Turkish Think Tanks and Their Attitudes Towards the Eu: Sceptic Or Supportive?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TURKISH THINK TANKS AND THEIR ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE EU: SCEPTIC OR SUPPORTIVE? by İREM NART Submitted to the Graduate School of Social Sciences in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Sabancı University August 2020 TURKISH THINK TANKS AND THEIR ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE EU: SCEPTIC OR SUPPORTIVE? Approved by: Prof. Senem Aydın-Düzgit . (Thesis Supervisor) Asst. Prof. Damla Cihangir-Tetik . Prof. Meltem Müftüler-Baç . Date of Approval: Aug 10, 2020 İREM NART 2020 © All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT TURKISH THINK TANKS AND THEIR ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE EU: SCEPTIC OR SUPPORTIVE? İREM NART EUROPEAN STUDIES M.A. THESIS, AUGUST 2020 Thesis Supervisor: Prof. Senem AYDIN DÜZGİT Keywords: Euroscepticism, Think Tanks, The European Union, Turkey Even though Euroscepticism has been an existed concept since the establishment of the EU, in recent years its visibility increased both in member and candidate states. The thesis examines the think tanks, which are actors that usually are not involved in the literature, by looking from the perception of Euroscepticism. In this thesis, 160 publications of the selected think tanks and 6 face-to-face interviews that are conducted with those think tanks are used. In line with the typology of Taggart and Szczerbiak, these discourses are surveyed and classified as hard Eurosceptic, soft Eurosceptic and supportive discourses depending on their features. iv ÖZET TÜRKİYE’DEKİ DÜŞÜNCE KURULUŞLARININ AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ’NE KARŞI TUTUMLARI: ŞÜPHECİ VEYA DESTEKLEYİCİ? İREM NART AVRUPA ÇALIŞMALARI YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ, AĞUSTOS 2020 Tez Danışmanı: Prof. Dr. Senem Aydın Düzgit Anahtar Kelimeler: Avrupa Şüpheciliği, Düşünce Kuruluşları, Avrupa Birliği, Türkiye Avrupa Şüpheciliği Avrupa Birliği’nin kurulduğu ilk yıllardan bu yana var olan bir olgu olsa da son zamanlarda görünürlüğünü hem üye ülkeler hem de aday ülkel- erde artırmıştır. Tez, Avrupa Şüpheciliğine farklı bir noktadan bakarak literatürde çalışma alanına çok dahil edilmeyen aktörler olan düşünce kuruluşlarını Avrupa Şüpheciliği temelinde incelemektedir. Tezde, seçilen altı adet düşünce kuruluşlarının 160 adet yayını ve düşünce kuruluşları ile yapılan 6 adet yüz yüze mülakatlardan faydalanılmıştır. Bu kaynaklardan elde edilen söylemler ise Taggart ve Szczer- biak tipolojisine göre incelenmiş ve türlerine göre sert Avrupa Şüpheciliği, yumuşak Avrupa Şüpheciliği ve destekleyici söylemler şeklinde sınıflandırılmıştır. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I would like to thank my dear thesis advisor Prof. Senem Aydın-Düzgit for her support and valuable comments in this process. I will imitate her discipline, unique knowledge and guiding attitude in my academic career and in every aspect of my life. Thank you for supporting and believing in me. I would also like to thank our respectable dean Prof. Meltem Müftüler-Baç for the invaluable lessons we took from her, and more importantly, for being more than just a teacher since the first day we started university. It was a true honour and a pleasure to benefit from her experience and advice. And I would like to thank Asst. Prof. Damla Cihangir-Tetik for accepting to take part in my thesis defence jury and for her valuable comments. Finally, my sincere appreciations go out to my mother Zübeyde and my father Faruk for always being there for me. You have always supported me and made me believe I could do better. Whatever I do I cannot pay for your effort. I dedicate all the success I will get in my life to you. I would like to thank my dear sisters Duygu and Ayşegül for their continuous love, encouragement, and support every aspect of my life. If I’m achieve something, it’s thanks to your support and love. I am very lucky to have you in my life! And I would like to thank my dear friends Nagehan and Dilara, with whom I have been together since the first day of university. I am grateful for your support during the toughest processes and for always being there for me. Love you girls! vi Aileme. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................... x LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................... xi LIST OF ABBREVIATONS ............................................... xii 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................ 1 2. EUROSCEPTICISM IN TURKEY .................................... 12 2.1. A Glance at Turkey-EU Relations..................................... 12 2.2. Public Opinion and Political Discourses............................... 16 3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGY ....... 25 3.1. Origins of Euroscepticism.............................................. 25 3.2. Taggart and Szczerbiak Typology..................................... 27 3.3. Methodology........................................................... 30 4. THINK -TANKS AS POLICY ACTORS ............................. 35 4.1. Definition and Organization of Think-Tanks.......................... 36 4.2. Think-Tanks in Turkey................................................ 38 4.3. Selected TTs........................................................... 39 5. ANALYSIS OF TURKISH THINK TANKS’ ATTITUDES ON EUROPE AND THE EU................................................ 43 5.1. Hard Eurosceptic Discourses........................................... 43 5.2. Soft Eurosceptic Discourses............................................ 51 5.2.1. Critical Discourses Against EU Policies........................ 56 5.2.2. National Interest Euroscepticism as a Type of Soft Euroscep- ticism........................................................... 69 5.3. Supportive Discourses................................................. 71 6. CONCLUSION ........................................................... 86 viii BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................ 91 APPENDIX A................................................................ 102 APPENDIX B ................................................................ 104 APPENDIX C ................................................................ 105 APPENDIX D................................................................ 108 APPENDIX E ................................................................ 110 APPENDIX F ................................................................ 113 APPENDIX G................................................................ 115 APPENDIX H................................................................ 117 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1. The Change in Public Opinion between 2004 and 2007......... 21 Table 2.2. The Change in Public Opinion between 2014 and 2019......... 24 Table 3.1. Number of Think-Tank Publications Analyzed................. 33 Table 3.2. Categories of discourses and their implications................. 34 Table 4.1. Selected TTs: Status, Activities, Missions Statements, Special- izations................................................................ 42 Table 5.1. Number of publications that include soft Eurosceptic discourse with regards to EU policies............................................ 57 Table 5.2. Number of publications by think tanks regarding areas of co- operation............................................................... 75 Table 6.1. Discourses that are identified during the analysis.............. 88 x LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1. Types of Euroscepticism (Taggart and Szczerbiak 2002)...... 29 Figure 5.1. Dominant words which are detected in the publications (Com- piled by author) 1 ...................................................... 44 xi LIST OF ABBREVIATONS ADD Association of Kemalist Thought . .9 AKP Justice and Development Party of Economic and Social Affairs. .5 ANAP Motherland Party . .5 AVIM Center for Eurasian Studies . 30 BILGESAM Wise Men Center for Strategic Studies . 30 CDA Critical Discourse Analysis . .7 CHP Republican People’s Party . .5 CSOs Civil Society Organizations. .4 DSP Democratic Left Party . .5 DYP True Path Party . .5 EC European Commission . .3 ECSC The European Coal and Steel Community . 25 EDAM Centre for Economics and Foreign Policy Studies . 39 EEC European Economic Community . .1 EP European Parliament . 32 EU European Union . .1 IHH Humanitarian Relief Foundation. 40 IKV Economic Development Foundation. .9 IMF International Monetary Fund . .2 INSAMER Humanitarian and Social Research Center . 30 xii MHP Nationalist Movement Party . .5 MÜSİAD Independent Industrialists and Businessmen Association . .8 SAM Center for Strategic Research. 38 SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research . 30 TEPAV The Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey . 30 TESEV Economic and Social Studies Foundation. .9 TISK Confederation of Employer Associations of Turkey. .9 TTs Think Thanks . .8 TÜSIAD Businessmen’s Association . .9 UNDP United Nations Development Program . 36 xiii 1. INTRODUCTION “The EU is dead. Long live Europe” (Marlowe 2019) . Nowadays, the European Union (EU) represents disappointments rather than dreams. During the recent years of European integration, which set out for the purpose of constituting an economic union in order to achieve peace among its members, theEU has created a separatist and sceptic group within itself (Aras and Tezcan 2015, 3). Particularly during the past few years, Eurosceptic movements have been drawing attention in many of the EU member states. A concept that has never been forgotten and has gained increasing popularity during the last few years; the concept of Euroscepticism is becoming increasingly debated in the literature. Euroscepticism has emerged as a rising