KADİR HAS UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES UNDERSTANDING TURKISH-GREEK RELATIONS THROUGH SECURITIZATION AND DESECURITIZATION: A TURKISH PERSPECTIVE A PhD Dissertation by Cihan DİZDAROĞLU 2010.09.18.002 Advisor: Prof. Sinem AKGÜL-AÇIKMEŞE Submitted to the Graduate School of Social Sciences in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in International Relations. İSTANBUL February, 2017 APPENDIX B ABSTRACT UNDERSTANDING TURKISH-GREEK RELATIONS THROUGH SECURITIZATION TO DESECURITIZATION: A TURKISH PERSPECTIVE Cihan Dizdaroğlu Doctor of Philosophy in International Relations Advisor: Prof. Sinem Akgül-Açıkmeşe February, 2017 This thesis focuses on the main contentious issues between Turkey and Greece, particularly in the post-Cold War era which was the peak point of securitization in bilateral relations, by using the framework of securitization theory in order to understand how, by whom and to what extent Greece is securitized and desecuritized by Turkey. By doing so, the thesis argues that there was a “threatening” and a “hostile” tone in Turkish elites’ discourses in almost every contention between the two countries such as delimitation (territorial waters, airspace and the continental shelf) and sovereignty issues (the status of the islands, islets and rocks as well as the (de)militarization of the islands) in the Aegean Sea, problems related to Cyprus, and Greece’s ties with terrorist organizations. Even tough Turkish elites have securitized issues related to Greece, such security speech-acts, paradoxically, since the late 1990s due to the forces of rapprochement, bilateral relations were almost transformed into a cooperative stance with emphasis on “friendship” rather than focusing on any existential threat, and decision-makers began to substitute their security grammar with a positive and cautious tone. Accordingly, this thesis argues that it is possible to explain the amelioration of bilateral relations with the methodology of desecuritization as there is a close correlation between the rapprochement process and desecuritization. In this context, the thesis reaches the conclusion that the rapprochement process, which has been an outcome of several factors, in Turkish-Greek relations quite fits into the form of “change through stabilization”, borrowed from Lene Hansen’s terminology. Keywords: Turkish-Greek Relations, Copenhagen School, Securitization, Desecuritization, Aegean Sea, Cyprus. ii ÖZET TÜRK-YUNAN İLİŞKİLERİNİ GÜVENLİKLEŞTİRME VE GÜVENLİK- DIŞILAŞTIRMA YOLUYLA ANLAMAK: BİR TÜRK BAKIŞ AÇISI Cihan Dizdaroğlu Uluslararası İlişkiler Doktora Danışman: Prof. Dr. Sinem Akgül-Açıkmeşe Şubat, 2017 Bu tez, Türkiye tarafından Yunanistan’ın nasıl, kim tarafından ve hangi boyutta güvenlikleştirildiği ve güvenlik-dışılaştırıldığını anlamak amacıyla, güvenlikleştirme teorisinin sunduğu çerçeveyi kullanarak başta ikili ilişkilerde güvenlikleştirmenin zirve yaptığı Soğuk Savaş dönemini olmak üzere, Türkiye ve Yunanistan arasındaki temel tartışma konularına odaklanmaktadır. Böylelikle, iki ülke arasındaki Ege’deki sınırlandırma (kara suları, hava sahası ve kıta sahanlığı) ve egemenlik konuları (ada, adacık ve kayalıkların durumuyla adaların silah(sız)landırılması), Kıbrıs’la ilgili sorunlar ve Yunanistan’ın terörizm bağlantısı gibi hemen her ihtilafta Türk elitlerinin söylemlerinde “tehditkâr” ve “düşmanca” bir ton hâkim olduğunu öne sürmektedir. Her ne kadar Türk elitleri Yunanistan’la ilgili konuları yukarıda anıldığı şekilde güvenlik söz edimleriyle güvenlikleştirmişse de, 1990’ların sonralarından itibaren yakınlaşmanın da etkisiyle çelişkili bir şekilde ikili ilişkiler yaşamsal tehditlere odaklanmak yerine “dostluk” vurgusunun hakim olduğu ve karar vericilerin güvenlik söylemlerinin yerini daha olumlu ve temkinli bir tona bıraktığı işbirliğine doğru evrilmiştir. Bu doğrultuda, elinizdeki tez yakınlaşma süreci ve güvenlik-dışılaştırma arasında yakın bir bağ olduğundan yola çıkarak, ikili ilişkilerdeki iyileşmeyi güvenlik-dışılaştırma metodolojisi çerçevesinde açıkalmanın mümkün olduğunu savunmaktadır. Bu çerçevede tez, çok sayıda etkenin bir sonucu olan Türkiye-Yunanistan arasındaki yakınlaşma sürecinin Lene Hansen’in terminolojisinden ödünç alınan “istikrar yoluyla değişim” formuna tümüyle uyduğu sonucuna ulaşmaktadır Anahtar Kelimeler: Türk-Yunan İlişkileri, Kopenhag Okulu, Güvenlikleştirme, Güvenlik-dışılaştırma, Ege Denizi, Kıbrıs. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Firstly, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my advisor Professor Sinem Akgül Açıkmeşe for her guidance, encouragement and insightful critiques since the very beginning of this journey. Thank you very much for being an excellent guide. I would also like to thank Professor Mitat Çelikpala, Professor Serhat Güvenç, Associate Professor Özgür Özdamar and Assistant Professor İnan Rüma, who were all members of the defense committee, for their invaluable feedbacks and suggestions. I greatly benefited from all of their comments and contributions. I would like to convey my deep gratitude to Professor Mustafa Aydın for his mentorship. I have always been honoured to work with him as an assistant. I have learned immensely from his guidance over the years. Throughout my educational life, numerous distinguished professors/teachers have played an important role in shaping my life and views. I extend my sincere thanks to all of them for giving me the privilege to be their student. I have had the fortunate opportunity to have a lovely family and friends whose moral support and patience helped me to complete my dissertation. Many thanks to Aslı Mutlu, Onur Kara, Fırat Avcı, Ömer Fazlıoğlu and Duygun Ruben for their support and friendship. In addition, a special thanks to the staff of the Information Center at the Kadir Has University. I am especially greatly indebted to my family, who always supported me in the course of this dissertation process as they always have done throughout my life. Last but not least, my warmest thanks to my love Hande Dizdaroğlu whose infinite encouragement, love and faith always makes everything in my life possible. Without her patience and constant support this thesis would not be completed. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... vi ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................vii INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 1. SECURITIZATION AND DESECURITIZATON: CONCEPTS, THEORY AND METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 20 1.1. Securitization Theory: What is Securitization/Desecuritization? .............. 23 1.2. How does Securitization/Desecuritization Occur? ....................................... 30 1.3. Critics on the Securitization Theory ............................................................. 36 1.4. Methodology of the Thesis ............................................................................. 40 1.4.1 Defining the Referent Object ...................................................................... 41 1.4.2. Defining the Securitizing Actors in Turkey ............................................... 43 1.4.3. Defining the Forms of Desecuritization ..................................................... 53 2. TURKEY’S SECURITIZATIONS OF GREECE .............................................. 55 2.1. The Disputes in the Aegean Sea ..................................................................... 58 2.1.1. Delimitation Issues in the Aegean Sea.................................................... 62 2.1.1.1. The Question of Continental Shelf ..................................................... 62 2.1.1.2. The Breadth of Territorial Waters ...................................................... 72 2.1.1.3. The Airspace of the Aegean ................................................................ 80 2.1.2. The Sovereignty Issues in the Aegean Sea ............................................. 84 2.1.2.1. The (De)Militarization of the Islands ................................................. 84 2.1.2.2. The Sovereignty over Islands, Islets and Rocks: The Kardak (Imia) Crisis ................................................................................................................ 94 2.2. The Cyprus Issue: The Case of S-300 Crisis .............................................. 107 v 2.2.1. The Developments in Cyprus and its Reflection to Turkish-Greek Relations ........................................................................................................................... 107 2.2.2. The Case of S-300 Crisis ......................................................................... 119 2.3. The Turkey-Greece-EU Triangle: The Case of Luxembourg .................. 127 2.4. The Capture of Öcalan ................................................................................. 134 2.5. Turkey’s Securitizations of Greece: An Overall Evaluation .................... 140 3. DESECURITIZATION OF TURKISH-GREEK RELATIONS SINCE 1999 .............................................................................................................................. ….143 3.1. The Root Causes of Rapprochement ........................................................... 144 3.1.1. The Earthquakes and Empowerment of Civil Society ............................. 144 3.1.2. The Europeanization Process