizethese how to critical, tend or whether optimistic accounts, of these transnational structure organizational on the material constraints impactof the demonstrated also scholars Several and 2003). and Tilly 2005; McAdam, 2001;Tarrow della Tarrow Porta Tarrow (e.g. NGOs (e.g.for externalization of local contentions and have Smiththe ability to modify local political agendas provide opportunities political They seemto 2005;Alger1997). Hochstetler 1998;Martens 2005; CooleyUnited Thakur 1994;Clark, (WB) Nations Bank Friedman (e.g. (UN) and the and and Ron makingdecision 2002). ofinternational processes governmental organizations (IGOs)such as the Mostorganizations of these (NGOs)’ point toIntroduction the significance of these actors in terms of their role in Scholarly discussions on ‘proliferation of transnational non-governmental transnational of ‘proliferation on discussions Scholarly 1 CEU eTD Collection as one of the prominent actors in this field, offers analytical insights due to the multiple roles multiple the to due insights analytical offers field, in this actors prominent the of one as AI,spheres. andmacro micro andnon-state, state transnational, and for national interaction of grounds make human rights field a fruitful place to look for a better understanding of a locus from judge nation states standardonthe“real”outside andNGOspracticing this universal states treat their own citizens” (Leebaw 2007: 224). Thecodified afterSecondWorldis the the “on based ideajudge War must thatoutsiders the way claim of universality, the warrant to into The reality” (Korey human law framed1992:1-2). premise which of rights and was “would take on the challenge who ones NGOsarethe where society” in civilized retrogression or progress measuring of transforming the words1948. The subjecthuman of hasrights been asconsidered “the fundamental standard for of the in Declaration Rights Human of Declaration Universal the with institutionalization its since fromespecially a standard clarified. be should comparison, Argentina-Turkey AI and field, rights human namely analysis, the for selections interlocked three interaction, NGO of level national and transnational that the roles of transnational organizations, NGOs in this study, are defined. constrained and enabled bynational institutional settings. Itis thesewithin structural settings are networks these within organizations of roles transnational so the that actors, transnational national and interactions of through the historically produced are structures network historical trajectories and human rights fields. By investigating the case, I argue that particular different positions in these two countries and yet there are significant similarities between two AIstudy strikingly occupies Argentina andTurkey.casethat comparative reveals This in (AI) Amnesty International by analyzing NGOs of transnational role the influence The moral claim of human rights is universal by definition, if not by by assumption, not if definition, by is universal rights human of claim moral The Before examining AIin the Turkey in Argentina caseof terms and of exploring the This study examines waysthe in which national histories and institutional fields might 2 CEU eTD Collection should be noted since “they both shaped the soul and identity of their and nations Kemalism of and state ideologies national dominant crucial very yet comparable hardly of sameimpact Atthe in the time, 1990s. programs yettechnocratic and populist until adventthe in of mid-” (p.201),freethe marketeconomies in 1980s, between Argentina and Turkey can belisted, among others, as “a developmental statist model ambitious programs of Forprivatizing enterprise public (p.2-3). K.Blindsimilarities (2009), had they both features, similar other among and stagnation of economic long periods within both period this arethat countries stabilizations, implementedexchange-rate both had havecountries two these similarities striking the (2002), For Eichengreen economic crises. highlighting relationships the countriesof these two with WorldIMF, Bank and 2001 1990s period of gradual economic reforms while thatArgentinaandTurkey undertook, Most addressthe 2009). of accounts K.Blindthese labor anddemocracy (e.g. , Yalman and Yildizoglu 2003; Gülalp 1985,K.Blind 2009)and the relationships between by“bureaucratic (e.g. ” society marked 2006); state, and capital relations Woods 1990; 2001;Onis 2006; Eichengreen Maxfield andNolt 2001 economic crises (e.g. model substitution and Namely, the import interconnected subjects. yet various different, on case works thisamount comparative of scholarly Asignificant transformations. historical,existingstudies Argentina thecomparing two. have andTurkey not do of similar outcomes political already to the in addition for comparison, selection for the central countries are of two these and cultural processes, interactions as of an organization. nor did isAIwords, itselfdifferent incorporates aspects these of differentspheres and different levels they experiencetransnational movement, social and even 2010:151). corporation” In part (Hopgood other completelyitcan take,by being “partsavvy global NGO, partwitness and institution of part record, dissimilar For the comparative case of Argentina and Turkey, the political historical trajectories historical political and Turkey, Argentina the case of comparative For the 3 CEU eTD Collection take and their complex negotiations with different actors. different with negotiations and complex their take they theroles of examination better for a NGOs transnational of literature the to countries, income non-, middle semi-peripheric case,namely introduction two this of particular beit the would Secondly, dictatorships. andmilitary regimes from authoritarian transition questioning the uses of transnational NGOs for comparative cases of and the with literature this on Argentina andTurkey,be would opening upaspacefurther for play out on NGO level. Therefore, the contribution of this study, which is partially informed carrying this study for legitimate ground a to provide and transition, of democratization processes the affect the levelin all all which of interventions, civilmilitary and privatizations reforms, through societytransformations to see how these democratization processes in details. tradition theoretical of is notthis reliability herethe totest main concern the though even movements, oppositional of evolution the on transition of type the of impact the about also but period transition in the opposition” of strength “the on only not insights junctures democracyCollier’s (1991) bureaucratic Collier and and from authoritarianism to transition of (1998)theory byMunck’s followed authoritarianism, bureaucratic conceptof the he where (1973)seminal work introduces tradition andthe narrowly O’Donnell’s of considers arguments, these on relies study this Therefore, process. in this actors oppositional important democratization,itself is a of process organizing andmobilizing the masses” In (p.12). terms of thisworkers are not only “importantstudy collective actors in democratization, but also democratization offers andworkers impacts through ondemocratization unionism, which significantprocesses to examineK. (2009)argues,since Blind processes of inprivatization countries have these two transnationalinstitutions” (p.200). Among these, privatization itself is a productive point of comparison, as human rights NGOs as other In sense,that comparability Argentina andTurkey of in of terms economic argument. Therefore, the comparison of Argentina the Therefore, comparison argument. will significant of andTurkey give 4 critical CEU eTD Collection embedded. settings on will themainalso impactthe reevaluate about research question national of institutional the roles I intensive research. further of thiswith from point be taken thatcan directions interconnected NGOs and the historical evolution case.Finally,the by of concludedifferent, yet Iwill addressingtwo extentthe to relevant are which findings empirical other several present will I to actors, rights human which theseprovided analysis. bynetworks Before visualizingdistribution the current of of roles the NGOs are transnationally withinactors fieldthis andthe ties among them inArgentina and Turkey with toolsthe behindframework analysis. network network analysis. I and historical perspective will namely a comparative study of framework this methodological briefly clarify field emerged inArgentinathe and Turkey. second Inthe Iwilllay chapter, the out significance rights human current the in which background political historical the of introduce will I thischapter, methodology and In AI. same by on the section fieldfollowed a descriptive rights and of human theories conceptualNGOs In the Iwillthird chapter, thefield currentanalyze of byidentifyinghuman rights the doIn order so,the firstreview to part ofthis aliterature alternative on paperprovides 5 CEU eTD Collection 2006; Fischer 1997. 1 with contact people of (p.19). their regardless background” national engagement, of make who and on scale, income a transnational sources of information and whoseek out sites their choose who actors political “nonterritorial definition by are NGOs And(p.18). a givenlimitedtheir to not third, are activities transnational territory. These nonmembers who sometimesof “but members, of the well-being necessarily the is not organizations of these activities the might not drives that Secondly,interesteven (p.17). from the by politics” aloofness a certain is accentuated be aware[which] parties political and governments from of independence formal “a the impartiality, of claim existence of theis a there rather states, orbetween astate within power for struggles association” conventional resemble field the strugglein First, the NGOs doesnot in of organizations these categories: three of features lists distinctive He (p.15). actors international of category a distinct as many ways, “advocacy networks”. or “civil associations”, than rather “NGOs” term the with for sticking reasons strategic Accordingexample, to him, Heins NGOs (2008) are gives significantactively a critical amount of studies, account it stillcreated reserves of its “thesignificance byboundaries” as an theoperational UN definition. systemof NGOs’ For roles Approaches in Alternative and 1.1 NGOs and the comparative caseof Argentina andTurkey will beintroduced. also The AI. particularly and movement rights human the towards intensified be will attention sections, following the In phenomenon. this of dimension transnational the and “NGO” Comparative Caseof Argentina andTurkey CHAPTER 1: Alternative TheoriesofNGOsand the Also forother critical reviews of definitions of the term “NGO” and what they do, seeRudasill in Witt eds. Even it seems that there is no consensus on the meaning of the term ‘NGO’ despite This chapter begins with a review of the accounts discussing the meanings of the term 6 1 CEU eTD Collection Turkey, and . 3 (p.6-7). globalization” Yet this neo-liberal as relationship known is very controversial ofcapitalism (p.55). phase current the by possible made or about brought and inclusion, discrimination and of equality, exclusion forms the against universalismof Principles and particularism, Charter Alegre Porto culturalthe with impositioncompliance out in and carried relativism,struggles social global or national local, of knowledge and practices their and NGOs movements, social among exchange movements especially in terms of their participation in WSF: “The WSF is the set of initiatives of transnational 2 positions actors among historically situated roles for an NGO. itself very distinction wherethe Turkey like cases the for especially ones, transnational (p.6), itis quite difficult dismiss to the significant differences between national NGOs and the ofboundaries”importance where he reify “former (2009), distinctions the arguesthatthese likeSpiro “artificial” national NGOs and transnational between distinction find the scholars definition activism,of what especially an NGOnot in relationyetstands clear. to World forTo Social begin becomes Forums with, (WSF) if (p.6). sans Frontieres” andeven wesimilar consider gatherings complicated.NGOsinstitutional identity also “includes such humanitarian NGOs as Oxfam, and CARE Medecins as parts of as an activist” “politically The category of Watch as“archetypes”. Rights AI,Human listed as the Althoughwave of transnational “politically of matter institutional identity” Spiro,activista canbe as which according to some and domestic from transnational” (p.2). He draws attention to NGOs and groups what he calls NGOs rights human identity-oriented from generalist “distinguishing by NGOs, rights human domestic seas but leaving incremental changes on the shore” (p.219). In process, this (p.219). leaving shore” incremental the on butchanges domestic seas into repeatedly beach,retreating lap onaninternational that a“series waves of as activism (2005)defines transnational Tarrow out: brought national NGOs between and transnational interactions the that ambivalences on the studies also There are global processes. to relation For example see Dalacoura (2003) where the author assesses the impact of Western human rights policies in policies rights human of Western impact the assesses author the where (2003) see Dalacoura example For See forexample Sousa Santos 2006. In book,his author considers NGOs as part of counter hegemonic Within these lines of thinking, what constitutes the field of “transnational” NGOs is NGOs “transnational” of field the constitutes what thinking, of lines these Within Particularly focusing on human rights organizations, Spiro (2009) offers a typology of Several scholars discuss transnational NGOs in terms of new forms of activism and in and activism of forms new of in terms NGOs transnational discuss scholars Several 7 3 2 , the , CEU eTD Collection which, among other things, means the proliferation of organizations.these means things,of proliferation which, the other among “international” as here the author quoted did. difference between positions the of UN organizationsand like AI vis-a-vis nation states, Iused the term 5 4 about only been never has inopportunity structures But early it andp.160-161). the early 2005, 1980s (Sikkink, institutional in international transforming these succeeded and early 1970s), in the activism human rights to closed ( America in Latin regimes authoritarian and activistsrights in working political domestic the of Sovietthe Union, Eastern After (p.12). certain especially likethe opportunities, increasein transformations human these structures opportunity future inLatin possible EU,the America…)”,the signals number of IGOs for example, such as the UN “or with a regional scope of action (for example modes it butof production is “ also and in of nother,change technologies matter only a to is, according That globalization. proliferation the (2006)characterizes Della Porta (p.145). government domestic the pressure on put of IGOs in mobilization of of issues transnational contention”domestic the in through to arena order and NGOs “externalization of in terms especially thesewaves of as carriers operate NGOs transnational as a matter of the process and the period known as development of the Roma movement in domestic and local politics” because of because the local andpolitics” in Roma of the domestic movement development faced they the However, hindering “newobstacles also international organizations”. increasingly successfulatorganizing level on a transnational and lobbying directly towards NGOs international with interacting Romani activists, Vermeersch out (2006)points “ambivalentthe perception international of politics” such that Romani activists, European of Central case In the scene. domestic the to ambivalences category of category AlthoughI find the term “transnational” more useful than international which, to say the least, highlights the BeckBoli 1999, and Thomas 1999 quoted here in della Porta 2006, p.12. In several these structures cases, opportunity of NGOs IGOs and/or brought Roma. As a result of framing through this interaction, local “became NGOs interaction, this framingthrough As of a result success stories of stories internationalof organizations. political 8 tools set inregulate and tools set to place reproduce” 5 frame a distinct European national European distinct a frame 4 Anincrease in the CEU eTD Collection imperialism global civilsociety; considering number the growing of NGOs transnational as the of emergence a promising approaches Optimistic categories: three approaches into group different these to is possible NGOs’, their roles, the expectationstransnational in‘the the fieldconcerning and approaches how they different the operateassess to in differentimportant is it point, localities. this It inquestion,at thatare relations of these the and organizations these relations among linguistic andcultural withindistances organization” the (p.235). bridge but “thealsoneed of because to costs, transportation and large scalecommunication the of isaresult This action”. oriented locally more does than resources “greater requires thatitsubstantially argues (2005) fortransnational Smith mobilization, material constraints wider scale alsomaterially frames local Butoperatinghierarchies shape and actors. discursively of and ina put limitsvisible in of material Opportunitiesterms relations. provided transnationalthe on scale both and restrictions on the transnationalseveral”but (p.326). activism transnational of form unitary one not is “there this that from emphasize they departing argument of and point organization. associations” developmental transnational and projects, transnational In movements, terms social transnational arenas: public transnational of forms “three in ofoccurs integration The authorsarguethatthe (p.327). integration” of patterns domestic different with correlate formstransnationalization of the distinctive matters: transnationalization “variation and inVedres arguethat Stark modeof the Bruszt, ties, of and complexity these In order toanalyze the international pressure (p.186-187). Keeping in mind these scholarly discussions on NGOs, transnational and national and transnational NGOs, on discussions scholarly these mind in Keeping more is relatively organizing of scales national and transnational between tension The , and middle ground approaches arguing for taking both , and middle ground approaches optimistic for taking both arguing visions and critical approaches discussing NGOs as agents of 9 governmentality or CEU eTD Collection coercive forces of the state apparatus. forces state of the coercive non- the encompass to areconsidered NGOs where perspective a critical as and movement counter-hegemonic NGOs aspartof a ideas about optimistic in the of terms both itself presents institutions, non-coercive and coercive of composition the with state and society civil between relationship dialectical This society. political the with unified becomes end the at and institutions non-coercive and coercive these through itself, power dominant the into develop to later model a and hegemony creating challenge the to thepotential encompasses On otherthe hand, dialectically, society civil also refers to organizationalthe model which coercive securing institutions, contributes to the roles of ruling parties hegemonic powers. and 2002: 160).Civil intertwinedsociety, composed with apparatus, state the of coercive andnon- (Fontana other” the on apparatus, bureaucratic/military/administrative the hand,and one the on society, civil spheres: penetrating, mutually and historically but separate, analytically in by is state two Because“the characterized Gramsci instrumental purposes. for is, leadership separation society of political society,and civil domination-consent and moral-intellectual ensemblethe of organisms (Gramscicommonly called ‘private’” 1971:12).ForGramsci, this is“that apparatuses society, and civil state of society” composed “political functions through hegemony to that, With isrespect force justified. coercive of theexercise massesby the which intellectual moral andleadership operateswith non-coercive tools in tocreate consentorder of Domination armed through forces of hand, other (Gramscithe on 1971:57). occurs coercion; manifests itself in ways:two as‘domination’ and ‘intellectual leadership’”moral as and organizing According coercion and consent. “the toGramsci, supremacy a social of group of global ideas and norms on the local grounds. into considerationcritical by accounts analyzing comparative cases and/or Civil Society: In Gramscian thought, “hegemony” is formed through a certain way of way acertain through formed is “hegemony” thought, Gramscian In 10 vernacularization CEU eTD Collection potential it carries as a necessary opposition to the neoliberal regime, especially of the “focus of the especially regime, neoliberal the to opposition asanecessary carries itpotential been disseminated every mechanisms.aspect of Alsooppositional he usof reminds the liberal system “organized property, individualism,around private and exchange” which has considers global civil society as a foundational element of an emergent, globalized, neo- he relations, every of intoissocial aspect diffused power where lineFoucauldian of thinking, a Following regime. this of relations power and social of product a is society civil global central vital and in element an expandingneo-liberal global him, Accordingregime”. to optimistic visions discussedabove, Lipschutz (2005)problematizes global civil “associety a the Against “NGOs”. transnational numberof proliferated the about sooptimistic are not that image of futurea global of the society. optimistic civil women’sto orwater rights sanitation. groups are regardedas Those forces derivingthe of an environmentalism from issues several with dealing for together comes NGOs various as well Worldis Forum Social oneexample,groups of different where people world the all around as alternative. are they whom to or what to clear not is still it though even with “alternative”, being associated is time the of most movements, global within NGOs to attribution optimistic inKatz 2006:334).The (FalkBelow” “Globalization from 2003quoted NGOs centerof at the callSome scholars it“The ThirdForce” (Florini eds. 2000) andsomeplaces specifically (p.396). of democratization governance global and accountability for greater force pushing important ‘popular’ itis as“themost considered and 2002:397), resources, access”(Batliwala the world system. Although global civil society embodies “the imbalancesof of inequalities power, the challenge to potential the has which force progressive somehow reformist, major strands of this perspective refersmostly informedin thinking byneo-Gramscian international One studies. relations of the to global civil society or the ‘global movement’ as a Optimistic approaches: Critical approaches: On the other hand, there is also a significant amount of amountaccounts of a significant isalso hand,there other the On Optimistic visions of visions Optimistic 11 global civilsociety arguments have been CEU eTD Collection of the constitutive powers of “the Empire” as the representatives of “democratic- of representatives asthe “the Empire” of powers of constitutive the very famous book inand their Negri, Hardt ‘civil society’” (1999:431). contemporary polarizes struggle that ‘civilabout (…)obscuretheprofoundsociety’ class divisions, class exploitation and class him,are comparable CEOs”(p.429).These and“by to NGOs,according to perksthat talking salaries budgets with million managers “multi with NGOsas Marxist regards tradition, anotherform withinto the governmental mechanismsimperial and Petras (1999),from (p.49). one itself from as transforms capital markets” “humanitarian and markets capital between Rabinow(p.243). (2005)points parallelto the principlesforces and which work are at rooms” hotel and forums in university be “‘quarantined’ is to NGOs of faith the that claims inexample, of within“newstrategies countries” developingruling considers the NGOs and fornationsbottom developedmanner.to top (2002) by under-privileged Ong and this under- imperialism overdependent, forms of new whichexercising considersNGOsas work and states, markets, (p.748-754). generate societies” civil to process that, today, continues materialist historical “through existence into come have they and constitutive mutually liberal system, aliberal system also cannot existif civil society is absent”. These two are a exist absent cannot society civil “while one, a causal than rather relationship dialectical considered as mechanism regulatory another Forupon state. the Lipschutz put (2005), is this a is markets, inthen assure regulatory order to state the through action bourgeoisie seeking profits. Civilsociety becoming an arena for this wherestruggle fractions certain of the sakeof for the body human commodify the to agents’ eagerness asthe capitalist interpreted on advocacyhuman rights an against state”,which himoverweening according be to could Outside of these global civil society discussions, there is a strong current of scholarly of current strong a is there discussions, society civil global these of Outside Empire (2000), make a similar claim about NGOs presenting them as one as them presenting NGOs about claim similar a make (2000), 12 CEU eTD Collection humanitarian interventionism” (p.145). influences have on social strong networks relations andargue that, and Levitt (2009) Merry meanings”local Therefore, (Merry institutions and2006:39). to adapted vernacularized, or typically are they communities, small to travel sources transnational from “ideas setting, agenda national and making policy international of processes these In agendas. national and shapingmaking international policy the processes the ascritical considered actors global economy political ‘governable’” 355). (p.344, political action, while also acknowledging (…) that global civil society servemake to the countries” that “itis possible torecognize the transformative potential of transnational in global the They order. conclude by assessing various empirical studies from “developing place and of perception agent’s particular of understanding an of necessity the out they point a understand any Therefore,transnational single actor, (p.339-344). agency of of the role to claim thatit cannot account for the differentially experienced terrain of global civil society meetings” and inand G8 various accompanying WTOmeeting the protests inSeattle 1999 the of wake in the action non-governmental in transnational interest scholarly the following a significant conceptual tool for analyzing world politics in post-coldthe war era“especially become ‘global society’ has and different viewsof civil which term the Gabay (2009) Berry example, For localities. different in various the actors “imperial” by supposedly carried messages of the translations different for revealing Oneway other, they argue granted. or understandingmultifarious the complex, world of NGOs, taking without these for critiques middle for for a ground areseveral and arguing sides of stick,there the studies other Marxist “Amnesty International or 6 (p.314). representational In a review of the book, Balakrishnan (2000) point to their claims of “banality of the enemy”, and quotes that The transnational NGOs like Greenpeace, Human Rights Watch, and AI have been have AI and Watch, Rights Human Greenpeace, like NGOs transnational The Middle groundapproaches: 6 comitia Médecins Sans Frontières ” along with media organizations and other “popular” organisms In between neo-Gramscian, Foucauldian, poststructuralist Foucauldian, neo-Gramscian, between In play an essential role in mobilizing public opinion behind 13 CEU eTD Collection 7 of organizationsin and cultural different ad historical contexts” (p.441) of appropriation, whichthey call place”in This process (p.446). historical circulation which the contexttook and appropriation and political the on depending differently was appropriated widely but package circulated “this them, to According rights. ‘women’s ideas on packof asimilar embrace leaders the women’s human rights NGOssites of four By differentat (p.444). looking keyelement themisthe carries messenger who in , Baroda, Limathe and pathNew York,and scholarsimpact foundof the that circulation of these meanings, where the social position of the among scholarly discussions about transnational NGOs. transnational about discussions scholarly among major trends represent to enough sufficient here listed ones are the categories, three these (p.2). haveorganizations outside such transnational networks other them” and as affected groups, international extent what to and whether and determined domestically are transitions these extent what “to ask they authoritarianism, from transition of cases European Eastern Bylooking atthe (p.1). if same” treating them as they are the than rather NGOs international of and“strategies understandingthese better of forprocesses a and argue Glenn (2002) Mendelson purposes, similar somewhat For another. to level one from transpose contentions domestic and“brokerage” of They conflict. “diffusion” political argue that through routes the McAdam of roots (2003) question domestic the from transnational stemmingcontention and a scale,on Tarrow tooperate transnational mechanisms” actors enabling constituent For other examples of “vernacularization” see the special issue of issue special seethe of “vernacularization” examples other For Within these “different contexts”, for analyzing “the dynamic “the analyzing for contexts”, “different these Within Although be within various numbers grouped are there studieswhichcannot other of vernacularization, 14 takes “different forms in different kinds Global Networks 2009, 9(4). 7 . processes and CEU eTD Collection rights arebased rights universalism interventions.organizations uponmoral “Modern (…) of human mechanics of foremost and thefirst concerns, pragmatic or reasons name ethical of through amongin samejustifications orfor the similar practices, the purposes, actors either shared are claims these that argue to possible is not it Although movements. these within types of social movements, is the universal moral claims which motivate the actors involved capital. of types different of in distribution the of terms and also accumulated capital they in of terms others than power of field hierarchical in this rank higher a in relatively are them of Some field. in the available Eachof (Risseare material struggle 2000:181). actors these that over and symbolic resources such as theFord Foundation and the German Konrad Adenauerin Foundations” picture this 2005:2). In addition, arealso there “churches, unions, peacemovements andfoundations (Guilhot scholars” least, academic butnot last lawyers and, activist associations, professional firms, consulting World orthe as theUnitedNations Bank,private such organizations such as “think tanks, philanthropic administrations, state foundations, international list this to be added can individuals or institutions other several Also victims. of relatives and non-victims victims, as individuals to courts international and organizations, governmental international bodies, juridical NGOs, governments, from scales, national and transnational on field which emerged after this involved actors period, inhuman movements vary rights both Within human secure understanding occurred. human theof rights rights global auniversal itisHowever in post-world the institutionalize period of1940sfirst when to the attempts and surprisingly, equality ‘mankind’). on of the rights base than of latergender much arrives citizenship, national affiliation, religious back ethnic background or dates centuries (not International Amnesty and Movements Rights 1.2 Human One striking feature of the human rights movement, which differentiates it from other from it differentiates which movement, rights human the of feature striking One their of regardless are beings human all that rights, human of idea The 15 CEU eTD Collection economic interest or towhatHeins religion” analogues or economic(2008) “impartiality”, in terms of interest for accuracy reputation and is credibility very high” (p.63). would feel in by comfortable findings contradicting Amnesty knowing that its International, researching “noby ambassadorand Drinan that strategies. stating documenting this (2001) acknowledges reporting, its of credibility the from results also bodies institutional political on vigilslobbying and direct as well onlineas andoffline influence Its power campaigning”. of groups”, AI employs methods of “mobilizing public pressure mass through demonstrations, exerting influence on “governments, political companies bodies, and intergovernmental andprotected berespected to rights human everyone”for recognized internationally 2009:5). pervasive (Drinan asamatter 2001:193) andactivist politically institutionalof identity (Spiro movement,Itissocial and 2010:151). acorporation and (Hopgood relentless, persuasive transnational record, of institution an a witness, is it also rights; human of NGO an primarily operationalizing monitoring its social capital: reports, andalso with pressure on through governments put to the ability activists)symbolic(with capital and in consultative among status itsUN and annual withhighreputation and reports scholars endowed with financial socialcapital approximately (with supporters), 2 million capital (its occupy” (Johnson inAI, Bourdieu 1993: within 6). these has relations, position,a significant scale of their the operation. transnational This universality perpetuates 9 institutionalizationof human rights after mid 1940s through a certainway, inrelation to body politics. 8 both at the level of rights and at the level of the most basic needs of life” (Rabinow 2005:49) humanitarian NGOs as Amnesty International, Oxfam, Médecins and sans frontiers, operates http://www.amnesty.org/en/who-we-are/about-amnesty-international Paraphrasing Hardt and Negri 2000:36.Also see Rabinow 2005:45-47 forcritical a account of AI strongly emphasizes its independence from “any politicalgovernment, ideology, AI itself defines as“a worldwide of movement people whocampaign for agents positions the between relations the by determined “is rights human of field The 16 mobilizing shame mobilizing ). AI is 9 . By 8 . CEU eTD Collection organization policy”, and working on behalf of abortion rights “can powerfully leverage the leverage powerfully “can rights abortion of behalf on working and policy”, organization of amatter official as of sexual orientation account on “persecution Africa taking up to in regime apartheid the of condemnation From rights. social and economic to broadened Korey 1992:160-180. 10 themajor of focus organization: characterizes the later would phrase bethe what that conscience” of “prisoners of the release for AI of steps first very the initiated and students these two infuriatedabout bythis story Benenson, imprisonment. of seven years sentenced to toliberty with beinga toast dictatorship, criticizingSalazar after upwith them ended the followed wheretheirconversation ina restaurant whoweredining students the The story of in students imprisoned1961. two Portoguese about he inthe whenarticle readan basis”2009:6). (Spiro in are decisions on a majoritarian undertaken representation aninternational whose council proportional allocated “national sections where It is organization” a “membership eveningnews bulletins andpage coverage getfront in ”the (Hopgood,2010:163). the headline still can condemnations Its rights. human of impact the of analyses academic its name signifies a globally trusted witness, and “itsindividual andmembers AI supporters. has research members,2 million subscribers, and supporters; work often forms the basis for Thedescribes as“aloofness from is organization (p.17). financedpolitics” bydonations of Fordetailed accounts on AI’s history see Amnesty International 1991; Hopgood 2006;Power1981, 2000; AI’s major mission, the release of political prisoners of conscience, has recently The very well known story of AI begins with Peter Benenson, a lawyer in London, were established in thirty-two countries Sections in all and regions ofthe world. (Cook1996, formed p.182) been had groups Amnesty 2,000 1970s early the in by Europe, concentrated Western Initially up. set were 'Sections' Amnesty groups, sufficient functioning a of with network countries In conscience. of prisoners 'adopted' of three cases the on each working members, Amnesty of groups local of formation the through principally developed world-wide ofwake movementthe 1961 campaign, Amnesty the grew It In the rapidly. 17 10 CEU eTD Collection in thewestern world, ProfessorMümtaz Soysal of Ankara, Turkey” (Korey 1992:159). 11 been given a firm foundation” (Korey 1992:159) ThisPeace Prize in December11,1977. wasamoment human where “ had rights Nobel the wasrewarded organization the when definite became universally human rights 2009:19). efforts of relevantidentity-oriented NGOs and the constituencies they represent” (Spiro democratization process observed in early stages of development in the Third World in Third the of in stages development observed early process democratization ofNational Reorganization. Process the “Proceso”, as known project dictatorship’s the of translation the War was Dirty 159). America 2008: 'dirty Latin of History itself ( war'” the military called whatthe desaparecidos. tragically as: became famous later kidnapping andwhich will disappearances between 1976 and 1983exercised by military in the regime form the massof tortures, killings, todemocratizationpath” and the formation human of is field,rights markedby terror the “sets a inArgentina that period Authoritarian 1997:343). development” (MunckandLeff founding moments. As such, theyformative or are periods of change, regime as defined “Transitions, constituents. national set a societymajor the of one on as considered a be can path regimes authoritarian that from transition of shapesmechanisms its subsequent politicalconsidered as the cross national equivalences of the comparative case. To begin with,national be also can mechanisms These Turkey. and inArgentina istoday it what into fields rights Turkey and 1.3 Argentina “To deliverits response to the uniques honorbestowed onthe organization, Amnesty chose a virtual unknown The importance of AI’s role in the process of andacknowledging institutionalizing process of AI’s inthe role The importance of According to O'Donnell, where he challenges the previous modernization theories, the theories, modernization previous the he challenges where O'Donnell, to According ofhuman have structure shapedthe that mechanisms political several similar There are “All the moral “All were whenin moral the Argentina becamesubmerged removed obstacles 18 11 . los CEU eTD Collection place (K.Blind 2009:33): in 1923“with limited pluralism”andin1946transition amultiparty to system took them, scholarssubstantial apply utility when refined (Mahoney new to to the context” Among2003: 155). discuss finding and model of a his orientingthat ideashad concepts hypotheses, “sensitizingas set thatTurkey and and to regions such as southern EuropeTurkish and Africa. They drew on the O’Donnell’s on countries arguments Americaauthoritarianism,Latin outsidesuch to as of authoritarianism authoritarianism into stages incollapsed later (GülalpMost scholars 1997). extended begins with the declaration of the the previous periods are said to be cut down bedown of militarywith silencing cut The the previous aresaidto the project periods coup. environmentwhere the interest in has ended ormorepolitics specifically classstrugglesthe of as an Also,frequently referred 1990sare the (Keyder security” 2004:72). namenational of atdemocracy rule all the accountability law(…) inthe of andattempts werebrutally quashed 1994. Along “a with military authoritarianismdominated with coupled a lackof of crisis economic and intellectuals, of forces, military Turkish and forces Kurdish guerrilla between armed struggle with marked following the yearswere government, human After more movesliberal these (Zürcher 2004:307). relatively rights” of the 18) butalsowith partly to lowering votingthe age presidential elections, direct assembly, the of (enlargement system political the with partly dealt which amendments constitutional apackage of introduced cabinet the “[In MarchandApril 1991] political where system In theearly Turkishmoved1990s, governmenta gradual to (Anavatan Partisi, ANAP) came powerto in 1983 and ruled until 1991 (ibid: 33). 1970s, and the 1980s, marked by military three interventions, theneoliberal Motherland Party also has complicated democratizationthe Aftergovernments, process.ideological the ofpolarization the1960s, coalition unstable in apparent system, party the of of degree fragmentation high The Republic. the of nature secular the protecting and order of restoring interruption by consecutive military interventions,often executed with the alleged objectives its of consolidation the democracy.A prominent feature of toward the Turkish democratization hasprocess reforms been its of political plethora a instituted has Turkey then, Since 19 liberalization of the of CEU eTD Collection “whitewas car Renault service Broadway” secret without narratives, to license plates.according case, Turkish the In service. secret by used car the is it since be disappearing will someone that signifies which Falcon” “Ford car the about ofpeople memories mentions 12 Argentina. likejustin War” “Dirty the military the coup after thepolitical atmosphere characterizes and disappearances in ofviolence form torture of the forcesuse with military the Narratives of the “disappeared ones” are similar in two cases. In cases. in two similar are ones” “disappeared ofthe Narratives 20 The Lexicon ofTerror, The Lexicon Feitlowitz (1998) 12 , CEU eTD Collection reproduction reproduction institutional thus more(....) of a given becomesover it time andmorepattern long-term and “formation the lead to can elements, contingent particular absenceof or properties” ofhistorical 2000:507). In (Mahoney these patterns existence trajectories, national deterministic have that chains event or patterns institutional motion into set events contingent decisively shape subsequent causal stilltrajectories reserves its validity (Mahoney 2004:91). asequence events within early for approach where acomparative historical argument the However question. main research the to answer as an statement theoretical generalizable a restrain countries these within of NGOs on networks the data qualitative andquantitative institutions, traditions and relations in Argentina and Turkey, aswell thelimitedas of amount political on study this for research historical limited The roles. these on fields institutional the different rolestransnational human rights AIinorganization Argentina Turkey, and demonstrate aiming to it takes in two countries and assess research agenda.future the impact of nationalboth to makehistories the point and areof stillthis short studyand yet crucial clear points andto implicationsbe on the topic,made are toonly some ofthe outcomes of these constraints.onnote However,these there possiblethe potential sites of future by narrow with study, comparative historical forms case definition of and broad research discussions, of these constraints methodological of discussions analysismeasuresa combined and of quantitative qualitative for lack reviewed, of The limitedof literature be selection otherwise.the incorporated could inthispaperthat severaldiscussions focus constrain topic geographic with a particular Chapter 2: Methodological discussions Path dependence “characterizes specifically those historical sequences in which historical those sequences specifically “characterizes dependence Path of a prominent casestudy historical iscomparative of research The method this on a particular done work the of andthe duration thesis, amaster of limits Spatial 21 CEU eTD Collection settings are juxtaposed. Social settings vary not only in space, but also in time, so that so in time, also but space, in only not vary settings Social juxtaposed. are settings specific meaning i.e. a type of study, in which social units orsocial processes in diverse social military interventions as periods of change”“significant considering the human fields.rights sinceperiod “a they major inI represent discontinuity national consider politics” (p.34). these Argentina, Collierand Collier (1991)consider military the as coups the of end point legacies”distinct (Collier Collier and 1991:29): produce hypothesized isand units in to which analysis), of countriesother in (or distinct ways indistinct occurs typically change, which significant is of “a period that juncture critical 13 demanding. are organizations rights human Argentinean way in the amendments constitutional inof terms was successful democracy towards inArgentina change as if that institutional the as decoding andresolving tookover. periodthe juntas Yet, when of it military is still arguable countries between two formulate thecontrast isitto possible discourses, security” “national interveninginmakingwith decision political in or d’etat processes with coup Turkey constantly as military of pattern reinforcing” “self and Argentina in pattern institutional defined as alternative options would havebeen more ‘efficient’” (Mahoney 2000:508), which are these if even options, available previously select or pattern the transform to difficult See Jelin 2003. “Comparative method” or “comparative analysis” in social sciences, “carries a more a “carries in sciences, social “comparative analysis” or method” “Comparative Thesemilitary of periods inArgentina and takeovers Turkey, can asa be formulated Although in their comparativestudy AmericanLatin includingof eight countries legacy-then one would assert that it was not, in fact critical juncture (ibid:30). explanatory If hypothesis proves to be false-that is,thehypothesized critical juncture didnotconsequences. produce the its about hypothesis explanatory the and cases, different change occurred within each case, theclaim thischangethat took place in distinct ways in The concept ofacritical juncture contains three components: the claim a significant that 13 self-reinforcing sequences self-reinforcing . In this macro-level analysis of transformation of transformation of analysis macro-level this In . 22 legacy CEU eTD Collection However “investigations that employ network imagery metaphorically but not analytically but – not imagery metaphorically thatemploy network “investigations However of transition. of pattern the as indicators be treated mightalso They processes. transition termsinternational of networkingin nextchapter) arenotthe for onlysignificant the democracy” (p.152). aremobilizedto that during transitions Latinopposition Americanto authoritarian and theirregimes maintain capacity networks to (1989) describes“as human-rightsvehicles the NP [Non-profit] organizations for of role exemplify that national societies develop distinctive political traditions and institutional and models thatareimprinted innational toward dispositions organizing traditions political distinctive develop societies national that exemplify structures. network in the change the analyze to in order countries of attributes” “distinctive which both “diachroniccaptures andsynchronic” aspectsof these differences and significant 15 14 arebeingthat scrutinized in study.this According toCollier and Collier (1991): treatments” “different is these it patterns, distinct the and equivalences” national “cross the both listing by Turkey, and Argentina between comparison the of validity the for one, chapter differenttreatmentin nations”different and (DiMaggio Anheier 1990:145).Asin argued the for example,receive like RedCross, thatNPOs the reports (1984) equivalence…Rosas 485) can be thiscomparative of studies synchronic” 1978: sort eitheror (Lammers, diachronic Authors quote Jepperson & Meyer1990. 1960s. the in sociology of comparative trends the on account critical a provides author , the In 14 . However, “comparativists face difficulty cross-national in face difficulty establishing “comparativists . However, These networks of human rights organizations (which will be discussed especially in be human organizationsof These especially (which discussed will rights networks In terms of “non-profit organizations”, DiMaggio and Anheier argueand (1990) and DiMaggio organizations”, “non-profitIn terms of goal furtherThe ultimate for study a wouldbetherefore, amethodological design institutional forms taken by the resolution of these issues (p.13). issues that are traits, butmust be achieved in throughpart fought a comparative assessmentof larger political out andmeaningful understanding of gained cases these cannot be only dwelling on by their unique the commonalities, country] each [of would fail to capture the reality of attributes these countries. Yetitis equally obvious thata …distinctive address not did asthat well analysis comparative Any as contrasts, in the political and 23 15 (p.146). Fruhling (p.146). CEU eTD Collection preliminary fieldwork during which main the research hasquestion emerged andformed has onthelocal organizations scene. rights human of networks the within position current AI’s of identification the for utilized differences countriesamong two using tools provided analysis. bynetwork This is data the assessment of is one Thesecond reports. previously project releases, press reports, asNGO such resources secondary gathered andinterviews namely and methods, expert of review several archival research, qualitative exhibited data by looking a combination background of historical presentation of the gatheredthrough countries of these at the similarities and structure. it(Emirbayer and Goodwin is 1994:1446), still conceptualizea very useful approach to social action” social of determination very in the moment symbolic and cultural “the neglecting for in (Wellmanbound up Although hierarchical1983:157). structures” this approach criticized “asymmetric ties of composed world as approach sees the network person rather ties; two chosen voluntarily with networks of perception egalitarian the challenges it that is approach means”identifiable,aspectAnotherimportant 2003:266). of (Gouldnetwork other through identifiable, atphenomenadiscover us any allows or important not easily to not rate methods network in useof Powerful “the that the sense form networks. the components that links the study amonganalyzing through the structure fundamental tosocial approach is fact, it In methodology. merely is not a powerful a several critiques, to opposed (Gould 2003:242). one-have had harder time yieldinginsights that distinguish from studies”them nonnetwork say by an referring to emerging intellectual community withoutas a‘network’ analyzingit as Qualitative methods of this study have been done through various stages. The stages. various through done been have study this of methods Qualitative The method usedfor components: study this has two firstthe is one the collection and as here, part methodological the under discussed although approach, Network 24 CEU eTD Collection described and to evaluate its evaluate impact anddescribed local the to on scene. they picture the in actors transnational other and AI of positions the identify to them wanted I Later, groups. oppositional andother actors these between assess possible asked to countries identifyand to majorthe organizations human rights in field.this Theywere also own fieldof their rights human describe the to interviewees Iaskedthe interviews, the publications. AI the as well as subject literaturethe on andsecondary sources Ireviewedin relevant the I was Budapest. while correspondence byemail interviewsor in person expert several 2010, Iconducted and in Between December 2009 have that Ikept withafterwards. met I touch period, contacts placeinAlso,again inthis scholars, Istanbul. time this period AI volunteers took two at and former four with topic, this on particularly done interviews the that, So experience. research most of the information about the human rights field in Turkey stems from my previous country, this native asof a sources accesstoTurkish better had relatively I Since discussions. these to contributing actors major the as well as rights” “human and “rights” of understanding worker’s children’s andrights identify of“marginal rights, in to rights workers” order the participated in current humantalksseveral about discussions inArgentinarights such as lawyers, scholars, journalists and two historians working on social movements of Argentina. I in Istanbul.During this Ihave seven conducted time, expertinterviews human with rights been from JuneMarch Airesto conducted 2009in Buenos andfrom toSeptemberJune 2009 The interviews Iconductedweremostly talks informal semi During and/or structured. . 25 CEU eTD Collection points of how recentinstitutionalized inArgentina asifthey are national proud-even though they several criticize governmentleftwing affiliations, seemed be to proud of way the humanof movementrights (Christina that.”Kirchner like still It are they political, was extremely were of organizations Argentinean interesting, when impartial, say in a sense that, most of the informants, including the ones with April 2010). they will definitely who they Madres, are butabout Amnesty, so ever, they what wouldn’t interest even political know what no who has it is” (Intreview Argentinean by the average author,any “Ask such: as it exemplified informants addressed world Madres’ wide popularity. Interview (Marchby author 2010). Anotherinformant 16 and “impartially” this theopportunities Yet emphasize they critically counterparts. Argentinean liketheir onits impartiality comments similar with organization based project fraction of Peronist Party) exhausts human rights merely for propaganda purposes. and Abuelas. Argentina, said “I[he]that amhaving locatingproblems actors AIamong other like Madres on and in working scholar and lawyer rights human a informants, the of One Amnesty?”. is about asking are you what and American] [Latin in the rights human of capital them about AI; the regularbe Iasked surprised when wasseemedto I spoke informantalmost every Turkishthe case), response was “so you cameArgentina all the (while way I downwas not sure Argentina, about concentrating the on AI as a point of comparisonduring military the ( regime” 2005). with among Abuelas with Madres, and Serpaj “the setwhich rhythm socialthe of movements Turkey: of Centrality AI CHAPTER 3:HumanRights Fieldsin Argentina and Madres de la Plaza de Mayo, Abuelas de Plaza de Mayo knownas Madres and Abuelas. Especially, Former volunteers and several activists also criticize AI as being an elite-driven, During my preliminary fieldwork in Buenos Aires on human organizationsrights in in AI Argentina 1970sand one early 1980s during late was majorthe of organizations 16 Honestly, I wouldn’t consider AI as a significant actor, they were…what they they were…what actor, a significant AI as consider wouldn’t Honestly, I 26 Frente Victoriapara la -leftwing CEU eTD Collection would have beenin touch with AI one way or another”. Interview by author, Julythe 2010. 17 (Ejército Revolucionariomilitarydel The due Pueblo) guerillas. Argentine to were cautious campaign to eliminate the “terrorist subversives” which were at the time and ERP agenda in handsthe of elitescounter (Munck andLeff 1997:353). the leaving thetransition of control the lost and defeat military the with elite weakened in role Argentina’s democracy In transition to samecrucial the 2004:112-113). (Sriram incumbenta period, played activists rights human the especially opposition strong of impact themilitary, the by War forchange weakening central wasthe catalyst Falklands/Malvinas in military that defeat the common agreement in to the addition Argentina, inquiry among isaproductive lineof In opposition and of rulers case the (ibid:345). chosen during transition the and which transition beyond andpersist distribution the of power 1997:343). Examinationslinks between of thatare prolongedthe institutional the patterns itsa society subsequent that (Munck apath shapespoliticalLeff development” on and Remarks Empirical and Precursors 3.1 Historical approach.countries by network using remarks. In transformation humanthe fieldsof rights in and Argentina by juxtaposing Turkey the empirical second part, I will demonstratetoday “politically for people engaged” in 1990swasaschool activists the of Amnesty the claimthat how AI has differentAmnesty former for Several today. especially volunteers, potential andforactivism attracting rights human for zone “safe” a relatively roles creating of in terms bring support transnational in these two One of them expressed this as following: “Probably everyone in Istanbul who are on the scene of activism 17 . Military rule throw Isabel Peron from office in 1976 and began a massive violent massive a began and in 1976 office from Peron Isabel throw rule Military Transitions are formative and founding moments of regime change. “As such, they set In this Iwill chapter, thehistoricaldiscuss precursors formationof the and 27 CEU eTD Collection (Sikkink 1993:424-425): Department” State the of the through received information on not NGOs, other and externalthe on pressure Argentina wasbased on earlythe “provideddocumentations byAI campaigns which is also the case today to some extend. years of in these early foundations the Withand USbased from European came Argentina these campaigns, a majority of governments. Therefore, much of the funding for domestic human rights organizations in fundto protect and their activities to themselves anyfurther against violentrepression by their Assembly for Human Rights got in touch with the externalMothers contacts to publicizeof the theirPlaza causes, de Mayo, the violent organizationsoppression.humandocumented such aboutthe as the Domestic rights Grandmothers of the Plaza information circulate the de to in order actors andgovernmental political media and EU Mayo, and the Permanent groups documented rights human These network. rights human national a of formation the to the lead time same human rights violations, formed external(Fruhling 1989:368). alliances with the developmentthe human of programs thesame rights to degree ashadbeenachieved inChile” US and (Sikkink Thiswhereabouts” 1993:423). “state of in intensity terror Argentina (…)prevented kidnappings, detaining and the execution victimsof “while denyingany of knowledge their secret ended upwith abuses,which human rights towards international reaction of terms in d’etatRegime. of Pinochet Chilean coup experiencewith They were careful their previous This military approach succeeded in silencing the international audience, butat the audience, international in succeeded silencingthe approach This military opponents, took them to secret detention centers where they tortured, interrogated, and killedinterrogated, them, and secretly tortured, disposed they ofwhere their bodies. When centers AI won the detention Nobel Peace secret Prize to later them took opponents, concerted government policies bywhich themilitary and kidnapped perceived thousand people.AI The report helpeddemonstrate thethat disappearanceswere of a part politicalmost prisoners,without hadcharges, and abducted between two and thousand ten the problem of thedisappeared. AI estimated that the regime had taken six thousand on its visit, awell-documented denunciation of the abuses of regime withthe emphasis on 1976. In on firstanniversary ofMarch AIthe 1977, military coup, report the published the international public criticism, the Argentine juntadecided to invite AI for anon-site visit in in Argentina toworld coup attention after the in1976.To counteract the tideof rising AI andgroups staffed Argentineby political firstbrought thehuman rights situation 28 CEU eTD Collection networks of AI in Argentina. 19 guerillas. 18 of of superpowers: countries suchChina,as Israel, SaudiArabia,and “ Pakistan, Turkey (p.436). interests security national tothe important perceivedas too states against lessbeen effective leftwing upon draws acts non-violent and acts violent between line the where claims impartiality and “professionalisation”, of process form, corporative Its AIits what it that haslost significanceacknowledged to incomparison usedtobe 80s. shifted “from militarythe to the human rights movement” (Jelin 2003:59). homeless” (Jelin 2003:59). the –theunemployed, rights aseconomic aswell minorities, ofsexualandethnic rights the include to broadened, violations rights human of denunciations of scope “the transition forand Identity Against Daughters and ForgettingWithin JusticeandSilence). of this period (Sons like by military with the increased H.I.J.O.S. junta emergenceof the groups youth the kept silent and were absent, government andthe parties as “while political military violence the of activities commemorative were the military”. In the aftermath period, condemnation of “e-activism” schema “e-activism” offices most in of American Latin the form andchangingcountries its intomembership an of AI volunteers in Argentina of opposition. of thepolitical tradition One inArgentina well as populist as agenda political claims that there is a great chance that AI will be closing down Fordetailed accounts, see Rossi’s (2005) interviewswhere author provides critical information about youth leftwing are violence exercised who of conscience prisoners potential of the most that argues 1991 Power Sikkink (1993) have activiststhey “network admit that humanrights these claims that However, within from this period it of onwards,istransition generally 1990s dominant the is that rights human of in terms Argentina about is characteristic What During the transition process conducted organizations humanrights During transition these the process Argentine regime (ibid: 423). that same year, its reputation was enhanced, further legitimizing its denunciationsof the 19 . 29 18 politics contradicts the major the contradicts politics CEU eTD Collection organizations like Abuelas, Madres-F, Madres-A, SERPAJ, HIJOS, CELS, APDH and CELS, HIJOS, SERPAJ, Madres-A, Madres-F, Abuelas, like organizations the with movement rights human Turkey) to comparison (in transformative and widespread isa there where a is country as latter known where the Argentina and Turkey fields of change” (Cizre, 2001, p.75). This point is one of the major contrasts between the human rights 1990s, Turkish NGOs have not yet had a ‘tremendous’ impact on domestic political and social only a few. In contrast to “their strong transnational links and support in the second half of the to limited still is transnational) and national both field rights human in the organizations of violations in Turkey following:as democratic interrupted process with military in coups 1960, 1971and 1980. a pressure on prolongedthe humanrights abusesin Turkey’s ambiguousthe throughout put pressure on Argentina’s military oppression and human rights abuses. Also, there has been EU, and US arena, Theinternational affects. corresponding more direct are there relations Consensus restructuring”, these two countries were considered as the “success story[ies]” of During early the aftermathsof“neoliberal of the crises.periods 2001economic the between Argentina and Turkey, among others such scene. local, on national the organizations of as rights human networking their relationship transnational of impacts the between differences the into interpreted be with could claim This IMF, WB and Delacoura (2003) describes these attempts of international pressure on human rights of similarities ason the beaccounted can international pressure of role The active Despite the increasing number of NGOs in Turkey from numbernumber in the 90s of late Turkey Despite theincreasingNGOs onwards, up the transition to democracy (albeit of a controlled and limited type) (p.13). political limelight. But links with Europe influenced the military regime and helped to speed temporary ‘correctives’ asopposed to attempts to hold on to power, themilitary soon left the about because, following the pattern of previousmilitary interventions, whichhad been delegation’s rights to their seats. These movesdid not in parliamentary themselvescause the Turkish return of democracy. the Itcame suspended Europe of Council the In 1981 Financial Protocol. Fourth the as known aid of package the blocked and Turkey with relations its froze democratic process in 1983. Following military the coup of 1980,the European Community Western haspressure already begun in the first1980s, a example being the resumption of the (Onis But in 2006:239). addition theseto impacts indirect of theirinternational 30 Washington CEU eTD Collection through entirethe through politic” body (ibid:9). runs but society and elite between clash a constitute not does authoritarianism, and political tradition political role in in asaninstitution politics in thedecision-making processesand termslegacy its in of military in coups the 1960, 1971and1980interrupted transition TheArmy’sprocess. active (ibid: 8-17). effective befully to failed policies these other, onthe ’ ‘towards project modernization domesticdemocratize”. Strong trendsontheone hand and prolonged the Turkish insofar trends domestic astheycoincidedwith to liberalize Turkish and reinforced and “only successful were policies and Western human rights pressures In organizations.” return, were close West the and Turkey between “when were effective However,during only relations policies 1990s,these occurred. the several improvements Western actors, Turkey and between relationships international Withfrom reforms” undertook 2003:13). both, pressures relationsthe with (Delacoura these seeking closer side, the Turkish “In response, EUandUS. suchasthe actors external 20 rights: human national the on account critical a gives (2001) Cizre case, Turkish the In others. several For detailed analysis of political tradition in Turkey from Ottoman legacy see Tunçay and Zürcher 2008. Zürcher and Tunçay see legacy Ottoman from inTurkey tradition political of analysis detailed For Although the transition to a multi-party after 1950, Although happened and transition the system to operated During the period of situationDuring of 1990s, the humanrights the period some zeal and devotion psychologically under human rights abuses have engaged with the cause of human rightswith objective interests, intellectual dissidents, and those who have suffered materially and professional segments that perceive integration with global entities anddynamics in their own extend sympathy, supportand commitment in of terms the future returnsoffers. it Only some middle classes, thehuman rights landscape is still unsafe, not worth the time and energy to of a part "community" where being duties take precedence with over come For rights. Turkey's only millionscan in the urban that code moral ashared concept outside the reality position, empirical no has conservative-nationalist the For discourse. popular they into have Nor translated fully. been passions centrist-liberal Turkey's aroused not have values rights Human 20 “reveals that the conflict at the heart of the Turkish politics, between politics, Turkish of atheartthe the conflict the that “reveals . (p.55) and 31 Turkey joinWesternTurkey ‘clubs’or sought to managed to get attention from CEU eTD Collection human rights abuses to the international scene. However, as explained above, the “Western the above, asexplained However, scene. international abuses tothe rights human externalize to ability organizations local the of in terms America Latin of capital rights human “transnational” also differs from Argentina and Turkey.Argentina isconsidered be to the human domestic Turkish the in rights active been has operation, of in terms different although Assembly, field Citizens Helsinki in Turkey. field in the capital associal significant with well-known well.is and Anothertransnational human rights organizationpoint with technicalanother also knowis how Watch on reporting Rights Human and legislation that a surprise Not etc. torefugees women, prisoners, highlight on reports generating andenable research that them behind “power” transnational the in relationreports provided byAI,some according since to of AI Rights havethem Watch andHuman to that and documents the utilize officers scholars, activists, is rights human reporting, of terms In the idea of militarism. to sensitivity organization’s beregardedasthe which can prisoners of conscience, as objectors for conscientious initiates several campaigns AIinTurkey Turkey. However, atwas noeffort this sizetoproblematize of in militarism military and pastthe dictatorships there junta, Argentinean of condemnation of in activities the major organizations among other Argentina, couldbe not flourished in Turkey. in as asestablished scene, rights human domestic a popular argues, as Gramsci state, of the apparatus every through andsilencing pastviolence with thelackofreckoningperiod, transforming unionism constitutional through andfearchanges politics.Inthe transition and forceleftist movements andand strategic theoppositional of interms eradicating brutal than the Turkish case. However, the of 1980s was more systematic Within AIarrived context, this inmid-90s. inTurkey Although organization the was In terms of the violent oppression of the army, the case of Argentina seems more 32 CEU eTD Collection forces, who calls themselves “Saturday Mothers” “Saturday themselves calls who forces, inmothers Kurdishbetween military guerilla of thearmeddeceased and conflict Turkish model the ‘Madresof de Plaza by is deMayo’ adapted a group of inwomen Turkey, the anxiety asif that “Turkey Argentina?”becomes an reflected crises in 2001 economic especially during popularly,Turkey, public debates the the Argentineanduring the Malvinas (Falklands) Warin 1982 and the recognition Armenian of Genocide by Parliamentbetween them,Argentina had moments. Turkey’sUK andTurkey several tense support to composed of several ups anddowns.fromin Apart nuclearthe cooperation (1988) agreement 2007 are one Istanbul). of than locations in other founded ones the those (except offices central of level major However,tense none of the citiesdisagreements. or Argentina. is in regionaloffices AI oldest oneof the example Tucuman For as thecenters. powerful offices of NGOs in Turkey Airesallows cities in than structure local Buenos tobealmost equally other as organizations can operate atMost the same federal the countries. InArgentina, two the among differences geopolitical the about an idea organization recently upnewopened divisions in differentregions in alsoTurkey. This gives Mothers”. 24 Iran”, and during early 2000s, this was formulated as “what if Turkey becomes Argentina”. 23 22 was ‘Mercosur’ during my interviews. 21 and forces“Turkish and of in forces guerilla versusKurdish conflict Turkey. This guerillas”, military between subjectof conflict the of nature because ethnic form,the of also such a but in thatallow institutionalized notonly because wayMadresdid, historical the of conjunctures transnational. of understanding ininspiration” adifferent domestic political produced Turkey with contradictions For details For see Baydar andIvegen 2006; Gedik 2009, Sancar 2001. They also had the ofname “Peace In Turkey,with any religious uprisings, public debates turn towards questioning “what ifTurkey becomes See Rossi 2005. Thefirst and foremost “transnational” organization that came up to most of the informants’ mind in Argentina In addition thestories, separate In addition Argentinato the relationship between andTurkey is Opposing the rumors that AI will be closing down offices in Argentina, the 21 33 23 At the same time in the human rights field, rights human the in time same the At 24 . However the movement never movement the However . 22 CEU eTD Collection data set composed of different makingin n=86 lists up from The Argentina. organizations are formed these a organizations lists gathered from links17x17 between matrix human rights inandof matrix for 17x17 organizations Turkey Prime Ministry of Turkey Human Rights Data and Methods: thatthe liesindicates inbetween many withorganization brokerage capacity. actors a greater degree betweenness Higher easily. reach others to beable can or isreachable organization as if the about givesanaccount closeness ina that sense areuseful betweenness and closeness inbound connected to it. If AI is an are with isand organizations that other of connected ties theorganization ties others organization with so in terms many be different can centrality degree one, meaning anasymmetrical dataset, directional others connected to it,is a hasif the dataset and anorganization measures theties Degree centrality 2000: 83-87). that is higher (Scott, centrality closeness and centrality betweenness centrality, degree are These structure. domination rather as but“varying degreesofinfluence” (Diani 2003: 106). Also, this as bemovementamongnot organizations”. directly leadership should understood andsymbolic resources of of centre practical exchanges “at the bybeing into “leadership” (Dianilocations locations These within be network” strategic the 2003:169). can translated in strategic located are usually mostprominent important or are themost who “actors AIToday of 3.2 Centrality movement’s spread and ended up framing these women as “traitors”. the constrained any kindpeace initiatives, against of operating discourses nationalistthe The predictions from preliminary research are tested through network analysis of in network a given identifyingactors centrality the of for various measures There are since countriesisisAI in significant, two of these position The the what of question degree, it signifies the prominence or “prestige” of it. Other measures, namely measures, ofit. “prestige” Other or theprominence degree, itsignifies 34 CEU eTD Collection Turkish and Argentinean human rights scenes. rights human Argentinean and Turkish partial by yetdefinition, sufficient broadly to identify positionsthe which occupy actors in lost not functioning theiror status This forreasons. other modelfor comparisonishighly offices, their down closed or active currently not are who ones the Ieliminated Later, both. the ones who explicitly claim to be a “human rights” organization or a “humanitarian” one or a selectionfrom identified through main oforganizationsthe lists (see I process: appendices); them is prohibitively 2006:338).costly Within(Katz constraints, I these formtried to a model individual-leveldata on inter-organizational links,and inter-personal arerareand collecting 1970s. human evolves mostly rights military around dictatorship and it violence the exercised during humanArgentinalinkedorganizations discourse of field.However,thepopular rights to In different of number of proliferation allows diversification this disabled, of rights to identities more ethnic Argentina. diverserefugees tofeminist organizations, are From to compared human organizations in rights Turkey reason: mainly becauseof this for Argentina differ96 variety. keep the to in order 31 30 29 Secretary Rights from Human set links of isformedn=96data composed Argentinean the listof from case, organizations 28 27 26 25 links Center University RightsLawResearch Human Presidency http://www.apdh-argentina.org.ar/links/index.asp http://www.derechos.net/links/esp/ong/ http://www.cels.org.ar/home/ www.derhuman.jus.gov.ar http://insanhaklarimerkezi.bilgi.edu.tr/source/81.asp?r=19.04.2010+01%3A50%3A19&oid=sub8&selid=62 http://www.stgm.org.tr/eng/stklist.php http://www.ihb.gov.tr/Linkler.aspx Although this type of data is not enough to have a full picture of human rights fields, is Turkey 86for The difference between numbers total that organizations, the of and 25 , Civil Society Development Center NGO database / 28 , CELS 29 research database, EQN’s database, research 35 27 all together for Turkey. for all For together 30 and APDH’s and 26 , and Istanbul Bilgi 31 databases CEU eTD Collection Figure 1:Turkey Human Organizations basedRights Networks on web links: organization: tothe links given issay, That inbound tosizes of is the nodesaredefinedaccordingthe the to degreethat web visualization. network for matrix attribute as actor-centrality used later measures andthese abbreviations arethenames of organizations (see abbreviations p.iii). zero for convenience. aresetto diagonal onthe entries The not. or ifis there arelationship to 0 according 1 and arebinary,data For the analysis of web links, web of analysis the For matricesThe two of formed17x17 are through editor; the Ucinet 6spreadsheet “linking”. Directional signify ties and areorganizations nodes set, data In thissample Freeman’s degree centrality measures centrality degree Freeman’s 36 are calculated CEU eTD Collection and Madres-F where they are four major national human rights organizations. human rights four major wherethey national are and Madres-F organization) and AI, where in Argentina MABIERTA is formed by SERPAJ, CELS, APDH Assembly, Human Rights Association (the most prominent national human rights However, notsurprisinglyin though, IHOP isTurkey of consisted Helsinki Citizen’s major organizations InArgentinacomeis together. it MABIERTA itisand inTurkey IHOP. within this setting, reservesits middle ground among local ones. AI military take-over. after the right or earlier either formed ones the especially degrees, inbound same similarly have organizations major the where cohesive more is field rights human the InArgentina, inArgentina. than has in Turkey, amore central role It country. Figure 2:Argentina Organizations HumanRights based Networks on web links One interesting point is that in each field, there is a one common platform where the where platform common a one is there field, in each that is point interesting One According to inbound degree measures, the position ininboundAI measures, position hasisquite the each degreedifferent According to 37 CEU eTD Collection 33 shutting down the organization. 32 Figure 3 Cluster analysis of NGOs in Turkey: organizations. these between in occurs brokerage MAZLUM’s organizations. humanitarian several governmental other religious human rights organizations government, Liberal with Islamist isof election the that, network andTurkey this particular arenas inthetransnational as Turkey well in movement LGBT supporting been has AI where AI), with IHOP of organization joint the in is it that sense a in (strong AI to connected is strongly it other) each to or MAZLUM other religious organizationrights and recently, initiated an publicly anti-LGBT campaign mobilizedand human scene defining the rightspositions. For example despite the fact that MAZLUM is a religious human organizationsLGBT organization. Rights of homosexuals are one of the major conflicting issues in this hand side have critical affiliationsin which is also observable throughtheleft their the on links toKAOS, ones the that an fact the to related be can field clustering This right. to left from clusters (the onesmainbe two appearsto there network, overall inthe of while AI middle the IHD stand and that are only linked to Religious here means Islamist. One of the major topics in the latest AI Report on Turkey is about the ongoing trials against KAOS, for For Turkey, another crucial point of analysis from this network visualization is that 33 became made more visibleand allianceswith through 32 38 . Another striking thing about the data about data the about thing striking Another . CEU eTD Collection research should bestrong conductedon ties, suchaninclusive study of tiesdifferent among formalize thenotion 1994, p.463).role” social of (Wasserman AlsoFaust, furtherand roles focus onmissing in this isstudy typethat of sinceties, “social network methods for studyingpatterns individual oris what collection, in of data terms However, settings. structural historical the to ‘types’corresponds of ties among actors itisandhigher betweenness, suggestthat, areference in field point in the Turkey. or subsets projects).of Also,AI’s higherinbound degree vis-à-viscentrality its outbound degreemeasure, actors as a in joint (even cancometogether withaffiliations indifferent field,actors waythe organization to and powerful AI prominent being aprestigious, of asaresult organizations, of agendas these national organizations. In Turkey, even though areconflictingthere pointsbetween main in and betweenness in Turkey. However Argentina AIstands leftwing of outside affiliated affiliations. have leftwing and movement LGBT to side,closer critical of the one other the vis-à-vis headscarf in terms of religious means),freedom for mobilizingAKDER platform with buthere (mostly IHOP, IHH. of grouped MAZLUM, IHH, OD, UV formjoint in the is MAZLUM since thesurprising not yet is otherThis organization. big rights human religious cluster prominent most being one latter the and government current the to proximity its with known KAOS and to LGBT movement. Other cluster IHH and MAZLUM is to interesting,ties closer has former MAZLUM) includes also (which platform joint the that indicate others and KAOS. Even though KAOSand is thenot organizations part of this within IHOP IHOP jointplatform the analysis, cluster this From depiction. this acomprehensive gives jointanalysis collaborations formation, form clustering the first cluster: it with IHOP, HEL, IHD, AI Network analysis reveals that the different roles NGOs have in the human rights field rights human in the have NGOs roles different the that reveals analysis Network closeness centrality, degree inbound measures, centrality of interms central very is AI, hierarchical inunderstand thenetwork, groupingsSo cluster these to within order 39 CEU eTD Collection effectively. human of networks rights andTurkey Argentina canbeidentifiedmore clearlyand examined measures thevisualization of With and the examinations, valuethese negative attribute. a with relationship andacontesting even published informal reports conference, referencing or in a symposium participation joint releases, jointpress asweblinks, actors these 40 CEU eTD Collection short analysis of current networking of the organizations of fields. withinhuman analysisnetworking these of short organizations of the rights current of structuringhuman of fieldsinrights Argentina followedand Turkey by visualization anda historical approach. analysis andcritical junctures presented approach, butambitious through a short conversation between network comparative Argentina of andTurkey. case and comparative the middleand the ground, hascase in laid beenbyintroducingquestion human field,AIrights critical optimistic, namely position, scholars’ the on intodepending categories three grouped After abriefof theories these discussion been haveframeworks they discussed. conceptual major the and arenas international and national in have they roles different the itself, concept structures that enable and constrain the actors within. Ithas done so in three parts: and settings institutional national different from primarily result roles the of variation the that vernacularization of processes different the of only because Not tothem. areattributed and/or undertake Argentina and Turkey,in AI at by looking NGOs, of roles transnational onthe settings historical national of impacts this study argues that,and agency; transnational however the focus NGOs between structure for interaction study constitutive concern the in.located remainsreserves the This have on the different implications are they networks the to in relation roles agents of the impact the of operationalize and conceptualize the former. they For assessing theaccurately it is harderto even token, same By the organization. a on transnational impact their examining let alone countries, “transition” of two case inacomparative settings Conclusion The third chapter hasThe third historical provide of lay acomparative chapter of currentout precursors framework has methodological ageneral of the outline In chapter, second the The first chapter has revised the theories of NGOs in terms of the definition of the It is thoroughly a complicated task to identify, assess and relate the structural historical , diffusion or different agendas of these organizations, this study or different agendashas oftheseorganizations, shown thisstudy 41 CEU eTD Collection interconnected directions that can intensive with that furtherbe research: from moved directions point this interconnected different, yet it Iwillevokes. researchquestions addressing two further with conclude of hypotheses. In that sense the contribution of this study should be considered in terms of the level the at remain to bound are NGOs transnational on have Turkey and Argentina of settings aredetermined positions they within historical national the settings are situated. AIhas significantly indifferent positions Argentina and Turkey and howthese relational among them and the historical in settings which they demonstrates chapter how emerged, this ties and positions relational their rights, human of fields in the actors the identifying By studies. providing theoretically methodologically powerful, challenging and empirically fruitful I conclude that any attempt to answer these questions would have the potential of 2- 1- Answers givenherefor such impacts question an national historical ambitious of what evaluation of the collaborations between transnational and national actors? national and transnational between collaborations the of evaluation democratization further largescalewith archival historical research and intensive towards regimes authoritarian from of transition cases comparative for movements What would be studies? historical the use of Andcouldit analysis tothe and networks what contribute comparative tothe of transnationaldiachronically and synchronically oppose Lammersas to (1978)“either-or” statement? NGOs both innetworks NGO of these mechanisms dynamic these can capture How we addition as formed, andreproduced Emirbayer and Goodwin (1994) reminds? transformed to the study inare What themechanisms beyond networks are social structures which these of labor 42 CEU eTD Collection List of List of n= 86data set of all organizations in Turkey Appendices Milletvekillerini ve Seçilmi METU Gender and Women's Studies Graduate Programme / ODTÜ Kad / ODTÜ Programme Graduate Studies Women's and Gender METU Mersin’e Göç Edenler Derne Marmara University Human Rights Center / Marmara Üniversitesi Üniversitesi / Marmara Center Rights Human University Marmara Mardin Mahsus Mahal Derne Liberal Düsünce Derne Düsünce Liberal Karayolu Trafik ve Yol Güvenli Kaos GL KA.DER Kad KA.DER Izmir Bar,Izmir HumanRights Law and Research Center / Istanbul Bar, Women's Rights Center / Istanbul Bar, Children's Rights Center / Istanbul Bar Human Rights Center / Institute Of Public Adm.Turkey M And The ø ø ø ø ø ø ø ø ø ø ø ø I.H.H.Humanitarian Relief Foundation / Human Rights Foundation of Turkey / Türkiye Human Rights Association / Hukukçular Derne Helsinki Citizens Assembly / Helsinki Yurtta Foundation for the Support of Women's Work / Kad Süpürge / Uçan Broom Flying (÷ Edirne Edirne Romanlar Derne Dü Do Children Foundation/ Çocuk Vakf Ceza Birle Bar Ayr Ayd Association forSolidarity with Asylum Seekers and Immigrants / S Ankara University Women's Studies Center / Ankara Üniversitesi Kad Üniversitesi Ankara / Center Studies Women's University Ankara Ankara BarWomen's Rights Commission /Ankara Barosu Kad Ankara Bar Human Rights Commission / Ankara Barosu Barosu / Ankara Commission Rights Human Bar Ankara Ankara Bar Children's Rights Commission / Ankara Barosu Çocuk Haklar Çocuk Barosu Ankara / Commission Rights Children's Bar Ankara Amnesty International Turkey / Uluslararas nsani Yard nsani nsani Haklar ve Sosyal Ara ve Sosyal Haklar nsani nsanca Ya nsanca nsanca Ya nsanca nsanVakf nsanKi nsan Haklar nsan nsan Haklar nsan nsanHaklar nsanHaklar nsanHaklar nsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri ve itim Haklar itim ÷ ú Õú Õ ünce ünce Suçu(!?)na Kar u Türkistan GöçmenlerDerne Õ mc nl ú Anneleri ø ik nfaz Sisteminde Sivil Toplum Derne Õ ÕOÕ÷ k Yar ø ú ø nsanHaklar nsanl ili a Kar a Õ ú ú ÷ Õ am am Derne am m Vakf m ini Geli Õ Õø Õ Õ Õ Õ Ortak Platformu Ortak Gündemi Derne Derne Ara nlar Õ Õ n Adaylar n Õ Derne çin Genç Giri çin Genç Õ ø k Realitesi Derne Destekleme Derne Destekleme nisiyatifi úÕ úWÕ Kad ø ÷ çin Hak ve Özgürlükler E i Õ ÷ rmalar ú ( Õ tirme Derne ve ÷ i ÷ ÷ ø i i Õ HH) i ÷ n Haklar n ÷ i (LDT) Õ úÕ ø i -EDROM Destekleme veE Destekleme nsani Yardnsani Giri Õ Derne ú úWÕ leri ú ø ÷ ø im Derne im nsan Haklar nsani Yard i – GÖÇ - DER ÷ rmalar Merkezi rmalar ú i im ve DÜ ÷ Õ ø ÷ Derne zleme Komiteleri Derne ÷ i Ara i B ÷ ÷ Õ i Genel Merk. ÷ i i ø i Õ stanbul Barosu ø m Derne R-DER úWÕ ø ÷ stanbul Barosu Kad ø ÷ i stanbul Barosu Çocuk Haklar rma Enstitüsü Õ i ø m Vakf Õ ù nsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri Derne ÷ ÷ ÜN (Dü Õ itme Derne itme Õ Af Örgütü Türkiye i ( C ddle EastHuman R ÷ ú ÷ it. Kült. Ve Yard. Derne lar Derne i ø nsan Haklar ø Õ ÷ SST ) r i ú Õ ünce ünce Özgürlü ø n Eme nsan Haklar ø 43 zmir Barosu ÷ ÷ i i ÷ ø nsan Haklar nsan i Õ ÷ n Haklar Õ ini De Vakf Õ Õ n Hukuku Komisyonu ghts Res.Doc.Centre / TODA Õ ÷ Merkezi Õ ÷ ü Derne ø ø Õ÷Õ ø nsan Haklar nsan erlendirme Vakf nsan Haklar nsani Yard Õ Uygulama Merkezi Õ nmac ÷ Õ Merkezi Õ Komisyonu n Sorunlar n i Õ n Çal n Õ ÷ Komisyonu Õ i) lar ve Göçmenlerle Dayan Õú Õ Õ m Vakf Õ malar Merkezi Hukuku ve Hukuk Ara Õ Ara Õ Õ úWÕ Yüksek Lisans Program Lisans Yüksek Õ rma ve Uygulama Merkezi ve Uygulama rma ø E Õú ma Derne ú .Merkezi Õ ÷ i CEU eTD Collection List of List of n= 96dataset of all organizations inArgentina Asociación Miguel Bru, Mayo de Plaza de Madres Asociación Asociación Ágora El Asociaciónde Periodistas Desaparecidos Detenidos de Ex Asociación (ADDH) Humanos Derechos de Defensores de Asociación delEstero (PRADE), Derecho del Alternativa Práctica Civil Asociación AsociaciónCivil por laIgualdad y Justiciala (ACIJ) Memoria Buena Asociación (APDH) Humanos Derechos los por Permanente Asamblea Amnesty International - Argentina Alto Comisionado de Nacioneslas Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR) Mayo de Plaza de Abuelas Abogados y Abogadas del Noroeste Argentino enDerechos Humanos y Estudios Sociales -ANDHES ReautonomyYouth Foundation of Turkey / Türkiye Çocuklara Yeniden Özgürlük Vakf Akademisi ve Demokrasi Yönetim Yerel Dünya / Democracy and Government Local for Academy World Women's Library and Information Centre / Kad Womenfor Women's Human Rights-New Ways/ Kad Law/IUIHHA Rights Human in Practice and forResearch Centre Istanbul of University University of Hacettepe Centre for Research and Application of the Philosophy of Human Rights Umut Foundation /Umut Vakf Uluslararas Uluslararas Tutuklu ve Hükümlü Aileleriyle Dayan Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Gönüllü Te Women Of Problems The And On TheStatus General Directorate Ministry Prime Republic Turkish Turkish Medical Association / Türk Tabipleri Birli Turkish Journalists Association / Türkiye Gazeteciler Cemiyeti Vakf Demokrasi Türk / Foundation Democracy Turkish Turkish Foundation forChildren in Need of Protection/ Türkiye Korunmaya Muhtaç Çocuklar Vakf Türk Türk Dünyas Vakf Demokrasi Türk Tüketicilerle Dayan Tüketicilerle Toplumsal Olaylar Toplumsal Duyarl The Physically Disabled Supporting Association / Bedensel EngellilerDayan Sosyal Kültürel Ya Sosyal De Sosyal Sivil Toplumu Geli 6Õ÷Õ RUS Purple Roof Women's Shelter and Foundation / Mor Çat Progressive Journalists Association / Ça Özgür-Der Öteki-Ben Organizationof Patients' and Patients' Relatives' Rights / MAZLUMDER HastaPeople/ veOppressed Hasta for Yak Solidarity and Rights Human for Organization Mülteci-Der Mülteci Platformu Mudanya Lozan Mübadilleri Derne nmac ø HAK RuhSa ø ø nsan Haklar nsan Haklar Õ ve Göçmenlerle Dayan veGöçmenlerle ÷Lú Õ Õ Insan Haklar Hrant Dink Vakf Õ im Derne im Kültür ve ÕOÕ Õ ÷OÕ÷Õ ú ú Ara Õú ú am k ve tirme Program ekküller Vakf Õ Õ ma Derne ma Vakf Kurumu Vakf Õ ÷ Õ nda nda i Geli úWÕ ø ù nsan Haklar Õ rma ve Yüzle Avrasya Federasyonu-IHAF iddet Kar Õ ø (T nsanHaklar ú Õ tirme Derne Õ ø ÷ HV) i Õú Õ Õ (TGTV) ma Derne ÷ - STK Destek Ekibi úÕ Õ i (T Õ tlar Derne Õú ú ÷ ø me Derne Õ Õ ma Derne HAK) Giri da Derne ÷ i SKYGD ú GazetecilerDerne ÷ ÷ ú i i (SGDD) imi Derne ÕQÕ ÷ i n ÷ ÷ ÷ i i i TUHAD-DER ø nsan Haklar ÕQÕ 44 Õ Õ n ÷ Kad i ø nsan Haklar Õ n S n ÷ i Õ Bilgi Belge Merkezi Õ÷Õ na ÷Õ Õ -Yeni CözümlerVakfi Vakf ÕQÕ Õú Õ ma Derne Haklar Õ Õ Derne ÷ i ÷ i Õ CEU eTD Collection Memoria Abierta Memoria Humanos Derechos los por Ecuménico Movimiento - MEDH seguridad más derechos Mas Madres de Plaza de Mayo – Línea Fundadora ArgentinaLiga por los Derechos del Hombre Laboratorio de Políticas Públicas (ILSED) y Democracia deSeguridad Latinoamericano Instituto Instituto Internacional de Planeamiento de la EducaciónIIPE/UNESCO Instituto de Estudios Comparados en Ciencias Penales y (INECIP)Sociales Instituto de Desarrollo Económico y Social (IDES) Instituto de Altos Estudios Sociales (IDAES), Universidad Nacional de San Martín HIJOS. Buenos Aires, Córdoba, Rosario, Pelloni Martha Hermana HelpArgentina H.I.J.O.S y (SERPAJ) Paz Justicia Servicio, Fundación Fundación por la Memoria Histórica y Social Argentina (FARN) Naturales y Recursos Ambiente Fundación lademocracia para Corte Una Foro (FOJUDE) Democrática Justicia la para Foro Isidro deSan Humanos deDerechos Foro Foro Ciudadano de Participación por la Justicia y los DerechosHumanos (FOCO) Fondo de Contribuciones Voluntarias de las Naciones Unidas para las Víctimas de la Tortura FLACSO Argentina FAVIM -Acción Ciudadana,Mendoza Políticas Razones por y Detenidos Desaparecidos de Familiares Equipo de AntropologíaPolítica y Jurídica del Instituto .Universidad de Buenos Aires Equipo Argentino de AntropologíaForense Lanús de laUni.Nac. Ciud.de Seguridad Licen.en la deDer.Hum.y el Centro y Pol.Púb. de Planificación Departamento Pueblo del Defensor Convocatoria Neuquina, Neuquén Conferencia Argentina de Religiosos y Religiosas (CONFAR) CoNaDI (ComisiónNacional porel Derecho a la Identidad) Unidas Naciones delas Humanos Derechos de Comité Comité Contra laTortura Comité Argentino de Seguimiento y Aplicación de la Convención Internacional Memoria sobrela por los Derechos delProvincial Niño Comisión Memoria la por Provincial Comisión La Plata (CIAJ), Jurídica y Acción deInvestigación Humanos Derechos los por Profesionales de Centro - CeProDH yPastoral Social Promoción la para Tierra Nueva Centro Centro de Informaciónde las Naciones Unidas para Argentina y (CINU) y Sociales Legales deEstudios Centro Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad (CEDES) deLanús Nacional Universidad dela Humanos deDerechos Centro Central de Trabajadores Argentinos (CTA) cemida* ced Casa del Liberado, Córdoba Casa de la Memoria y la Vida Mansión Seré. de Morón C.O.R.R.E.P.I. C.O.F.A.V.I. (ADC) Civiles Derechos los por Asociación Asociaciónnuncamas.org 45 CEU eTD Collection Table1: Data sethumanTable1: Data organizations Turkey rights Usuarios y Consumidores UNICEF -Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia y Cultura la Ciencia la Educación, la para Unidas Naciones las de Organización - UNESCO Sin olvido Humanos Derechos de Rosario de Secretaría Nacional Universidad dela Derecho de Facultad la de Humanos Derechos en eInvestigaciones deEstudios Centro Criminal, y Política Criminología de Sección Relator Especial de las Naciones Unidas sobre Tortura Red Solidaria (UNIRED) y Social Económica Información de Redes Red de Red de Derechos Humanos y Salud Mental (Memoria) Humanos Derechos de abogados Red de Red para Argentina laCooperación Internacional (RACI) Raquel y Jorge Witis Goldman Daniel Rabino Proyecto Seguridad Urbana, InstituciónPolicial y Prevención del Delito de la Universidad Nacional del Litoral Desaparecidos Proyecto (PNUD) el Desarrollo para Unidas Naciones las de Programa Programa de Investigación sobre Fuerzas Rosario Armadas, de Seguridad Nacional y Sociedad dela laUniversidad Universidad de Nacional General de Secretaría de la Humanos” y Derechos Urbana delaSeguridad el Gobierno en “Transformaciones Programa Ciudadano Poder Participación Ciudadana, información la a acceso de Organizaciones Neuquén Zainuco, Organización OrganizaciónInternacional del (OIT) Salud la de Mundial /Organización Salud de la Panamericana Organización - OPS/OMS ONUSIDA -Programa Conjunto de las Naciones Unidas sobre VIH/SIDA Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos Movimiento Teresa Rodríguez 46 CEU eTD Collection Table 2: Data set of human rights organizations in Argentina in organizations rights human of set Data 2: Table 47 CEU eTD Collection Political Economy of Transnational Action.” International Security Action.”Political International Security 27(1):5-39. Transnational Economy of Cooley,A. And J. Ron. 2002. “The NGO Scramble: Organizational Insecurity and the System, edited by P. Willets. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution. Conscience of the World: Influence of Non-Governmental Organizations in the UN Cook, H.1996.“Amnesty International Unitedat the Nations.” In Pp.181-213. The Press. University Princeton America. in Latin Dynamics Regime and Movement Collier R. and D.Collier. 1991. Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Environment, Human andRights Women.” World Politics 51(1):1-35. Soicety: A Comparison of NGO Participation in UN World Coonferences on the Clark, A., E.J.Friedman and K.Hochstetler.1998. "The Sovereign Limits of Global Civil Rights Norms Clark, A.2001. Human Rights in Turkey Summary Report Human Rights Review, -December. Cizre U. 2001. “Truth and fiction about (Turkey's) human rights politics.” Pp. 55-77 in America.2008.Cambridge University Press. South Spanish 1930: Since America Latin VIII: Volume America Latin of History Cambridge Press. Polity Cambridge: Bourdieu, P.1993. The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. Technologies. Natick:Analytic Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C.. 1999. UCINET 6.0 Version 6.232 Macmillan. Palgrave Argentina. and Turkey in Democracy and Blind K.P. 2008. Democratic Institutions of Undemocratic Individuals: Privatizations, Labor, Practice: the Case of Caseof Oxfam." the Practice: Berry, C., and C. Gabay. 2009. "Transnational Political Action and ‘Global Civil Society’ in 31(3):689-715. Society and Culture in Women of Journal Signs: inIstanbul.” Phenomenon Mothers Baydar, G. and B. Ivegen. 2006. “Territories, Identities, and Thresholds: The Saturday 13(4):393-409. Civil Society.” Voluntas Batliwala, S. 2002. “Grassroots Movements as Transnational Actors: Implications for Global Balakrishnan, G.2000. “Virgilian Visions.” J.G. Smith, C.Chatfield and R.New York: Syracuse University Press. In 260-275. Governance.” Pp. Alger, C. F. 1997. “Transnational Social Movements, World Politics and Global References Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press. Diplomacy of Conscience: Amnesty Internationaland Changing Human Global Networks Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics, New Left Review New Left 48 9(3):339-358. 5, -October:142-148. edited by CEU eTD Collection University Press. University Guilhot, N. 2005. The Democracy Makers: Human Rights and International Order. Columbia Nowell-Smith), Gramsci, A. 1971. CambridgePress. D. Rueschemeyer. University and Sciences, edited in by Analysis Historical in Comparative J. the Mahoney Social Gould, R.2003.“Uses of ToolsNetwork in Comparative Historical 241-269 Research.” Pp. 1(2):29-43. Feitlowitz M.1998. Agency.American Journal of Sociology, 99(6),1411-1454. Emirbayer, M. & Goodwin, J. (1994). Network Analysis, Culture, and the Problem of Berkeley. California of Economics, University Department of Mimeographed, Argentina and Turkey?” Eichengreen, B. 2001. “Crisis Prevention and Management: Any New Lessons from Press. University Gedik, 2009. E. “Türkiye’de PerspectiveInternational Case of Human Rights Organizations in ." Pp. 358-377 in Fruhling, H.1989."NonprofitOrganizations as Authoritarian Opposition to Rule: The Florini,2000. Ann.(ed). Review of Anthropology Fisher, W. F. 1997. “Doing Good? The Politics and Antipolitics of NGO Practices.” Press. University Fontana, B. 2002. "Gramsci on Politics and State." Peace. International Center forInternational Exchange andWashington: Carnegie Endowmentfor Drinan, R.F.2001.Mobilization of Shame: AnnualSectors.” of Review Sociology 16:137-159. DiMaggio P.J. and H.K. Anheier. 1990. “The Sociology of Nonprofit Organizations and Collective Action, edited by M. Diani and D. McAdam. Oxford University Press. Networks.” Pp. 105-122 in Social andMovements RelationalNetworks: Approaches to Diani, M.2003.“'Leaders'Brokers? or Positions and Influence in Social Movement Press. University Minnesota of Networks. Della Porta D. 2006. Globalization from Below: Transnational Activists and Protest Policies towards Turkey, Iran and Egypt. Royal Institute of International Affairs. K.Dalacoura 2003.Engagement Coercion? or WeighingWestern Human Rights London: Lawrence& London: Wishart Selection fromPrisonNotebooks A Lexicon of Terror: Argentina and the Terror:A Lexiconof andthe LegaciesofTorture. Argentina The Third Force: TheRise Transnationalof Civil Society. 26:439-464. , edited by E. James. Oxford University Press. ù ehitAnnelerinin Sava World View Human Rights. of 49 . JournalClassical of Sociology (trans. Quintin andGeoffrey Hoare Quintin (trans. ú ve Çözüm veAlg Çözüm The Nonprofit Sector in Õ lar Õ ,” New Haven : Yale Fe Dergi. Oxford 2:157-178. Tokyo: Annual CEU eTD Collection Martens, K. 2005. Social Sciences, Democracy and Authoritarianism.” Pp.131-176in Case of The Research: Historical in Accumulation Comparative “Knowledge 2003. ------. 548. Mahoney J. 2000.“Path Dependence in Historical Sociology.” Theory and Society 29:507- 769. Lipschutz, R. D. 2005. "Power, Politics and Global Civil Society." Political Science 33:747- Women’s in ,Rights , Indiaandthe United GlobalStates.” 9(4):441-461. Networks Levitt, P. and S.E. Merry. 2009. “Vernacularization on the Ground: Local Uses of Global Perspectives onPolitics 5(2):223-239. Leebaw, B. 2007. “The Politics of Impartial Activism: Humanitarianism and Human Right.” Sociology 4:485-510. Lammers C. 1978. “The Comparative Sociology of Institutions.” Annual Review of Grapevine”. New York : St. Martin's Press. Korey, W. 1992. NGOs and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights : “A Curious Keyder C.2004.“Turkish Bell Jar.” New LeftReview, 28:65-84. 348. Katz, H.2006. "Gramsci, Hegemony, Global and Civil VoluntasSociety 17:333- Networks." Cultures, edited by P. Gready. London: Pluto Press. in Argentina andAfrica." South International Journal 2:83-105. Humphrey, M., E. Valverde. 2008. "Human Rights Politics and Injustice: Publications." Journal Human of Rights 2:151-165. 2009 : The State of the World’s Human Rights, London: Amnesty International Report Amnesty International Amnesty "ReviewInternational, 2010. : ------. Press. University in a Comparative Perspective.” Pp. 53-69 in Political in53-69 Tr Political Pp. in aComparativePerspective.” Jelin, E.2003. “Contested S.Hopgood, 2006. Macmillan. Palgrave NY: Recognition. Heins, V.2008. Nongovernmental Organizations in International overSociety: Struggles M. Hardt, and A. Negri. 2000.Empire.Harvard University Press. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 15(3):329-348. Gulalp, H.1985.“Patterns of Capital Accumulation and State-society in Relations Turkey”. edited by J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer. Cambridge University Press. NGOs and the : Institutionalization, Professionalisation and Keepers International. oftheFlame:Understanding Amnesty Memories of Repression in the : Commemorations 50 Comparative Historical Analysis inthe a nsition: Politics a nd NY: Cornell CEU eTD Collection IMF.” Onis Z. 2006. “Varieties and crises of neoliberal globalization: Argentina, Turkey and the Rurales Etudes Ong, A.2002.“Globalization and NewStrategies of Rulingin Developing Countries.” Berkeley Press. California Power, Jonathan. 1991. A 429-440.29(4): Petras, James. 1999. “NGOs: In the Service of Imperialism.” O'Donnell,1973. G. 362. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International for International Peace. Carnegie Washington: Endowment Society, and Pp.Rights.” 177-210.In Human Risse, T.2000. “The Power of Norms versus the Norms of Power: Transnational Civil Society Collier. Blackwell Publishing. Technology, Politics, andEthicsas Anthropological Problems, Rabinow, P.2005.“MidstAnhtropology’s Problems.” Pp.40-54. In ------. 2000. Hill. in Perspective.” Europe Comparative andEastern America Munck, G.L. and C. S.Leff. 1997. “Modes of Transition and Democratization: South Argentina, 1976-1983. Munck, G.L.1998. Middle.” Merry Engle S.2006.“Transnational and Human Local Rights Activism: Mapping the Press. at Building democracy inEastern Europeand Eurasia. Mendelson, Sarah E., John K. Glenn. 2002. Studies McAdam, D.,S. Tarrow and C.Tilly. 2003. “Dynamics of Contention.” Argentina.” Sponsorship of SubstitutionImport inIndustrialization ,the Turkey and Maxfield, S. and J. H. Nolt. 1990. “ and the Internationalization of Capital: U.S. Adaptation Third World Quarterly . edited by A. Florini. Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange and 2:99-102. American Anthropologist . New York: Palgrave Macmillan. International Studies Quarterly Like Water onaStone: The Storyof Amnesty International. July-December 233-248. (162-164): Authoritarianism andDemocratization :Soldiers andWorkers in Modernization andBureaucratic-Authoritarianism University : Pennsylvania State University Press. mnetsy International:TheHumanRightsStory. 27:239–263. 108:38-51. The ThirdForce: of TheRise Transnational Civil 34(1):49-81. The Power andLimits NGOs:AofCritical Look 51 New York: Journal ofContemporary Asia edited by A. Ong and S.J. Columbia University Global Assemblages: . University of Social Movement Hamondsworth: McGraw- 29(3):343- CEU eTD Collection PeaceResearch Thakur, R. 1994. “Human Rights: Amnesty International and the United Nations.” edited by S.Tarrow and D. della Porta. Rowman & L and Transnational 227-246.Contention.” Pp. In Tarrow, S. and D. della Porta. 2005. “Conclusion: ‘Globalization’, Complex Internationalism ------. 2005. Activism.” Civic and Ties Stark D, L. Bruszt and B.Vedres. 2006. “Rooted Transnational Publics: Integrating Foreign TimesofTransition. Sriram, C. L. 2004. Studies Research Paper No.2009-6. Spiro, P.J. 2009. “NGOs and Human Rights: Channels of Power.” Temple University Legal NewYork: ZedBooks. Santos, Sousa B. 2006. Scott and M.N. Zald. Cambridge University Press. 248 in S Smith J. 2005. “Globalization and Transnational Social Movement Organizations.” Pp. 226- and Power, 151-174. Coalition.” In Pp. ------. 2005. “Patterns of Dynamic Multilevel Governance and the Insider/outsider Politics.”in International Institutions and Contention Political “Transnational 2001. S. Tarrow, America.” Sikkink K. 1993.“Human Rights, Principled Issue-Networks, and Sovereignty in Latin Scott, J.2000. Social Analysis: Network AHandbook. 2ndedition. London: Sage. 90:37. 6873.html Mondiale de Amnistía Internacional”. Caso Rossi, Federico. 2005. “Los Movimientos Transnacionales y el Desafío del E-activismo: El Sancar, S. 2001.“SavaSancar, S. Libros. Aires:Buenos Prometeo Pereyra. yActivismoenClaveTransnacional, Locales: Movilizacion delaExperiencia RedATTAC enla Pp.231-260. In Argentina.” ------. 2008. “La Transnacionalizacion Norte-Sur los Conflictos y Sus Actores: la ocial MovementsandOrganizaton Theory, ). (02). Retrieved December 06,2009.( American Review Political Science American Review of International Organization edited by D. Della Porta and S. Tarrow. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. New Transnational Activism 31(2): 143-160. 31(2): Confronting Past HumanRights Violations New York: FrankNew York: Cass. ú The Rise oftheGlobal Left: TheWorldSocialForum and Beyond ta Çocuklarta Theory andSociety Transnational Protest andGlobal Activism: People, Passions, Dialogues, Propositions, Histoires pour Une Citoyenneté ÕQÕ Kaybetmi 47(3):411-441. . Cambridge University Press. 52 35:323-349. http://base.d-p-h.info/fr/fiches/dph/fiche-dph- ú 4:1-20. Transnational Protest andGlobal Activism, Türk veTürk Kürt Anneler”, edited by G.F.Davis, D.McAdam, R.W. ø ttlefields Publishers, Inc. edited by : Justice Conflictos Globales, Voces A.Grimson and S. vs. Toplum veBilim Peace in Journal of . CEU eTD Collection Zürcher E.J.2004. 2 a Comparative Analysis of State – Capital the Relations” Preliminary Draft prepared for Yalman, G. and E. Y IMF: An Introduction.” N.Woods, 2006.“Understanding through Pathways Financial andCrises Impact the of the 200. Wellman, B.1983. “Network Analysis: Some Basic Principles.” Cambridge University Press. Wasserman, K. S., Faust.1994.Social Analysis:Network MethodsandApplications. Contemporary Central Europe Vermeersch, P.2006. Countries, of NGOs in theCreation, Storage, andDisseminationInformation of inDeveloping Rudasill, L. 2006. “The Warning Voice-NGOs and Information.” Pp. 9-22 in Milliyetçilik (1876-1923). Tunçay, M. and E.J.Zürcher. 2008. nd ECPR General , Conference, Marburg, 18-21 September. edited by S.W. Witt. München: K.G. Saur. Turkey: AModernHistory Õ ld The Romani Movement: Minority Politics andEthnicMobilizationin Õ Global Governance zo Istanbul: Ileti Istanbul: ÷ lu. 2003. “Responding toFinancial Crisis With or Without IMF : . New York: Berghahn Books. Osmanl ú im Yay im Õø 12: 373–393. mparatorlu . London: I.B. Tauris Press. 53 Õ nlar Õ . ÷ u`nda Sosyalizm ve Sociological Theory Changing Roles 1:55-