DOCSLIB.ORG

Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 MASTERS THESIS 13-11,312

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 MASTERS THESIS 13-11,312 INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 MASTERS THESIS 13-11,312 BAYAR, Yllmaz A ll, 1929- TURKEY'S ECONOMIC POLICIES: FROM STATISM TO A "MIXED ECONOMY" (1923-1973). The American U n iv e rs ity , M .A ., 1978 Economics, general University Microfilms Intemational, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48 ioe TURKEY'S ECONOMIC POLICIES: FROM STATISM TO A "MIXED ECONOMY" (1923-1973) by Yllmaz A ll Bayar Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of The American University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements fo r the Degree of Master of Economics Signatures of Committee: Chai rman : Dean of the CdTlege /y. /f77 Date The American U niversity Washington, D.C, 1977 the AMEfilCAIf LflM /.r.- TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 Chapter I . HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ............................................................................ 3 A. The Ottoman Economic Heritage ................................................... 3 B. The Kemalist Revolution ................................................................ 5 I I . THE FIRST TURKISH REPUBLIC (1923-1960) ........................................... 6 A. The Kemalist Economic Reconstruction ....................................... 6 B. Statism as a New Economic Policy (1933-1938) ...................... 9 C. President Inonu's Economic Policies during the War Years (1939-1945) 10 D. President Inonu Continues Statism with Modifications (1945-1950) ....................................................... 12 E. The Democratic Party Pushes Economic Development and Private Enterprise (1950-1960) ....................................... 13 I I I . THE SECOND TURKISH REPUBLIC AND THE CONCEPT OF A "MIXED ECONOMY" (1961- ) 22 A. The May 27, 1960 Revolution and its Economic Implications .................................................................................... 22 B. Economic Policies of the Inonu Coalition Governments (1961-1965) 25 C. The Justice Party and Prime Minister Demirel's "Progressive-Conservative" Policies (1965-1971) .................................................................................... 26 D. The Political Crisis of 1971-1973 and its Economic Consequences .......................................................... 28 E. The Republican People's Party and Prime M inister Ecevit's "Left-of-Center" Economic Program (1973-1974) .................................................................................... 29 F. Prime Minister Demirel's New Economic Policies (1975- ) ........................................................................................ 31 IV . THE TURKISH ESTABLISHMENT AND THE EMERGING STRUCTURE OF MODERN TURKISH SOCIETY ................................................................... 33 A. The Ottoman H e rita g e............................................................................33 B. The First Turkish Republic ............................................................. 34 n m C. The "Establishment" T o d ay............................................................. 35 1. The E lites .......................................................................................35 2. L a b o r ............................................................................................... 36 3. The Rural Areas and the Pe a s a n tr y...................................... 37 4. General Observations about the New E lite s.........................38 V. MAJOR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SECTOR DEVELOPMENT ............................ 39 A. The Development Plan— Economic Sector ................................... 39 1. Agriculture ...................................................................................36 2. Industry, Mining, Power ...................................................... 59 3. Transportation...............................................................................63 4. Communications ...............................................................................67 5. T o u r is m ........................................................................................... 68 6. Urban Development ................................................................... 69 B. Development Plan--Social Sector .............................................. 70 1. Population....................................................................................... 70 2. Employment....................................................................................... 71 3. Education ....................................................................................... 72 4. Health and W elfare......................................................................74 C. F in a n c e .................................................................................................... 75 1. The Financial System, Money and Prices ...............................75 2. Currency ........................................................................................... 77 3. Domestic C r e d i t ...........................................................................77 4. Financial Institutions and Banks ........................................ 78 5. National Budget.......................................................................... 79 6. Foreign A id ................................................................................... 80 7. Balance of Payments..................................................................82 V I. THE FOREIGN TRADE REGIME...........................................................................86 A. General Observations ........................................................................ 86 B. Principal Imports ............................................................................ 87 C. Principal Exports ............................................................................ 89 D. Trade Policy ............................................................................................92 E. Trade P r o s p e c ts ...................................................................................92 F. Economic Outlook ................................................................................ 92 V II. INVESTMENT IN TURKEY.................................................................................. 94 A. Foreign Investment Encouragement Law ..................................... 94 B. Foreign Investment Climate ........................................................... 96 C. The Petroleum L a w ...............................................................................98 D. Extent of U.S. Investment............................................................. 99 IV V III. TURKEY'S BASIC ECONOMIC POLICIES— SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS..................................................................................................104 APPENDIX A. KEY ECONOMIC INDICATORS—TURKEY ....................................... 116 APPENDIX B. TURKEY AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY .... 118 CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY..... .................................................................................. 121 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................... 125 MAP OF TURKEY TABLES 1. Medium- and Long-term Growth Strategy (in % ).............................. 41 2. Macroeconomic Targets and Achievements, First (1963-67), Second (1968-72) Five-Year Plans (in %).... 42 3. Macroeconomic Targets of the Third Five-Year Plan (1973-77) (in % ) ...................................................................................... 44 4. Number of Tractors, Selected
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE CYPRUS QUESTION in the MAKING and the ATTITUDE of the SOVIET UNION TOWARDS the CYPRUS QUESTION (1960-1974) a Master's
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Bilkent University Institutional Repository THE CYPRUS QUESTION IN THE MAKING AND THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOVIET UNION TOWARDS THE CYPRUS QUESTION (1960-1974) A Master’s Thesis by MUSTAFA ÇAĞATAY ASLAN DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BILKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA September 2008 To my grandfathers Osman OYMAK and Mehmet Akif ASLAN, THE CYPRUS QUESTION IN THE MAKING AND THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOVIET UNION TOWARDS THE CYPRUS QUESTION (1960-1974) The Institute of Economics and Social Sciences of Bilkent University by MUSTAFA ÇAĞATAY ASLAN In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BILKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA September 2008 I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations. --------------------------- Associate Prof. Hakan Kırımlı Supervisor I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations. --------------------------- Assistant Prof. Dr. Nur Bilge Criss Examining Committee Member I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations. --------------------------- Assistant Prof. Dr. Eugenia Kermeli Examining Committee Member Approval of the Institute of Economics and Social Sciences --------------------------- Prof. Dr. Erdal Erel Director ABSTRACT THE CYPRUS QUESTION IN THE MAKING AND THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOVIET UNION TOWARDS THE CYPRUS QUESTION (1960-1974) Aslan, Mustafa Çağatay M.A., Department of International Relations Supervisor: Associate Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Neo-Kemalism Vs. Neo-Democrats?
    ' TURKISH FOREIGN POLICY BETWEEN 1960-1971: NEO-KEMALISM VS. NEO-DEMOCRATS? Sedat LAÇ 0NER ‘I hope you will understand that your NATO allies have not had a chance to consider whether they have an obligation to protect Turkey against the Soviet Union if Turkey takes a step which results in Soviet intervention without the full consent and understanding of its NATO allies.’ 1 Lyndon B. Johnson, US President, 1964 ‘Atatürk taught us realism and rationalism. He was not an ideologue.’ 2 Süleyman Demirel , Turkish Prime Minister Abstract In the post-coup years two main factors; the détente process, and as a result of the détente significant change in the United States’ policies towards Turkey, started a chain-reaction process in Turkish foreign policy. During the 1960s several factors forced Turkish policy makers towards a new foreign policy. On the one hand, the Western attitude undermined the Kemalist and other Westernist schools and caused an ideological transformation in Turkish foreign policy. On the other hand, the military coup and disintegration process that it triggered also played very important role in the foreign policy transformation process. Indeed, by undermining Westernism in Turkey, the West caused an ideological crisis in Kemalism and other foreign policy schools. The 1960s also witnessed the start of the disintegration process in Turkish politics that provided a suitable environment for the resurgence of the Ottoman schools of thought, such as Islamism and Turkism. 1 The Middle East Journal , Vol. 20, No. 3, Summer 1966, p. 387. 2 0hsan Sabri Ça /layangil, Anılarım, ( My Memoirs ), ( 0stanbul: Güne 2, 1990), p.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey's Islamists: from Power-Sharing to Political
    TURKEY’S ISLAMISTS: FROM POWER-SHARING TO POLITICAL INCUMBENCY The complex relationship between political Islam and the Turkish state – from political exclusion in the early Republican era, to power-sharing in the post-World War II multi-party era, to political incumbency in the 2000s – was crowned by AKP’s landslide electoral victory in 2002. The author debunks two myths regarding this relationship: first, that Kemalism enjoyed a monopoly of political power for decades and second, that Islamists achieved victory in 2002 after being the regime’s sole opposition. According to the author, Turkey’s failed Middle East policy can be attributed to AKP’s misconception that its Islamic counterparts would achieve power after the Arab uprisings just as they had done in Turkey in 2002. Behlül Özkan* Spring 2015 * Dr. Behlül Özkan is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Marmara University, Istanbul. 71 VOLUME 14 NUMBER 1 BEHLÜL ÖZKAN he 1995 elections in Turkey, in which the Islamist Welfare Party (Refah Partisi) won the most votes, garnered much attention both in Turkey and abroad. Welfare Party leader Necmettin Erbakan took office as T prime minister the following year, the first time in the country’s histo- ry that an Islamist had occupied an executive position. Erbakan was subsequently forced out of office in the “post-modern coup” of 28 February 1997, widely inter- preted as a sign that achieving power by democratic means was still impossible for Islamists. Prominent Islamists such as current President and former Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan have often declared themselves to be the victims of the February 28 coup, which they cite as an instance of the perpetual repression faced by Islamists and their political constituencies since the founding of the Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • The False Promise [Of the 'Turkish Model']
    THE FALSE PROMISE Ahmet T. Kuru Since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, most Turks preserved the belief, beyond a simple expectation, that one day they would have ‘grandeur’ again. In fact, this was largely shared by some Western observers who regarded Turkey as a potential model for the coexistence of Islam and democracy. Almost a century after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, however, it would be fair to depict Turkey as a mediocre country, in terms of its military, economic, and socio-cultural capacities, and a competitive autocracy, regarding its political system. The promise of the Turkish case to combine the best parts of Islamic ethics and modern democratic institu- tions appeared to be false. What explains the failure of the idea of the ‘Turkish model?’ To simplify a complex story, one could define the competing groups in Turkish politics until 2012 as Kemalists and their discontents. For the former, it was the religious and multi-ethnic characteristics of the Ottoman Empire that led to its demise. The Turkish Republic, in contrast, had to be assertive secularist, and Turkish nationalist, to avoid repeating the maladies of the Ottoman ancien régime. This project required radical reforms, including the replacement of the Arabic alphabet with Latin, and an authoritarian regime, since the majority of Turks were conservative Muslims, and Kurds resisted assimilation. A major problem of the Kemalist understanding of Westernisation was its extreme formalism, probably due to the fact that Kemalism was primarily represented by the military. According to this formalist perspective, dress code and way of life defined the level of Westernisation of a person.
    [Show full text]
  • Yolsuzluk Ve Usulsüzlük Olaylarinin Türk Siyasetine Yansimalari (1923–1950)
    YOLSUZLUK VE USULSÜZLÜK OLAYLARININ TÜRK SİYASETİNE YANSIMALARI (1923–1950) Erkan AFŞAR Doktora Tezi Tarih Anabilim Dalı Prof. Dr. Selami KILIÇ 2013 Her Hakkı Saklıdır T.C. ATATÜRK ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ TARİH ANABİLİM DALI Erkan AFŞAR YOLSUZLUK VE USULSÜZLÜK OLAYLARININ TÜRK SİYASETİNE YANSIMALARI (1923–1950) DOKTORA TEZİ TEZ YÖNETİCİSİ Prof. Dr. Selami KILIÇ ERZURUM–2013 I İÇİNDEKİLER ÖZET ............................................................................................................................... V ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. VI ÖNSÖZ ......................................................................................................................... VII KISALTMALAR ........................................................................................................... X EKLER LİSTESİ ......................................................................................................... XI GİRİŞ ............................................................................................................................... 1 BİRİNCİ BÖLÜM TEK PARTİLİ DÖNEMDE YAPILAN YOLSUZLUK VE USULSÜZLÜKLER 1.1.BAHRİYE VEKİLİ İHSAN (ERYAVUZ) BEY DAVASI ( 1927–1928) ........ 23 1.1.1. İhsan Eryavuz’un Hayatı ............................................................................ 24 1.1.2. Bahriye Vekâletinin Kurulması .................................................................. 24 1.1.3. İsmet Paşa ile
    [Show full text]
  • Download Chapter
    PARTIES ESTABLISHED IN TURKEY AFTER 1960 AND THEIR ACTORS Assist. Prof. Dr. Mehmet Biçici Gaziantep University Introduction Organized structures formed in order to gain the authority to govern in a country by elections or to become partners in the administration of the country through coalition governments are called political parties (Gökçe, 2013). According to the political scientist Duverger’s evaluation of political parties, there are two main periods in the formation of political parties. In these two main periods, the background of the emergence and development of parties is taken into consideration. The first main period considers how the parties formed and under what conditions, while in the second main period, how the parties came to the present day after the World War II are examined (Göktürk, 2016). We can gather Party Political Systems under two headings. These are the two-party political system and the multi-party political system. In the two-party political system there are two major parties that are trusted to be elected by the people voting. Those who vote choose between these two parties, and the party that holds the majority wins power. 3. Parties are far from powerful in this election. The best known examples of the two-party political systems are seen in the United States and England. The candidates for power in these countries have two large majorities. Other smaller parties are unable to be in power because they cannot get close to the big two parties. Examples include the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in the US, and the Labor Party and the Conservative Party in the UK.
    [Show full text]
  • İzmir Adnan Menderes Airport Brochure
    ADB İzmir Adnan Menderes Airport IZMIR’S BACKGROUND 4.1 million people reside in Izmir and it is the 3rd most populous city in Turkey. Also referred as the “Pearl of the Aegean”, Izmir is a tourist destination located at the Aegean coast of Turkey and is well-known for its historical sites, beautiful beaches and holiday resorts. The city attracts 1.2 million foreign visitors each year thanks to the numerous tourist attractions in and around. Hosting one of the biggest ports in Turkey, Izmir also has a significant amount of trade volume. TAV Airports built brand new international and domestic terminals for Izmir Adnan Menderes (ADB) in order to expand the capacity and accommodate the increasing air transport demand to/from the city. Operator of 14 airports worldwide, TAV Airports assists the airlines and tour operators to grow their business in Izmir through its regional experience and know-how. ADB IZMIR OFFERS THE BEST OF THE AEGEAN Izmir is well-known for its historical areas, beautiful beaches and holiday resorts. Izmir Adnan Menderes Airport (ADB) is the most convenient entry point to the Aegean region for the visitors. The city is closely located to major touristic districts such as Çeşme, Selçuk and Kuşadası. Its massive tourism makes Izmir a lively city. The House of the Virgin Mary, located near Ephesus in Selçuk, is a holly place for Christians and visited by more than half a million people every year. The tourism development plans of the Government regarding Izmir and its vicinity reveals that the bed capacity of the region will be increased from 40,000 to 100,000 by 2023.
    [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]
  • Democracy in Crisis: Corruption, Media, and Power in Turkey
    A Freedom House Special Report Democracy in Crisis: Corruption, Media, and Power in Turkey Susan Corke Andrew Finkel David J. Kramer Carla Anne Robbins Nate Schenkkan Executive Summary 1 Cover: Mustafa Ozer AFP / GettyImages Introduction 3 The Media Sector in Turkey 5 Historical Development 5 The Media in Crisis 8 How a History Magazine Fell Victim 10 to Self-Censorship Media Ownership and Dependency 12 Imprisonment and Detention 14 Prognosis 15 Recommendations 16 Turkey 16 European Union 17 United States 17 About the Authors Susan Corke is Andrew Finkel David J. Kramer Carla Anne Robbins Nate Schenkkan director for Eurasia is a journalist based is president of Freedom is clinical professor is a program officer programs at Freedom in Turkey since 1989, House. Prior to joining of national security at Freedom House, House. Ms. Corke contributing regularly Freedom House in studies at Baruch covering Central spent seven years at to The Daily Telegraph, 2010, he was a Senior College/CUNY’s School Asia and Turkey. the State Department, The Times, The Transatlantic Fellow at of Public Affairs and He previously worked including as Deputy Economist, TIME, the German Marshall an adjunct senior as a journalist Director for European and CNN. He has also Fund of the United States. fellow at the Council in Kazakhstan and Affairs in the Bureau written for Sabah, Mr. Kramer served as on Foreign Relations. Kyrgyzstan and of Democracy, Human Milliyet, and Taraf and Assistant Secretary of She was deputy editorial studied at Ankara Rights, and Labor. appears frequently on State for Democracy, page editor at University as a Critical Turkish television.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Military Coups in Turkey 1. Introduction
    International Journal of Social and Economic Sciences Uluslararası Sosyal ve Ekonomik Bilimler Dergisi E-ISSN: 2667-4904, 9(2): 49-56, 2019 The History of Military Coups In Turkey Furkan KAYA Yeditepe University, İstanbul, TURKEY *Corresponding Author Received: November 12, 2019 E-mail: [email protected] Accepted:December 23, 2019 Abstract The history of military coups has a considerable place in Turkish political life. The Janissary revolts in the Ottoman period are accepted as the beginning of the military coup tradition and interventions in Turkish political life. The founder of the Turkish Republic, Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, took off his military uniform and wore his civilian attire when the War of Independence started. This is because Atatürk believed that real and powerful democracy could only be achieved by civilian governments. However, the military juntas argued that the soldiers were permanent guards of the Republic and had the right to protect the integrity and interests of the country under all circumstances. These are the May 27, 1960 military coup, March 12, 1971 military memorandum, September 12, 1980 military coup, February 28, 1997 Post-Modern coup and the July 15, 2016 military coup attempt. All military coups inevitably destroyed the Turkish democracy. In fact, in every military coup, traces of foreign powers, the US being in the first place, can be seen. That’s why this study aims to enlighten the history of coups in Turkey in order to prevent possible future military coup attempts in Turkey. During this study, important newspapers and magazines, as well as archival documents, books, and articles were benefited from.
    [Show full text]
  • Protracted Occupation That Leads to De Facto State Creation: the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, an International Legal Evaluation
    Global Journal of Politics and Law Research Vol.8, No.2, pp.30-64, March 2020 Published by ECRTD-UK ISSN: ISSN 2053-6321(Print), ISSN: ISSN 2053-6593(Online) PROTRACTED OCCUPATION THAT LEADS TO DE FACTO STATE CREATION: THE TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS, AN INTERNATIONAL LEGAL EVALUATION Sanford R. Silverburg, Ph.D Professor Emeritus Department of History and Politics Catawba College Salisbury, NC [email protected] ABSTRACT: The history of Cyprus is replete with foreign invasions and occupation. Modern history has Great Britain in control over the island, betwixt a long-term period of antagonism and hostility over the island’s control between Greece and Turkey. Greek Cypriots have for many years sought enosis, or union with Greece, while the minority Turkish community’s ethnic community goal has been taksim (partition) between the two ethnic groups. A crucial temporal dividing point came in 1974 when following a coup d’etat against the Greek Cypriot leadership leading to some instability which was then followed by a Turkish military invasion in order to protect the island’s Turkish population. Once order was restored and with Ankara’s backing, the Turkish Cypriots created the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Because of the manner in which the political action occurred, only Turkey provided diplomatic recognition, thus bringing up the legal issue of non-recognition and a discussion of the use of force to achieve a political objective. KEY WORDS: Cyprus, Turkish republic, northern Cyprus, Turkish foreign policy, Greek foreign policy, occupation, international law, de facto state INTRODUCTION Occupation in its varied forms1 has taken on increased interest in the post-World War II era, at multiple legal2 and political levels.
    [Show full text]