Abstract
This article focuses on post-Arab-uprising calls for democratization in the
Middle East. Scrutinizing the then-Turkish government’s coupling of a cultural
relativist norm-promotion discourse in the global arena with a nativist discourse
in the Middle East, the paper examines how much our current conceptual tools
can explain successes and failures in this process. The article focuses on two
schools of thought that pay considerable attention to the role of culture in
institution-building: the English School of International Relations (ES) and
the nativist strand of post-colonialism. It touches upon two problems in the
ES literature and offers two solutions: (1) It reinforces attention on Buzan’s
conception of interhuman society compared to the ad hoc blending of different
levels of abstraction in cultural analyses. (2) It aims to initiate a dialogue for a
more precise distinction between various ideational and behavioral components
of the concept of culture, since these components do not necessarily fit well
together. Considering these two caveats, the article operationalizes culture in
the given case to examine some limitations of the nativist ideological perception
of cultural zones and its concurrent claims over true nativity. The paper seeks
these limitations, first, by analyzing the extent of cultural commonalities between
three sub-regional Islamist movements that shared a strong common identity,
and second, by examining the dialogue between ideological mismatches in the
constitution-making processes of Egypt and Tunisia.