TURKEY, EUROPEANIZATION, AND DOMESTIC CHANGE

Yıl 2014, , 63 - 84, 29.12.2014

Gözde Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.29228/mjes.85

Öz

The Europeanization process of Turkey was accelerated with the launch of European Union candidate country status in 1999, though it has had fluctuations across time. While Ankara started to launch reforms in a more passive way in the following years of 1999, Europeanizing reforms accelerated by the 2002 elections and slow downed by 2005. However, reforms continued in many areas in the aftermath of 2005. Considering the weakened credibility of EU conditionality and increasing domestic adoption costs, the External Incentives Model, which has been dominated the external Europeanization literature, especially in the case of Central and East European countries, does not account for the continuing reforms in Turkey by 2005. This article starts with the afore-mentioned research problem and explores the fluctuations in Turkey’s Europeanization through employing the External Incentives Model and its primary conditions: EU conditionality and veto points that are incurred by domestic adoption costs. The article goes beyond conditions provided by the External Incentives Model, EU conditionality and domestic adoption costs, and brings domestic factors as driving forces of Europeanization

Anahtar Kelimeler

Europeanization, EU Conditionality, Turkey, Domestic Actors

TÜRKİYE, AVRUPALILAŞMA VE YEREL DEĞİŞİM

Öz

1999 yılında Avrupa Birliği’ne aday ülke statüsü kazanan Türkiye’nin Avrupalılaşma süreci hızlanmış fakat zaman içerisinde dalgalı bir seyir izlemiştir. 1999’dan sonraki üç yıl içerisinde pasif bir şekilde reformlara başlayan Ankara, 2002 seçimleri sonrasında Avrupalılaşma reformlarını hızlandırmıştır. 2005 yılı itibarı ile reformlar hız kesmiş ama yine de yamalı bir şekilde olsa da devam etmiştir. Orta ve Doğu Avrupa ülkelerinin Avrupalılaşma sürecini analiz eden çalışmaların başarısını ortaya koydukları Dış Teşvik Modeli artan uygulama maliyetleri ve kredibilitesi düşen Avrupa Birliği koşulluluk ilkesi çerçevesinde 2005 sonrası Türkiye’de devam eden reformları açıklamada yetersiz kalmıştır. Bu araştırma probleminden yola çıkan makale Türkiye’nin deneyimlediği bu dalgalı süreci Dış Teşvik Modeli’nin bel kemiğini oluşturan Avrupa Birliği koşulluluk ilkesi ve ulusal uygulama maliyetlerine maruz kalan veto odakları çerçevesinde incelemekte ve yetersiz kaldığı noktada reformların itici gücü olabilecek etkenleri incelemektedir. Makale Avrupa Birliği koşulluluk ilkesinin reformları itici etkisinin aday ülkelerin Avrupalılaşma sürecindeki tek etken olamayacağı, özellikle iç etkenlerin Avrupalılaşmaya olumlu etki yapabileceğidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Avrupalılaşma, AB Koşulluluk İlkesi, Türkiye, Ulusal

Kaynakça

• Alessandri, E. (2010). Democratization and Europeanization in Turkey After the September 12 Referandum. Insight Turkey, 12(4), 23-30.
• AKP Parti Programı (2001). Erişim: 12 Şubat 2009, http://eng.akparti.org.tr/english/partyprogramme.html
• AKP Seçim Manifestosu (2002). Erişim: 12 Şubat 2009, http://www.akparti.org.tr/tbmm/belge.asp
• Avcı, G. (2011). The Justice and Development Party and the EU: Political Pragmatism in a Changing Environment. South European Society and Politics, 16(3), 409-421.
• Avrupa Komisyonu (2004). Türkiye 2004 İlerleme Raporu, SEC (2004)1201 final, Brüksel.
• Avrupa Komisyonu (2006). Türkiye 2006 İlerleme Raporu, SEC (2006)1390, Brüksel.
• Avrupa Komisyonu (2009). Türkiye 2009 İlerleme Raporu, SWD (2009)1334 final, Brüksel.
• Avrupa Komisyonu (2012). Türkiye 2012 İlerleme Raporu, SWD (2012)336 final, Brüksel.
• Avrupa Komisyonu (2013). Türkiye 2013 İlerleme Raporu, SWD (2013)417 final, Brüksel.
• Aybet, G. (2006). Turkey and the EU after the First Year of Negotiations: Reconciling Internal and External Policy Challenges. Security Dialogue, 37(4), 529–549.
• Aydın, S. ve Keyman, F. E. (2004). European Integration and the Transformation of Turkish Democracy. Centre for European Policy Studies EU-Turkey Working Papers, 2.
• Aydın, S. ve Çarkoğlu, A. (2006). EU Conditionality and Democratic Rule of Law in Turkey. Sabancı Üniversitesi, Stanford Üniversitesi ve Floransa Üniversitesi’nin hazırlamış olduğu çalıştayda sunulan tebliğ. 10-11 Aralık 2006, Istanbul.
• Aydın-Düzgit, S. ve Keyman, F. E. (2007). ‘Europeanization, democratization and human rights in Turkey’, Esra LaGro ve Knud Erik Jorgensen (der.), Turkey and the European Union Prospects for a Difficult Encounter. Londra: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Aydın-Düzgit, S. ve Keyman F. E. (2013). EU-Turkey Relations and the Stagnation of Turkish Democracy. Global Turkey in Europe Policy Briefs, 6.
• Bahcheli, T. ve Noel, S. (2011). ‘The justice and development party and the Kurdish question’, Marlies Casier ve Joost Jongerden (der.), Nationalisms and Politics in Turkey Political Islam, Kemalism and the Kurdish Issue. Londra ve New York: Routledge. ‘Balyoz Davası Nedir?’. (21 Eylül 2012), Bianet.
• Bardakçı, M. (2010). Turkish Parties’ Positions Towards the EU: Between Europhilia and Europhobia. Romanian Journal of European Affairs, 10(4), 26–41.
• Bertelsmann Stiftung (2006). Bertelsmann Transformation Index Turkey Country Report. Erişim: 13 Mayıs 2011, http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xbcr/SIDC13A32F5- 58D22B5A/bst_engl/Turkey.pdf
• Bertelsmann Stiftung (2008). Bertelsmann Transformation Index Turkey Country Report. Erişim: 13 Mayıs 2011, http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xbcr/SID27B847D2- 25110A11/bst/Turkey.pdf MARMARA AVRUPA ARAŞTIRMALARI DERGİSİ 81
• Bertelsmann Stiftung (2010). Bertelsmann Transformation Index Turkey Country Report. Erişim: 13 Mayıs 2011, http://www.btiproject.de/fileadmin/Inhalte/reports/2010/pdf/BTI%202010%20Turkey.p df
• Börzel, T.A. (2000). Why there is no ‘southern problem’. On environmental leaders and laggards in the European union. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(1), 141–162.
• Börzel, T.A. (2010). The Transformative Power of Europe Reloaded: The Limits of External Europeanization. KFG Working Paper Series, 11, Freie Universität Berlin. Börzel, T. A. ve Risse, T. (2000). When Europe Hits Home: Europeanization and Domestic Change. European Integration Online Papers, 4(15).
• Börzel, T. A. and Soyaltın, D. (2012). Europeanization in Turkey Stretching a Concept to its Limits. KFG Working Paper Series, 36, Freie Universität Berlin.
• Çınar, M. (2011). ‘Turkey’s Present Ancien Régime and the Justice and Development Party’, Marlies Casier and Joost Jongerden (der.), Nationalisms and Politics in Turkey Political Islam, Kemalism and the Kurdish issue. Londra ve New York: Routledge, 14-27.
• CIVICUS (2005). Civil Society in Turkey: An Era of Transition. CIVICUS Civil Society Index Country Report for Turkey.
• CIVICUS (2010) Civil Society in Turkey: At a Turning Point. CIVICUS Civil Society Index Project Analytical Country Report for Turkey II.
• Cizre, Ü. (2011). Disentangling the Threats of Civil-Military Relations in Turkey: Promises and Perils. Mediterranean Quarterly, 22(2), 57-75. Cizre, Ü. ve Walker, J. (2010). Conceiving the New Turkey after Ergenekon. International Spectator, 45(1), 89-98.
• Dağı, I. (2006). The justice and development party: Identity, politics, and human rights discourse in the search for security and legitimacy, Hakan Yavuz (der.), The Emergence of a New Turkey Democracy and the AK Parti. Salt Lake City, Utah: The University of Utah Press.
• Diez, T., Agnantopoulos, A. ve Kaliber, A. (2005). File: Turkey, Europeanization and Civil Society: Introduction. South European Society and Politics, 10 (1), 1–15.
• Gençkaya, Ö. F. ve Özbudun, E. (2009). Democratization and the Politics of ConstitutionMaking in Turkey, Budapeşte ve New York: Central European University Press.
• Grigoriadis, I. N. (2008). On the Europeanization of minority rights protection: Comparing the cases of Greece and Turkey. Mediterranean Politics, 13(1), 23-41.
• Grigoriadis, I. N. (2009). Trials of Europeanization Turkish Political Culture and the European Union, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gürsoy, Y. (2011). The impact of EU-driven reforms on the political autonomy of the Turkish military. South European Society and Politics, 16(2), 293–308. ‘Erdoğan: Kürtaj yasasını çıkartacağız [Erdoğan: We will enact the abortion law]’. (29 Mayıs 2012), Radikal.
• 82 TÜRKİYE, AVRUPALILAŞMA VE YEREL DEĞİŞİM
• Freedom House (2011). Countries at the Crossroads – Turkey.
• Freedom House (2013). Freedom in the World – Turkey.
• Freedom House (2014). Freedom in the World – Turkey. Heper, M. ve Yıldırım, S. (2011). Revisiting Civil Society in Turkey. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 11(1), 1-18.
• İçduygu, A. (2011). Interacting Actors: The EU and Civil Society in Turkey, South European Society and Politics, 16(3), 381–394.
• Kelley, J. (2004). Ethnic Politics in Europe: The Power of Norms and Incentives, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Ketola, M. (2012). A Gap in the Bridge? European Union Civil Society Financial Assistance in Turkey. European Journal of Development Research, 24(1), 89-104. Keyman, F. E. ve Öniş, Z. (2007). Turkish Politics in a Changing World: Global Dynamics and Domestic Transformations, İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Kubicek, P. (2005) The European Union and Grassroots Democratization in Turkey. Turkish Studies, 6 (3), 361–377.
• Kumbaracıbaşı A. C. (2009). Turkish Politics and the Rise of the AKP, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
• Liaras, E. (2009). Turkey’s Party System and the Paucity of Minority Policy Reform, EUI Working Papers RSCAS, 56, San Domenico di Fiesole.
• Magen, A. ve Morlino, L. (der.) (2009). International Actors, Democratisation and the Rule of Law Anchoring Democracy?, Londra ve New York: Routledge.
• Narbone, L. ve Tocci, N. (2007). Running around in circles? The cyclical relationship between Turkey and the European Union. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 9(3), 233–245.
• Oğuzlu, H. T. (2012). Turkey and the European Union: Europeanization Without Membership. Turkish Studies, 13(2), 229–243. ‘Org. Büyükanıt’ın Konușmasının Tam Metni [The Full Text of Chief of General Staff
• Büyükanıt’s Speech]’. (13 Nisan 2007), NTVMSNBC. Öniş, Z. (2003). ‘Domestic Politics, International Norms and Challenges to the State: Turkey-EU Relations in the Post-Helsinki Era’, Ali Çarkoğlu and Barry Rubin (der.), Turkey and the European Union Domestic Politics, Economic Integration and International Dynamics. Londra ve Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 9-34.
• Öniş, Z. (2009). Conservative globalism at the crossroads: The justice and development party and the thorny path to democratic consolidation in Turkey. Mediterranean Politics, 14(1), 21–40.
• Öniş, Z. (2010). Contesting for the “Center”: Domestic Politics, Identity Conflicts and the Controversy Over EU Membership in Turkey, Istanbul Bilgi University European Institute Working Papers, 2.
• Özbilgin, O. (24 Mayıs 2013). Turkey bans alcohol advertising and curbs sales. Reuters. MARMARA AVRUPA ARAŞTIRMALARI DERGİSİ 83
• Noutcheva, G. ve Aydın-Düzgit, S. (2012). Lost in Europeanisation: The Western Balkans and Turkey. West European Politics, 35(1), 59–78.
• Patton, M. J. (2007). AKP reform fatigue in Turkey: What has happened to the EU process?. Mediterranean Politics, 12(3), 339–358.
• Polat, R. K. (2009). The 2007 Parliamentary Elections in Turkey: Between Securitisation and Desecuritisation. Parliamentary Affairs, 62(1), 129-148.
• Posch, W. (2007). Crisis in Turkey: Just Another Bump on the Road to Europe?. Institute for Security Studies Occassional Paper, 67.
• Pridham, G. (1994). National Environmental Policy-Making in the European Framework: Spain, Greece and Italy in Comparison. Regional Politics and Policy, 4(1), 80-101.
• Pridham, G. (2005). Designing Democracy: EU Enlargement and Regime Change in PostCommunist Europe, Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Saatçioğlu, B. (2009). How Closely Does the European Union’s Membership Conditionality Reflect the Copenhagen Criteria? Insights from Turkey. Turkish Studies, 10(4), 559– 576.
• Schimmelfennig, F. (2009). Entrapped Again: The Way to EU Membership Negotiations with Turkey. International Politics, 46 (4), 413–431.
• Schimmelfenning, F. ve Sedelmeier, U. (Der.) (2005). The Europeanisation of Central and Eastern Europe, Ithaca ve Londra: Cornell University Press.
• Schimmelfennig, F., Engert, S. ve Knobel, H. (2003). Costs, Commitment and Compliance: The Impact of EU Democratic Conditionality on Latvia, Slovakia and Turkey. Journal of Common Market Studies, 41(3), 495-518.
• Sedelmeier, U. (2011). Europeanisation in New and Candidate States. Living Reviews in European Governance, 6(1), 1-52. ‘Sezeryan Yasası Kabul Edildi! [The ceserean law is adopted]’. (4 Haziran 2012), Haber3.
• Somer, M. (2011). ‘Democratization, Clashing Narratives, and ‘Twin Tolerations’ between Islamic-Conservative and Pro-Secular Actors’, Marlies Casier and Joost Jongerden (der.), Nationalisms and Politics in Turkey Political Islam, Kemalism and the Kurdish issue. Londra ve New York: Routledge, 28-47.
• Sugden, J. (2004). ‘Leverage in theory and practice: Human rights and Turkey’s EU candidacy’, Mehmet Uğur ve Nergis Canefe (der.), Turkey and European Integration Accession Prospects and Issues. Londra ve New York: Routledge.
• Tocci, N. (2005). Europeanization in Turkey: Trigger or Anchor for Reforms?. South European Society and Politics, 10(1), 73–83.
• Toktaş, Ş. ve Kurt, Ü. (2010). The Turkish Military’s Autonomy, JDP Rule and the EU Reform Process in the 2000s: An Assessment of the Turkish Version of Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DECAF). Turkish Studies, 11(3), 387–403. ‘Turkey drops anti-abortion legislation'. (22 June 2012), Aljazeera.
• Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri (27 Nisan 2007). Basın Açıklamaları, Ankara. Türkmen, F. (2008). The European Union and Democratization in Turkey: The Role of the Elites, Human Rights Quarterly, 30(1), 146-163.
• 84 TÜRKİYE, AVRUPALILAŞMA VE YEREL DEĞİŞİM
• Uğur, M. (2010). Open-ended membership prospect and commitment credibility: Explaining the deadlock in EU-Turkey accession negotiations. Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(4), 967-991.
• Ulusoy, K. (2007). Turkey’s Reform Effort Reconsidered, 1987–2004. Democratization, 14(3), 472 – 490.
• Vachudova, M. A. (2005). Europe Undivided: Democracy, Leverage and Integration after Communism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Yılmaz, G. (2014a). EU Conditionality is not the Only Game in Town! Domestic Drivers of Turkey’s Europeanization. Turkish Studies, 15(2), 303-321.
• Yılmaz, G. (2014b). It Is Pull-and-Push That Matters for External Europeanization! Explaining Minority Policy Change in Turkey. Mediterranean Politics, 19(2), 238-258.
• Yılmaz, G. ve Soyaltın, D. (2014). Zooming into the “Domestic” in Europeanization: Promotion of Minority Rights and Fight Against Corruption in Turkey. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 16(1), 11-29.