DOCSLIB.ORG

Li ?Ifiil F Івіі®Іі

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Li ?Ifiil F Івіі®Іі i i i t a ü i i Ш Шш ІёрШ дШі ^ PffRfclf f ï i i i i t ÂÉiÉiyOStOlÉil ;.;íiTíf яй li ?ifiil fівіі®іІ lit ■ M s m M if Âji^- ■ £ і ш -•'Л'·? PARTY DISCIPLINE PROBLEM IN THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC POPULIST PARTY A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Political Science and Public Administration of Bilkent University In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Haldun Canci Cayio tcrcf.'jiccn Lcyijianmijtil. September 1992 3 Ö . А ^ 6 5 ^ 3 è 023Ö81 I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science and Public Administration, Prof. Dr. Metin Heper I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science and Public Administration. Assistant Prof. Umit Cizre Sakallioglu / I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science and Public Administration. Assistant Prof. Omer Faruk Genckaya I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science and Public Administration, Prof. Dr. Ali Karaosmanoglu ABSTRACT The performance of a political party mainly depends on its party organization, ideology and electoral support. In this connection, party discipline can be counted as an independent variable of party performance. However, party discipline may be affected by various factors, such as party structure, political culture, governmental structure. This study examines the anti-disciplinary behaviors and attitudes in the SDPP in 1988-1992 period by giving emphasis to the party structure. In the light of the content analysis of the party discipline cases in the SDPP as appeared in Turkish daily press between 1988-1992, we can classify main sources of violations of party discipline as follows: (a) The leadership struggle; (b) The ideological/factional differentiations; (c) The Kurdish problem. ÖZET Bir siyasal partinin basarisi esas olarak partinin orgut yapisi, ideolojisi ve seçmen desteği ile ilgilidir. Bu bağlamda, parti disiplini parti basarisini ölçmede bagimsiz bir değişken olarak kabul edilebilir. Bununla birlikte parti disiplini parti yapisi, siyasal kültür, hükümet yapisi gibi birçok faktör tarafindan etkilenebilir. Bu calisma 1988-1992 döneminde SHP'de disiplin dişi davranis ve tavirlari parti yapisini esas alarak incelemektedir. 1988-1992 döneminde basina yansiyan disiplin dişi davranislara ilişkin olaylarin muhteva analizi isiginda, SHP'deki disiplin ihlallerinin baslica sebeplerini su şekilde sıralayabiliriz: (a) Liderlik mücadelesi; (b) Ideoloji/hizip farklilasmalari; ve (c) Kurt sorunu. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I want to express my acknowledgements to especially Assistant Prof. Omer Faruk Genckaya for his valuable stimulation and encouragements at the all stages of this study. I am also grateful to Prof. Dr. Metin Heper and Assistant Prof. Umit Cizre Sakallioglu, the members of my thesis committee, who provided me with useful materials, read the text with much patience and care, and made many helpful and inspring suggestions. I should also express my thankfulness to Prof. Dr. Ergun Ozbudun for his encouragements at the start of the process. I would also like to thank my friend. Monitor Gürhan Arslan, who helped me in printing my thesis. CONTENTS Page Chapter One: INTRODUCTION 1 1. Structural Factors Affecting the Party Discipline 4 a. Party Structure and Party Discipline 6 b. Turkish Party System and the Party Discipline 8 2. Party Discipline and the SDPP 12 3. Methodology 19 Chapter Two: FINDINGS 26 1. Causes of Violation of Party Discipline in the SDPP 26 a. Struggle for Leadership: Divisions and Unities in the SDPP 27 b. Emergence of the KurdishIssue 34 2. A New Version of the Competition for Leadership 43 3. New Separations and Unities 49 Chapter Three: A General Evaluation and Conclusion 66 1. The Leadership Struggle and the Ideological Factional Differentiation 66 2. The Activities of the Kurdish Originned MPs 71 3. Conclusion 72 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY 75 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Political parties, as indispensible elements of a democratic political system, perform several important functions that help the political system survive. These include linkage with other institutions, aggregation of 1 interest, political socialization and so on. The importance of political parties becomes clearer in developing countries. In the absence of other associations/ institutions, political parties play a critical role in the modernization process of these countries. Thus,political parties and their performance have become a popular area of interest for social scientists. The performance of a political party mainly depends on its party organization, ideology and electoral support. In this connection, party discipline can be counted as an independent variable of party performance. The concept of party discipline, many times, has been confused with the 2 terms party cohesion and party unity. According to Ranney and Kendall, party cohesion (or party unity) can be described as " the extent to which, in a given situation, group members can be observed to work together for the 3 group's goals in one and the same way" On the other hand, the concept of party discipline may denote two meanings: (a) the cohesion which is structured and maintained by the obedience of group members to leader and to his decisions, and (b) the existence of some forceful mechanisms and methods in the hands of the leader in order to provide the obedience of the group members vis-a-vis his 4 decisions. In other words, party discipline can be regarded as a special type of cohesion. But party cohesion, in general, may be achieved by many other mechanisms, in the absence of discipline, such as by ideological unity, intra-party 5 solidarity and consensus. Therefore, the aim of party discipline is to achieve the intra-party cohesion. But the existence of party cohesion in a party does not necessarily require the existence of party discipline. In the absence of cohesion within a party, we can not mention aboutthe existence of party discipline. Contrary to this, in the absence of party discipline we may still speak of party 6 cohesion. Given the fact that the discipline and the solidarity are the two main sources of party cohesion, we must evaluate them from different perspectives. Obviously, definition of party discipline by Ranney and Kendall stresses the concept of leadership and the obedience to the leader. Those who may not satisfied with this definition may raise the following argument: In most parties, the party discipline is identified with the obedience to the group decisions or to the strictly defined party rules and regulations, but not to the leader himself. However,since the group decisions and the party rules and regulations are applied by the leader or by the leadership cadre, in the last analysis the obedience to the group decisions and the party rules can be understood as obeying 7 the leadership position. Therefore in this study the concept of party discipline, in general, refers to the obedience to the decisions of the leadership cadre within a party organization. On the other hand, in terms of the intra-party democracy, one can claim that, the existence of the strong disciplinary arrangements do not necessarily lead to the absence of intra-party democracy within a political party. Moreover, the presence of the intra-party democracy does not create a contradiction with party discipline. Furthermore, 8 both of them can be present within a party coincidentally. Besides, it can be argued that intra-party democracy strengthens the party discipline in some respects. According to this argumentation, for example, the election of the leader in a democratic way makes his authority legitimate in the eyes of the party members. And this helps the 9 establishment of the party discipline. According to the party discipline variable, we can classify the political parties into two categories: (a) highly disciplined; and, (b) not so highly disciplined 10 political parties. If a political party creates a strictly defined controlling mechanisms over some actions of its members, either through the domination of the leader or the supression of certain commissions and the whips of the party within the limits of commonly legitimized and clearly defined disciplinary regulations, it can be identified within the former category. Whereas if a party leaves their members free of their actions, it can be defined within the latter. As it was noted by Ozbudun, European socialist parties can be given as an example to the former category while the American 11 political parties are the best examples of the latter. But of course, such a general classification is not sufficient to understand why there are so much different perceptions and practices of discipline within various parties of the democratic world. In order to explain this phenomenon, it will be better to search for the different formations and their impacts on party discipline. 1. STRUCTURAL FACTORS AFFECTING THE PARTY DISCIPLINE Various factors which surround a political party may influence the degree of party discipline. According to Ozbudun those factors can be classified into four main headings: (1) Party Structure; (2) Governmental Structure; (3) Social Structure; 12 (4) Political Culture. (1) PARTY STRUCTURE: Party structure is one of the most important factors of party discipline and was generally 13 advanced by Maurice Duverger. According to this argument, the party structure and its effects on the party discipline can be identified by analysing two main aspects of party structure; first, the power of the party organization, and 14 second the typology of the party organizations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dealing with a Rising Power
    Dealing with a Rising Power: Turkey’s Transformation and its Implications for the EU Svante Cornell, Gerald Knaus, Manfred Scheich Dealing with a Rising Power: Turkey’s Transformation and its Implications for the EU Dealing with a Rising Power: Turkey’s Transformation and its Implications for the EU Svante Cornell, Gerald Knaus, Manfred Scheich CREDITS Centre for European Studies Cover design: RARO S.L. Layout: Victoria Agency Printed in Belgium by Drukkerij Jo Vandenbulcke Centre for European Studies Rue du Commerce 20 Brussels, BE – 1000 The Centre for European Studies (CES) is the political foundation of the European People’s Party (EPP) dedicated to the promotion of Christian Democrat, conservative and like-minded political values. For more information please visit: www.thinkingeurope.eu This publication receives funding from the European Parliament. © Centre for European Studies 2012 Photos used in this publication: Centre for European Studies 2012 The European Parliament and the Centre for European Studies assume no responsibility for facts or opinions expressed in this publication or their subsequent use. Sole responsibility lies on the author of this publication. 2 Dealing with a Rising Power: Turkey’s Transformation and its Implications for the EU About the CES The Centre for European Studies (CES), established in 2007, is the political foundation of the European People’s Party (EPP). The CES embodies a pan-European mindset, promoting Christian Democrat, conservative and like-minded political values. It serves as a framework for national political foundations linked to member parties of the EPP, with 25 foundations currently members. The CES takes part in the preparation of EPP political platforms and programmes.
    [Show full text]
  • Who's Who in Politics in Turkey
    WHO’S WHO IN POLITICS IN TURKEY Sarıdemir Mah. Ragıp Gümüşpala Cad. No: 10 34134 Eminönü/İstanbul Tel: (0212) 522 02 02 - Faks: (0212) 513 54 00 www.tarihvakfi.org.tr - [email protected] © Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 2019 WHO’S WHO IN POLITICS IN TURKEY PROJECT Project Coordinators İsmet Akça, Barış Alp Özden Editors İsmet Akça, Barış Alp Özden Authors Süreyya Algül, Aslı Aydemir, Gökhan Demir, Ali Yalçın Göymen, Erhan Keleşoğlu, Canan Özbey, Baran Alp Uncu Translation Bilge Güler Proofreading in English Mark David Wyers Book Design Aşkın Yücel Seçkin Cover Design Aşkın Yücel Seçkin Printing Yıkılmazlar Basın Yayın Prom. ve Kağıt San. Tic. Ltd. Şti. Evren Mahallesi, Gülbahar Cd. 62/C, 34212 Bağcılar/İstanbull Tel: (0212) 630 64 73 Registered Publisher: 12102 Registered Printer: 11965 First Edition: İstanbul, 2019 ISBN Who’s Who in Politics in Turkey Project has been carried out with the coordination by the History Foundation and the contribution of Heinrich Böll Foundation Turkey Representation. WHO’S WHO IN POLITICS IN TURKEY —EDITORS İSMET AKÇA - BARIŞ ALP ÖZDEN AUTHORS SÜREYYA ALGÜL - ASLI AYDEMİR - GÖKHAN DEMİR ALİ YALÇIN GÖYMEN - ERHAN KELEŞOĞLU CANAN ÖZBEY - BARAN ALP UNCU TARİH VAKFI YAYINLARI Table of Contents i Foreword 1 Abdi İpekçi 3 Abdülkadir Aksu 6 Abdullah Çatlı 8 Abdullah Gül 11 Abdullah Öcalan 14 Abdüllatif Şener 16 Adnan Menderes 19 Ahmet Altan 21 Ahmet Davutoğlu 24 Ahmet Necdet Sezer 26 Ahmet Şık 28 Ahmet Taner Kışlalı 30 Ahmet Türk 32 Akın Birdal 34 Alaattin Çakıcı 36 Ali Babacan 38 Alparslan Türkeş 41 Arzu Çerkezoğlu
    [Show full text]
  • Tarih Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Başlangiçtan Bugüne Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Hükümetleri
    T.C. KÜLTÜR VE TURİZM BAKANLIĞI TÜRKİYE KÜLTÜR PORTALI PROJESİ TARİH TÜRKİYE CUMHURİYETİ BAŞLANGIÇTAN BUGÜNE TÜRKİYE CUMHURİYETİ HÜKÜMETLERİ Prof. Dr. Abdulhaluk Mehmet ÇAY 2009 ANKARA 6.8. Başlangıçtan Bugüne Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Hükümetleri Muvakkat İcra Encümeni (25 Nisan 1920-3 Mayıs 1920) İcra Vekilleri Heyeti Reisi Mustafa Kemal Paşa, TBMM Reisi Celalettin Arif Bey, Erzurum Cami Bey (Baykut), Aydın Bekir Sami Bey (Kunduh), Amasya Hamdullah Suphi Bey (Tanrıöver), Antalya Hakkı Behiç Bey (Bayiç), Denizli İsmet Bey (İnönü), Edirne I. İcra Vekilleri Heyeti “1. TBMM Hükümeti” (Mustafa Kemal Paşa) (3 Mayıs 1920-24 Ocak 1921) Bakanlığı Adı Soyadı Seçim Bölgesi İcra Vekilleri Heyeti Reisi Mustafa Kemal Paşa (Başbakan) Umuru Şeriye Vekili Mustafa Fehmi Efendi Bursa (Diyanet Bakanı) (Gerçeker) Cami Bey (Baykut) Aydın Dahiliye Umuru Vekili Hakkı Behiç Bey (Bayiç) Denizli (İçişleri Bakanı) Nazım Bey (Resmor) Tokat Refet Bey (Bele) İzmir Adliye Vekili Celalettin Arif Bey Erzurum 2 (Adalet Bakanı) Nafıa Vekili İsmail Fazıl Paşa (Cebesoy) Yozgat (Bayındırlık Bakanı) Ömer Lütfü Bey (Argeşo) Amasya Hariciye Vekili Bekir Sami Bey (Kunduh) Amasya (Dışişleri Bakanı) Sıhhiye ve Muavenet-i İçtimaiye Vekili Adnan Bey (Adıvar) İstanbul (Sağlık ve Sosyal Yardım Bakanı) İktisat Vekili Yusuf Kemal Bey (Tengirşenk) Kastamonu (Ekonomi Bakanı) Müdafaa-i Milliye Vekili Fevzi Paşa (Çakmak) Kozan (Milli Savunma Bakanı) Bakanlığı Adı Soyadı Seçim Bölgesi Erkân-ı Harbiye-i Umumiye Vekili İsmet Bey (İnönü) Edirne (Genelkurmay Başkanı) Maliye Vekili Hakkı Behiç Bey
    [Show full text]
  • Biographies of Political Leaders of the Turkish Republic
    Biographies of Political Leaders of the Turkish Republic RECEP TAYYIP ERDOĞAN Israeli President, has given him heroic status among the general Middle Eastern public. Recently, at the Council of Prime Minister of the Turkish Republic since 2003 Europe Parliamentary Assembly, Erdoğan responded, with strong and clearly critical remarks to the questions of European Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who is originally from Rize, a Black Sea parliamentarians about sensitive issues in Turkey, for example coastal city, was born on 26 February 1954 in Istanbul. In relations with Armenia, freedom of the press, and the ten 1965 he completed his primary education at the Kasımpaşa percent vote barrier. While Erdoğan’s rebukes tend to surprise Piyale Elementary School and, in 1973, graduated from the the international public, Turkish people are accustomed to his Istanbul Religious Vocational High School (İmam Hatip Lisesi). style. Moreover, many people believe that this belligerent style He also received a diploma from Eyüp High School since, at is the key to his success and popularity. the time, it was not possible for the graduates of religious vocational high schools to attend university. He eventually studied Business Administration at the Marmara University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences (which was then known as Aksaray School of Economics and Commercial Complete version of the Biography of Recep Tayyip Sciences) and received his degree in 1981. Erdogan at: In his youth, Erdoğan played amateur football from 1969 www.cidob.org/es/documentacion/biografias_lideres_ to 1982 in local football clubs. This was also a socially and politicos/europa/turquia/recep_tayyip_erdogan politically active period in his life.
    [Show full text]
  • The Social Democratic Populist Party: Revisiting the Recent Past of Social Democracy in Turkey *
    Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, Araştırma Makalesi Cilt 75, No.1, 2020, s. 279 – 314 DOI: 10.33630/ausbf.587411 THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC POPULIST PARTY: REVISITING THE RECENT PAST OF SOCIAL DEMOCRACY IN TURKEY * Uğur Tekiner Cambridge Üniversitesi Siyaset ve Uluslararası Çalışmalar Bölümü Doktora Öğrencisi ORCID: 0000-0002-7478-3891 ● ● ● Abstract This study aims to examine the case of the Social Democratic Populist Party (Sosyaldemokrat Halkçı Parti – SHP) that functioned as the major representative of the social democratic ideology in Turkey under highly extraordinary conditions of the post-1980 coup political atmosphere until 1995. Realizing the necessity of taking this critically important phase in the evolution of Turkish social democratic thought into account, the major argument of this paper is that even if the SHP spent a remarkable amount of effort for achieving its ultimate target of evolving into a European-style, ‘genuine’ social democratic party, it ultimately failed to reach this end due to three interrelated factors, such as changing political realities in the domestic and European contexts during the 1980s, the intra-party turmoil within the SHP, and the poor performance of the SHP in power. In relation to this core argument, the ideological decline of the SHP is claimed to have a direct impact on the successive electoral defeats and ideological drifts of the CHP, as its successor, in the following years. Keywords: Turkish social democracy, Centre left, The Social Democratic Populist Party, The Republican People’s Party, Post-1980 Turkish politics Sosyaldemokrat Halkçı Parti: Türkiye’de Sosyal Demokrasinin Yakın Geçmişi Üzerine Yeniden Düşünmek Öz Bu çalışma, 1980 darbesi sonrası siyasi atmosferin hayli olağanüstü koşulları altında, Türkiye’de sosyal demokrat ideolojinin başlıca temsilcisi olarak ortaya çıkan ve 1995’e kadar varlığını sürdüren Sosyaldemokrat Halkçı Parti (SHP) vakasını incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır.
    [Show full text]
  • Uluslararası Bilimsel Araştırmalar Dergisi; Journal of the International Scientific Research
    IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi IBAD Journal of Social Sciences IBAD, 2020; (6): 19-37 DOI: 10.21733/ibad.665764 Özgün Araştırma / Original Article 1991 – 2002 Yılları Arasında Koalisyon Hükümetleri Yönetimi Enes Malik Çakır1* ÖZ Parlamenter demokratik sistem içerisinde yer alan hükümet biçimlerinden birisi koalisyon yönetimidir. Koalisyon, birden fazla siyasi partinin ortak amaç ve esaslar Geliş tarihi: 26.12.2019 çerçevesinde iş birliği içinde bulunan, bu ortak amaçlar için birbirleriyle iletişim ve Kabul tarihi: 24.01.2020 uyum içinde çalışarak güç birliğine dayalı bir hükümet oluşturma biçimi olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Türkiye’nin 1961-1965, 1974-1979 ve 1991-2002 arasındaki Atıf bilgisi: yıllarda koalisyon geçmişine sahip olduğu bilinmektedir. Parlamenter demokratik IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi bir sistem olan koalisyon kavramının genellikle Türkiye’de hükümetlerin işlevlerine Sayı: 6 Sayfa: 19-37 bakılarak istikrarsızlıkla eşdeğer tutulduğu söylenebilir. Bu çalışmada öncelikle 19 Yıl: 2020 Dönem: Kış koalisyonun tanımı ve çeşitleri, ardından Türkiye’de kurulan koalisyon hükümetleri kısaca açıklanmıştır. Daha sonra çalışmanın temel kısmı olan 1991 ve 2002 yılları arasında kurulan koalisyon hükümetleri, demokratik tutumları ve istikrar açısından analize tabi tutulmuştur. Dönemin siyasi olaylarının da koalisyon hükümetlerine This article was checked by Turnitin. olan etkileri de analiz içerisinde ele alınmıştır. Çalışmada “İstikrar açısından Similarity Index 7% koalisyon yönetimleri verimli midir?” ve “1991-2002 arası dönemde mevcut siyasi
    [Show full text]
  • AN EMERGING DOMINANT PARTY SYSTEM? October 27, 2011 Gloria-Center.Org
    http://www.gloria-center.org/2011/10/turkey%e2%80%99s-2011-elections-an-emerging-dominant-party-system/ TURKEY’S 2011 ELECTIONS: AN EMERGING DOMINANT PARTY SYSTEM? October 27, 2011 gloria-center.org This article analyzes Turkey’s June 12, 2011, general elections, focusing on the three parties and the predominantly pro-Kurdish independents. Although the incumbent Justice and Development Party won by a sizeable majority, it gained fewer seats in comparison to its 2002 and 2007 electoral performances. The Republican People’s Party maintained its position as the main opposition party, with noticeable increases in its voting shares both regionally and locally. The pro-nationalist Nationalist Action Party was the only party to lose seats in parliament. Last, the Kurdish independents increased both their parliamentary representation and their share of electoral spoils. Though the government maintained an overall parliamentary majority, its desire to enact constitutional changes and/or implement a presidential system will be constrained and dependent on support from the remaining parties in parliament. INTRODUCTION On June 12, 2011,Turkey’s governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) won an anticipated third term in office for 2011-2015. The party, which first came to power in November 2002, has won three consecutive landslide elections. Under the leadership of Tayyip Erdogan, the AKP won a surprising near 50 percent (approximately 21.4 million votes) of the popular vote and 327 seats (out of 550) in the country’s unicameral Grand National Assembly. The main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), under the chairmanship of Kemal Kilicdaroglu, came in second with approximately 26 percent of the vote (11.1 million votes), giving them 135 seats in parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • The Republican People's Party (Chp) and Turkish Foreign
    THE REPUBLICAN PEOPLE’S PARTY (CHP) AND TURKISH FOREIGN POLICY 2003-2005 A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY SEÇK İN BARI Ş GÜLMEZ IN PARTIAL FULLFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS SEPTEMBER 2006 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences. ______________________ Prof. Dr. Sencer AYATA Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. ________________________ Prof. Dr. Meliha ALTUNI ŞIK Head of Department This is to certify that we read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. _______________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. Necati Polat Thesis Advisor Examining Committee Members Assoc. Prof. Dr. Necati POLAT (METU, IR) _________________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. Çağrı ERHAN (Ankara U., IR) _________________________ Assist. Prof. Dr. Oktay TANRISEVER (METU, IR) _________________________ I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Seçkin Barı ş Gülmez Signature: iii ABSTRACT THE REPUBLICAN PEOPLE’S PARTY (CHP) AND TURKISH FOREIGN POLICY 2003-2005 Gülmez, Seçkin Barı ş M.Sc., Department of International Relations Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Necati Polat September 2006, 173 pages This study aims to examine the foreign policy orientation of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) during 2003 and 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • The Stillborn Neo-Ottomanist Foreign Policy Aspiration of the Özal Era
    C . S OYSAL THE STILLBORN NEO-OTTOMANIST FOREIGN POLICY ASPIRATION OF THE ÖZAL ERA COŞKUN SOYSAL METU METU 2020 JANUARY 2020 THE STILLBORN NEO-OTTOMANIST FOREIGN POLICY ASPIRATION OF THE ÖZAL ERA A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY COŞKUN SOYSAL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS JANUARY 2020 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Yaşar Kondakçı Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Oktay Tanrısever Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Mustafa Türkeş Supervisor Examining Committee Members Prof. Dr. Yüksel Akkaya (Hacı Bayram Veli Uni., HİT) Prof. Dr. Mustafa Türkeş (METU, IR) Prof. Dr. Hasibe Şebnem Oğuz (Başkent Uni., SİBU) Assoc. Prof. Dr. E. Attila Aytekin (METU, ADM) Assist. Prof. Dr. Şerif Onur Bahçecik (METU, IR) PLAGIARISM I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name : Coşkun Soysal Signature : iii ABSTRACT THE STILLBORN NEO-OTTOMANIST FOREIGN POLICY ASPIRATION OF THE ÖZAL ERA Soysal, Coşkun Ph.D., Department of International Relations Supervisor : Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • "The Real Winners and Losers of Turkey's July 2007 Election
    THE REAL WINNERS AND LOSERS OF TURKEY’S JULY 2007 ELECTIONS Heymi Bahar* The July 2007 Turkish parliamentary elections were a major victory for the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP), entrenching it in power. By the same token, the historic center-right parties virtually disappeared, the left stagnated, and the number of nationalist MHP and independent Kurdish members increased. This article lays out the reasons both for the AKP’s success as well as the performance of other forces. Following the Turkish Parliament’s failure to internal politics of both parties prevented select a new president in an April 27, 2007 unification, the DSP decided not to run as a session, the decision was made that early party, though some of its members ran on the elections be held on July 22, 2007 (rather than CHP ticket. in October). The governing Justice and On the center-right, those involved Development Party (AKP) had named Foreign included the True Path (DYP) and the Minister Abdullah Gul as its candidate, Motherland (ANAP) Parties, which attempted rejecting proposals by the opposition to unite under the name “Democrat Party” Republican People’s Party (CHP) to choose a (DP). This effort failed, however, due to non-partisan, mutually accepted figure. factors explained below, with ANAP declaring Following the decision of CHP and other it would not participate in the election. parties to boycott the voting session, the issue The ten percent threshold needed in order was taken to the Turkish Constitutional Court. to win seats in parliament also changed the CHP leader Deniz Baykal argued that there strategy of some of the smaller parties.
    [Show full text]
  • Türk Diş Politikasinda Çok Yönlülüğün Yakin Tarihi: Soğuk Savaş Sonrasi Devamlilik Ve Değişim
    Boğaziçi Üniversitesi - TÜSİAD Dış Politika Forumu Boğaziçi University - TÜSİAD Foreign Policy Forum TÜRK DIŞ POLİTİKASINDA ÇOK YÖNLÜLÜĞÜN YAKIN TARİHİ: SOĞUK SAVAŞ SONRASI DEVAMLILIK VE DEĞİŞİM Doç. Dr. Gün Kut Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Siyaset Bilimi ve Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü Boğaziçi Üniversitesi-TÜSİAD Dış Politika Forumu Araştırma Raporu Boğaziçi University-TÜSİAD Foreign Policy Forum Research Report DPF 2010-RR 02 Boğaziçi Üniversitesi - TÜSİAD Dış Politika Forumu Boğaziçi University - TÜSİAD Foreign Policy Forum Özet Türk dış politikası Soğuk Savaşın sona ermekte olduğu yolunda ilk belirtilerin ortaya çıkmasıyla birlikte bir değişim sürecine girdi. Konjonktürel değişikliklere pragmatik tepkiler verme konusunda deneyimli olan dış politika karar vericileri yeni duruma uyum sağlarken bir yandan Türkiye’nin temel yönelimlerinin korunması ve süregelen sorunlara mevcut koşullarda zemin kaybedilmeden çözüm aranması, diğer yandan değişen dünyada Türkiye’ye yeni bir rol bulabilmek için çok yönlü inisiyatifler geliştirilmesi çabasına girdiler. Karar vericilerin kişilik ve üslup farklılıkları dışında büyük ölçüde konjonktürel dalgalanmaların seyrine paralel olarak gelişme gösteren bu çabalar, Türkiye’nin ekonomik olarak güçlü bir görüntüye kavuşması ve hükümet istikrarının sağlanmasıyla daha belirgin sonuçlar vermeye başladı. Bu araştırma, 1989’dan bu yana Türk dış politikasındaki devamlılık ve değişim eğilimlerini karar verici aktörler, karar verme sürecini belirleyen yapılar ve dünya konjonktürünün seyri gözönünde tutularak incelemek
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey's Failed Coup Has Firmly Tightened Erdoğan's Grip on Power
    Turkey’s failed coup has firmly tightened Erdoğan’s grip on power blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2016/07/18/turkey-coup-erdogan/ 18/07/2016 What does the attempted coup in Turkey mean for the country’s politics moving forward? Dimitar Bechev writes that on the one hand the failure of the coup illustrates the extent to which Turkey has become ‘civilianised’, with citizens less willing to accept the military interfering in politics. However, the net effect of the coup will be to greatly strengthen Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s grip on power. Whatever its perpetrators had in mind, the failed coup attempt in Turkey highlights how far the country has travelled since the late 1990s. Politics has become ‘civilianised’. A clear majority of Turkish citizens and elites, irrespective of their leanings and affiliations, believe the military should stay in the barracks. The coup was, no doubt, welcomed by some hard-core secularists, but hardly any of them marched in its support. The Kemalist People’s Republican Party (CHP) leader, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, denounced it in short order. It was not that long ago when his predecessor on the job, Deniz Baykal, was calling the army to intervene against the government’s alleged efforts of undermining secularism. That was in the tense summer of 2007 when Kemalists were rallying en masse against the notion that a veiled woman, Abdullah Gül’s wife Hayrunnisa, could become the nation’s first lady. Now the CHP along with the three other parliamentary parties have signed a joint declaration to condemn the coup attempt. What is more, years of debating the traumatic legacy of past military interventions, notably the one of 1980, have made the word “coup” (darbe) toxic.
    [Show full text]