SIGNIFICANCE OF EXTERNAL F/ACTORS IN THE DEMOCRATIZATION PROCESS: CASE OF TURKEY, THE EUROPEAN UNION, AND THE KURDISH PROBLEM by Fidel Aksoy Berlin, 2012 A dissertation submitted to the Department of Political and Social Sciences of Freie Universität Berlin in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate in Political Science (Dr. rer. pol.) Advisor / First Reader: Prof. Dr. Ferhad Ibrahim Seyder Second Reader: Prof. Dr. Helgard Kramer Date of Thesis Defense: 27 January 2012 ii DEDICATION to the peaceful coexistence between the Kurdish and Turkish people, and to my family. iii CONTENTS List of Maps, Figures and Tables……………………………………………………………viii List of Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………….…ix Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………….….xi Chapter 1 – Introduction…………………………………………………………………..…1 I. RESEARCH QUESTION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF RESEARCH………….1 II. CASE STUDY: TURKEY…………………………………………………..…4 III. THREE PHASES OF DEMOCRATIZATION………………………………..7 IV. AIMS OF THE STUDY……………………………………………………..…8 Chapter 2 – Literature Review and Methodology ……………………..………………….10 I. DEFINING DEMOCRACY……………………...…………………………..10 1 – Democracy as a Regime Type and as a Social Model…………………….10 II. LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………..12 1 – Agent-based and Modernization Approaches in Democratization Studies…………………………………………………..12 2 – Literature on the International Aspects of Democratization……………...15 III. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK……………………………………………18 1 – Inside-Outside Linkage…………………………………………………...18 IV. METHODICAL CATEGORIZATION OF EXTERNAL F/ACTORS………20 1 – Global Political/Ideological Order………………………………………..20 2 – Conditionality and Security Support of Regional/International Democratic Community………….……………..22 3 – Global Capitalism and Effects of International Economics………………25 4 – Diffusion Effect and International Communication………………………26 5 – Democratic Assistance……………………………………………………28 V. METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………32 1 – Modernization Approach and Inside-Outside Linkage…………………...32 iv Chapter 3 – Conceptual Framework: Modernization, Democratization and Socio-economic Research ……………………………..35 I. BUILDING THE REPUBLIC AND THE ROLE OF WESTERN/EUROPEAN IDEOLOGIES…………………………………….35 II. MODERNIZATION………………………………………………………….37 1 – Modernization of Turkey………………………………………………….38 III. INCOMPLETE DEMOCRATIZATION……………………………………..41 1 – Concealed Authoritarianism: Effects of Kemalism and Militarism………43 A) Kemalism………………………………………………………….45 B) Militarism………………………………………………………….48 i) Military in Economics………………………………………52 ii) Military in Public Eye……………………………………...55 iii) Military as a System Changing Force……………………..58 a) Coup d'état 1960……………………………………58 b) Coup d'état 1971……………………………………59 c) Coup d'état 1980……………………………………61 d) Coup d'état (post-modern coup) 1997………………62 Chapter 4 – Turkey’s Democratization Path ……………………………………………...65 I. DEMOCRATIZION QUEST…………………………………………………65 II. OBSTACLES ON THE DEMOCRATIZATION PATH…………………….67 1 – Lack of Democratic Political Culture……………………………………..67 2 – Fear of Change……………………………………………………………69 3 – Economic and Social Inequalities………………………………………...70 4 – Kurds and the Kurdish Problem…………………………………………..73 A) Kurds………………………………………………………………73 B) Kurds and the New Republic of Turkey…………………………...77 C) Kurdish Movements……………………………………………….80 D) The Kurdish Problem……………………………………………...87 i) Defining the Kurdish Problem……………………...………90 Chapter 5 – External F/actors in Democratization Process ………………………………92 I. THE EU AS AN EXTERNAL ACTOR AND EU CONDITIONALITY AS AN EXTERNAL FACTOR…………………...92 II. THE ORIGIN OF EU CONDITIONALITY…………………..……….…….93 1 – EU Conditionality in Southern Europe……………………………………93 2 – EU Conditionality in Eastern Europe……………………………………..95 III. ROAD TO CANDIDACY……………………………………………………96 v IV. THE COPENHAGEN SUMMIT: THE WAY IN……………………………97 V. THE ESSEN SUMMIT: DRAFTING THE PRE-ACCESION STRATEGY…………………………………………98 VI. AGENDA 2000 PROPOSALS: COMMENCING THE ACCESSION PROCESS………………………………………………..99 VII. THE HELSINKI SUMMIT………………………………………..………...100 VIII. EU CONDITIONALITY AND CANDIDATES’ MINORITY ISSUES……………………………………………...…………100 IX. EU CONDITIONALITY IN THE PROCESS OF CHANGE…………..…..101 1 – Stricter Conditionality and Elevated Ambiguity…………………...……101 X. CHANGING EU CONDITIONALITY…………………..…………………103 XI. APPLICATION OF EU CONDITIOANLTIY………………..…………….104 1 – Demarches……………………………………………………..………...104 2 – Agenda 2000 and the Opinions……………………………..…………...105 3 – Screening and Negotiations……………………………………..……….105 4 – Accession Partnership and NPAA…………………………………..…...106 5 – Progress Reports………………………………………..………………..106 XII. EFFECTS OF EU CONDITIONALITY……………………..……………...106 XIII. CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………..………………...109 Chapter 6 – EU-Turkey Relations: the pre-Helsinki- Period …………………………………………………………..…………………………...111 I. EU CONDITIONALTIY AND TURKEY’S PURSUIT OF MEMBERSHIP…………………………………………..………………….111 II. EU’S INFLUENCE IN TURKISH DEMOCRATIZATION……..………....112 III. KURDISH QUESTION: SOURING EU-TURKEY RELATIONS……………………………………………..………………….114 IV. THE CUSTOMS UNION AND EU’S PRESSURE…………..…………….115 V. AGENDA 2000 AND TURKEY…………………………………..………..116 VI. DETERIORATING RELATIONS……………...………………..…………117 VII. THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND AFFECTS ON TURKEY……………………………………………………117 vi VIII. THE IMPACT OF EU CONDITIOANLTIY………………..……………...120 IX. CONCLUSIONS…………………………..………………………………...123 Chapter 7 – Substantive Counts / Assessing Realities in the pre-Helsinki Period …………………………………………..……………...125 I. SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND HUMAN (CULTURAL) RIGHTS SITUATION OF THE KURDS IN PRE-HELSINKI PERIOD……………………………..………………...125 II. SOCIO-ECONOMIC RESEARCH AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT………………………………………..………………….126 III. REGIONAL DISPARITIES IN TURKEY: THE PRE-HELSINKI PERIOD (1987-1999)…………………………………………..……………129 IV. SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RANKING OF THE PROVINCES AND REGIONS 1996………………………..………………130 1 – Social Indicators…………………………………………………..……..131 2 – Economic Indicators………………………………..……………………132 A) First-degree Developed Provinces 1996………………...………..134 B) Fifth-degree Developed Provinces 1996……...…………...……..135 C) The Most and the Least Developed Regions of Turkey Compared…………………………..………...136 i) The Most Developed Region: Marmara……………..…….136 ii) The Least Developed Region: Eastern Anatolia…..……...138 V. HUMAN (CULTURAL) RIGHTS SITUATION OF THE KURDS IN PRE-HELSINKI PERIOD…………………..……………139 Chapter 8 – EU-Turkey Relations: the post-Helsinki Period ………………..………….147 I. THE HELSINKI SUMMIT…………………………………………………148 II. THE ACCESSION PARTNERSHIP WITH TURKEY…………..………...149 III. NATIONAL PROGRAMMES FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE ACQUIS (NPAA)……………………………………..…………...150 IV. THE BRUSSELS COUNCIL…………………..……………………………151 V. CONDITIONALITY MECHANISM AND THE REGULAR REPORTS ON TURKEY……………………………………………………151 1 – Progress Report 1998………………………………..…………………..151 2 – Progress Report 1999…………………………………..………………..153 3 – Progress Report 2000……………………………………..……………..155 4 – Progress Report 2001…………………………………………..………..158 5 – Progress Report 2002………………………………..…………………..161 vii 6 – Progress Report 2003………………………………………..…………..164 7 – Progress Report 2004………………………………………..…………..166 8 – Progress Report 2005…………………………………………..………..170 9 – Progress Report 2006………………………………………..…………..173 10 – Progress Report 2007…………………………………..………………175 11 – Progress Report 2008……………………………………..……………178 12 – Progress Report 2009………………………………..…………………181 Chapter 9 – Substantive Counts / Assessing Realities in the post-Helsinki Period …………………………..………………………….185 I. REGIONAL DISPARITIES IN TURKEY: THE POST-HELSINKI PERIOD (1999-2009)……………..………………185 II. SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RANKINGS OF THE PROVINCES AND REGIONS 2003…………………..………….185 1 – Social Indicators…………………………………………..……………..185 2 – Economic Indicators…………………………………..…………………186 A) First-degree Developed Provinces 2003………………..………...186 B) Fifth-degree Developed Provinces 2003…………………..……..187 C) The Most and the Least Developed Regions of Turkey Compared………………………..…………..189 i) The Most Developed Region: Marmara……………..…….189 ii) The Least Developed Region: Eastern Anatolia……..…...191 III. COMPARING 1996 AND 2003 RESULTS………………………..……….192 IV. EU-FUNDED PROGRAMMES / SUCCESS STORIES IN TURKEY..…...195 Chapter 10 – Conclusions ……………………………………………-…………………...200 Bibliography ..........................................................................................................................208 viii Maps, Figures and Tables Figure 1: A Theoretical Framework: Inside-Outside Linkage……………………………..…19 Figure 2: Regional Socio-Economic Development Index…………………....……………..136 Figure 3: Socio-Economic Development Index of Marmara Region…….…………………137 Figure 4: Socio-Economic Development Index of Eastern Anatolia Region……………….138 Figure 5: Regional Socio-Economic Development Index…………………………………..189 Figure 6: Socio-Economic Development Index of Marmara Region……………...………..190 Figure 7: Socio-Economic Development Index of Eastern Anatolia Region…………...…..191 Figure 8: Development Index Values of 1996 and 2003 Studies……………………...……193 Figure 9: Socio-Economic Development Indices of Provinces……………………………..193 Table 1 – Typology of External F/actors……………………………………………………..31 Table 2: 1996-2003 Comparison of Socio-Economic Development of Provinces………….194 . Map 1: Geographic Distribution of OYAK Group’s Companies and Facilities……….……..54 Map 2: Geographical Regions of Turkey………………………………………..………….133 Map 3: First-degree Developed Provinces in 1996……………………………….………...134 Map 4: Fifth-degree Developed Provinces in 1996…………………………………...……135 Map 5: First-degree Developed Provinces in 2003………………………………..………..186