SECURITY FIRST APPROACH: CAUSES OF SECURITY PRIORITIZATION AND IMPLICATIONS OF THIS PRIORITIZATION ON DEMOCRACY IN THE CASES OF SINGAPORE AND AZERBAIJAN A Master’s Thesis by NUR ALKIŞ Department of International Relations Bilkent University Ankara December 2009 SECURITY FIRST APPROACH: CAUSES OF SECURITY PRIORITIZATION AND IMPLICATIONS OF THIS PRIORITIZATION ON DEMOCRACY IN THE CASES OF SINGAPORE AND AZERBAIJAN The Institute of Economics and Social Sciences of Bilkent University by NUR ALKIŞ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BİLKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA December 2009 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. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ersel Aydınlı 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. Assist. Prof. Dr. Pınar İpek 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. Assist. Prof. Dr. Aylin Güney Examining Committee Member Approval of the Institute of Economics and Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Erdal Erel Director ABSTRACT THE SECURITY FIRST APPROACH: CAUSES OF SECURITY PRIORITIZATION AND IMPLICATIONS OF THIS PRIORITIZATION ON DEMOCRACY IN THE CASES OF SINGAPORE AND AZERBAIJAN Nur AlkıĢ M.A. Department of International Relations Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ersel Aydınlı December 2009 The security-democracy relationship is an interesting issue that has drawn scholarly attention. The security first approach is a new input in the field. It looks the issue from the Western foreign policy perspective and discusses what should be done by Western powers in the failed and rogue states to build security and democracy. It claims that first security must be established, and then democracy would gradually consolidate, rather than democracy promotion. Such a shift in Western foreign policy would have significant impact for the developing world, facing the challenge of political-economic development and security-democracy building at the same time. This thesis aims to apply security first approach to developing world. It analyzes the causes of security prioritization and implications of this prioritization on democracy, in the cases of Singapore and Azerbaijan to verify the security first approach’s claims. Both of these countries have applied a security first approach after they gained independence. They have also established some democratic institutional and legal structures. However, the worry of the ruling elites about losing security and power led them constantly delay democratization and restrict political arena. The governments of both cases have been successful in maintaining security and stability, yet this did not give way to the gradual triumph of democracy as argued by security first approach. Western cooperation with the governments of these countries, due to the formers’ interest in the stability of both countries and regimes can be argued to have contributed to the security of the states and their ruling elites, but not to the democratization process and the security of the people. Hence, the thesis argues that the discussion in the Western foreign policy should not be about security versus democracy, but rather about striving for security and democracy concurrently in the developing world. Keywords: Security, Stability, Democracy, Democratization, Security First, Singapore, Azerbaijan iii ÖZET ÖNCE GÜVENLĠK YAKLAġIMI: SĠNGAPUR VE AZERBAYCAN ÖRNEKLERĠNDE GÜVENLĠĞĠN ÖNCELĠKLEġTĠRĠLMESĠNĠN NEDENLERĠ VE BU ÖNCELĠKLEġTĠRMENĠN DEMOKRASĠYE ETKĠSĠ Nur AlkıĢ Yüksek Lisans, Uluslararası ĠliĢkiler Bölümü Tez DanıĢmanı: Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ersel Aydınlı Aralık 2009 Güvenlik-demokrasi iliĢkisi akademik dünyada ilgi çeken ve çalıĢılan bir konu olagelmiĢtir. Bu alana yeni bir katkı olan önce güvenlik yaklaĢımı, güvenlik- demokrasi iliĢkisini Batılı ülkelerin dıĢ politika perspektifinden ele alarak, baĢarısız ve haydut devletlerde güvenlik ve demokrasinin tesisi için Batılı devletlerce ne yapılması gerektiğini tartıĢmakta ve önceliğin güvenliğin teminine verilmesi gerektiğini, demokrasinin zaman içerisinde geliĢeceğini savunmaktadır. Batılı ülkelerin dıĢ politikalarında bu türlü bir değiĢikliğe gidilmesi, siyasi ve ekonomik kalkınma ile güvenlik ve demokrasiyi aynı zamanda gerçekleĢtirmek durumunda kalan üçüncü dünyayı da etkileyecektir. Bu çalıĢma önce güvenlik yaklaĢımını üçüncü dünyaya uyarlamayı amaçlamakta, bu doğrultuda Singapur ve Azerbaycan örneklerinde güvenliğin öncelikleĢtirilmesinin nedenlerini ve bu öncelikleĢtirmenin demokrasiye etkisini incelemektedir. Her iki ülke de bağımsızlığını kazandıktan sonra önce güvenlik anlayıĢını benimsemiĢtir. Aynı zamanda bazı demokratik kurumsal ve yasal düzenlemeleri kabul etmiĢtir. Ancak, yönetimlerin güvenliği ve iktidarı kaybetme endiĢesi, demokratikleĢmenin sürekli ertelenmesine ve siyasi alanın kısıtlanmasına neden olmuĢtur. Ġki ülkede de iktidarlar, güvenlik ve istikrarı sağlamıĢtır, ancak bu önce güvenlik yaklaĢımınca savunulduğu üzere demokrasinin zaferiyle sonuçlanmamıĢtır. Batılı güçlerin çıkarları doğrultusunda bu hükümetleri desteklemeleri, hem devletlerin hem de hükümetlerin güvenliğine katkı sağlamıĢtır, ancak ne demokratikleĢme sürecine ne de insanların güvenliğine katkıda bulunmamıĢtır. Bu nedenle, bu çalıĢma Batılı ülkelerin dıĢ politikalarının güvenlik mi yoksa demokrasi mi argümanı yerine, geliĢmekte olan ülkelerde güvenlik ve demokrasinin aynı zamanda temini için çabalanmasına odaklanması gerektiğini savunmaktadır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Güvenlik, Ġstikrar, Demokrasi, DemokratikleĢme, Önce Güvenlik, Singapur, Azerbaycan iv ACNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my special thanks to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ersel Aydınlı for his guidance and support, not only throughout the thesis but also throughout my graduate study. I am also thankful to Assist. Prof. Dr. Pınar Ġpek and Assist. Prof. Dr. Aylin Güney who examined my study, gave valuable comments and made recommendations on my thesis. I am grateful to Assist. Prof. Dr. Pınar Bedirhanoğlu, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fatih Tayfur, Assist. Prof. Dr. Galip Yalman and Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pınar Bilgin for their valuable recommendations and guidance during my undergraduate and graduate study. Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratefulness to my family for their irreplaceable support and understanding all the way through. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................................................................................... iii ÖZET ...…................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................... v TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................. vi CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 1 CHAPTER II: DEFINITIONS AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 11 2.1. Introduction ……………………….............................................. 11 2.2. Definitions ………………………............................................... 12 2.2.1. Security … ……………………………………............ 12 2.2.2. Political Stability ……………...………………..….…. 15 2.2.3. Democracy …………………………….…………….…. 16 2.2.4. Democratization ……………………………………… 19 2.3. Literature Review on the Security-Democracy Relationship …… 19 2.3.1. Democratic Peace Theory …………………..………… 21 2.3.2. Democratization as Cause of Insecurity and Instability … ..….………………………………………. 25 2.3.3. Negative Impact of State and Military-Centric Security on Democracy……...…………………………………….. 28 2.3.4.Security First Approach .…… …………………………... 31 2.3.5. Critics of Security First Approach ……………………… 37 2.4. Conclusion ….……………………………………………………. 42 CHAPTER III: THE CASE OF SINGAPORE …………………............... 47 3.1. Introduction .................................................................................... 47 3.2. Political History and System ........................................................... 48 3.3. The Context that Gave Way to the Prioritization of Security .......... 50 3.3.1. Legacy of Colonialism ………………………………….. 50 vi 3.3.2. Cold War Environment………………………………….. 51 3.3.3. Urgency of Survival …………………………………...... 52 3.3.4. Multiethnic Society……………………………………… 53 3.3.5. Asian Values……………………………………………. 53 3.3.6. Lack Of Opposition…………………………………….. 54 3.3.7. Successful Economic Development ……………..…….. 55 3.4. Prioritization of Security at the Expense of Democracy……….… 56 3.5. Implications of Security First Understanding on Democracy……. 58 3.5.1. Political Restrictions in the Name of Survival…………. 59 3.5.2. Restrictions on Ethnic Groups and Languages .…..…. 60 3.5.3. Restrictions on Civil Society and Media………………. 62 3.5.4. Incorporation of Working and Middle Classes into the System……..………………………………… 64 3.5.5. Hindering Opposition………………………………… 65 3.5.6. Use of Elections as the Base of Legitimacy …………. 67 3.5.7. Economic Development as the Other Base of Legacy …………………………………………..…. 69 3.5.8. Meritocracy Principle ………………………………… 70 3.6. Some Opening Up …………………........................................... 71 3.7. Conclusion ……………………………………………………... 72 CHAPTER IV: THE CASE OF AZERBAIJAN …...………………... ... 77 4.1. Introduction