![Transformation of Sovereignty Discourse in Turkish Politics](https://data.docslib.org/img/3a60ab92a6e30910dab9bd827208bcff-1.webp)
TRANSFORMATION OF SOVEREIGNTY DISCOURSE IN TURKISH POLITICS By SEDA SAADET DOMANİÇ Submitted to the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science Sabancı University Fall 2007 TRANSFORMATION OF SOVEREIGNTY DISCOURSE IN TURKISH POLITICS: APPROVED BY: Assoc. Prof. Hasan Bülent Kahraman (Dissertation Supervisor) Prof. Dr. Meltem Müftüler Baç Assoc. Prof. Ayşe Kadıoğlu Assoc. Prof. Ayhan Kaya Prof. Cemil Koçak DATE OF APPROVAL: 07.02.2008 ii © Seda Saadet Domaniç 2008 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT TRANSFORMATION OF SOVEREIGNTY DISCOURSE IN TURKISH POLITICS Domaniç, Seda Saadet PhD, Political Science Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hasan Bülent Kahraman Fall 2007, viii + 282 pages This dissertation offers an analysis of the transformation of sovereignty discourse in Turkey and illustrates the various discursive utilizations of the concept in connection with purposes of competing ideologies in turning points of Turkish politics. Rather than discussing whether or not sovereignty is obsolete in the face of growing globalization and fragmentation, this study underlines the need to reappraise the implications of the role that sovereignty plays in conditioning the coherence of opposing political ideologies. To this end, four critical ‘moments’ are studied by employing a discourse- theoretic approach: dislocation brought by the Ottoman disintegration; creation of the Turkish nation-state; disruption engendered by globalization during the post-1980 Turkey; transformation unleashed by Turkey’s ‘Europeanization’ during the 2000s. By illustrating the historico-political production/reproduction of sovereignty in relation to ideologies of Ottomanism, Turkish Nationalism, Populism, Statism, Second Republicanism and Europeanism, the findings refute the conventional view that presents sovereignty as a fixed, neutral and timeless organizing principle of modern politics. Instead, it is shown that sovereignty acts as an empty-signifier embodying a broad plurality of meanings to allow power blocs to produce political frontiers and uphold associated antagonisms. It is argued that only by deconstructing this highly politicized and contentious nature of the concept that we can start to question the unconditional, absolute and state-centric doctrine of sovereignty prevailing in Turkey. Keywords: Sovereignty, Nationalism, Nation-State, Globalization iv ÖZET TÜRK SİYASETİNDE EGEMENLİK SÖYLEMİNİN DÖNÜŞÜMÜ Domaniç, Seda Saadet Doktora, Siyaset Bilimi Danışman: Doç. Dr. Hasan Bülent Kahraman Güz 2007, viii + 282 sayfa Bu tezin ana konusu Türk siyasetinin önemli geçiş dönemlerinde egemenlik söyleminin dönüşümü ve bu söylemin farklı ideolojilerin siyasi hedefleri ile bağlantılı olarak oynadığı rollerin bir analizidir. Giderek yaygınlaşan küreselleşme ve parçalanma süreçleri karşısında egemenlik kavramının sonunun gelip gelmediğini tartışmak yerine, bu çalışma egemenlik söylemi ile karşıt siyasi ideolojilerin söylemsel bütünlüğünün sağlanması arasındaki ilişkiyi irdelemektedir. Bu amaçla, Türk siyasetinde dönüm noktası olarak belirlenen dört dönem söylem kuramı yöntemi kullanılarak incelenmektedir. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun çöküşü, Türk ulus-devletinin inşası, 1980 sonrası Türkiye’nin küreselleşmesi, ve 2000 sonrası Türkiye’nin Avrupa ile bütünleşmesi egemenlik söyleminin dönüşümü açısından ele alınan dönemler arasında yer almaktadır. Araştırma sonucunda elde edilen bulgular, egemenlik kavramının içeriğinin Osmanlıcılık, Milliyetçilik, Halkçılık, Devletçilik, İkinci Cumhuriyetçilik ve Avrupalıcılık ideolojileri ile ilintili siyasi amaçlar bağlamında sürekli olarak yeniden üretildiğini belgelemektedir. Bu doğrultuda, tezin bulguları egemenliği tarafsız, doğal, ve ebedi bir kavram olarak kabullenen çalışmaların sorgulanmasını sağlayarak, özcü yaklaşımların aksine, egemenlik kavramının içinde birçok anlamı ve siyasi değeri barındıran ve bu kapsaycı özelliği ile farklı güç odakları tarafından siyasi sınırlar ve ilişkili karşıtlıklar oluşturulmasına destek olan bir “boş-gösteren” (empty-signifier) görevi üstlendiğine işaret etmektedir. Sonuç olarak Türkiye’de mevcut mutlak, şartsız ve devlet-merkezli egemenlik doktrininin dönüştürülebilmesi için ilk önce kavramın siyasetle olan yakın ve tartışmalı ilişkisinin çözümlenmesi gerektiği savunulmaktadır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Egemenlik, Milliyetçilik, Ulus-Devlet, Küreselleşme v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to deeply thank my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Hasan Bülent Kahraman for his insightful support from the beginning to the end. Without his continuous encouragement and guidance, I would not be able to complete this dissertation. I am also grateful to my jury members Prof. Meltem Müftüler Baç, Assoc. Prof. Ayşe Kadıoğlu, Assoc. Prof. Ayhan Kaya and Prof. Cemil Koçak for their valuable and constructive comments. I thank Prof. Fuat Keyman from Koç University for reading the draft of first chapters and making helpful suggestions; Mehmet Savan for his precise work on the translation of Ottoman quotes. My friends at Sabancı University Political Science PhD Program have been a great source of encouragement and intellectual support. While I am grateful for all their comments and criticism, I alone am responsible for all possible mistakes, omissions and interpretations. I am also indebted to Cem İlhan, Kemal Derviş, Sinan Ülgen, Damla Gürel, Can Buharalı, Semih Yalman and Ferit F. Şahenk, as well all my other colleagues at European Union Information Project, Centre for Economic and Foreign Policy Studies (EDAM) and Dogus Group. It was their tolerance and support that made it possible to continue with an academic project of this magnitude while maintaining a professional career. Finally, I am very grateful to my family and friends for their understanding and acceptance of my lengthy absences. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. OBJECTIVE OF RESEARCH ....................................................................................... 1 1.2. RETHINKING SOVEREIGNTY AS A PROBLEMATIC, YET A RESILIENT CONCEPT ........ 6 1.3. METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCH.............................................................................. 12 1.3.1. Antagonisms and Logics of Equivalence and Difference ............................. 14 1.3.2. Empty-Signifiers, Floating-Signifiers and Nodal Points .............................. 16 2. BACKGROUND: HISTORICO-THEORETICAL CONSTRUCTION OF SOVEREIGNTY IN MODERN POLITICS ............................................................................. 21 2.1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 21 2.2. ABSOLUTISM AND THE DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY .......................................... 22 2.3. CONSTITUTIONALISM AND THE DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY.............................. 28 2.4. REPUBLICANISM AND THE DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY ..................................... 31 2.5. NATIONALISM AND THE DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY......................................... 35 2.6. NATION-STATE AND THE DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY ....................................... 41 2.7. RAISON D’ETAT, POLITICS OF THE EXCEPTION AND THE DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY.............................................................................................................. 47 2.8. EARLY CRITIQUES OF THE PREVAILING DISCOURSES ON SOVEREIGNTY ............... 52 2.9. CONCLUSION......................................................................................................... 57 3. DISLOCATION: THE OTTOMAN DISINTEGRATION AND THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY ................................................................... 60 3.1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 60 3.2. CLASSICAL OTTOMAN CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY.......................... 61 3.2.1. Origins: Tribal Practices, Islam and Turko-Iranian State Tradition........... 62 3.2.2. Synthesis: The Early Ottoman Conceptualization of Sovereignty................ 66 3.2.3. Raison d’Etat and Justice: Foundations of Absolute Sultanic Sovereignty.. 67 3.2.4. From Dynastic Sovereignty towards the Sovereignty of the Ottoman State. 71 3.3. PRELUDE: POLITICAL LEGITIMACY, PUBLIC OPINION, AND IDEOLOGY ................. 75 3.4. DISCURSIVE DISCOVERY OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY: A WAY OUT OF THE IMPASSE? .................................................................................................................................... 84 3.4.1. In the midst of the earthly and the divine: Where to look?........................... 85 3.5. OPPOSITION: ISLAM, CONSULTATION AND THE POSITION OF MILLET-I HAKIME..... 98 3.6. DOOMED BIRTH OF ‘POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY’: TRAPPED IN BETWEEN THE DISCURSIVE CLASH OF LIBERALISM AND CONSERVATISM......................................... 102 3.7. CONCLUSION....................................................................................................... 107 vii 4. CREATION: TURKISH NATION-STATE BUILDING AND THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE ON SOVEREIGNTY ................................................................. 109 4.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 109 4.2. FROM ‘POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY’ TOWARDS THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE ‘NATION’ 111 4.2.1 Elitism and Distrust towards the ‘People’..................................................
Details
-
File Typepdf
-
Upload Time-
-
Content LanguagesEnglish
-
Upload UserAnonymous/Not logged-in
-
File Pages290 Page
-
File Size-