Search

Turkish foreign policy has dramatically transformed over the last two decades. In the first decade of the Justice and Development Party's (AKP) rule, the 'logic of interdependence' constituted the driving motive of Turkish foreign policy. In the second decade, however, the 'logic of interdependence' and the soft power-driven 'mediator-integrator' role were gradually replaced with a quest for 'strategic autonomy', accompanied by interventionism, unilateralism and coercive diplomacy. This article explores the causes of this dramatic shift. We argue that 'strategic autonomy', which goes beyond a moderate level of status-seeking compatible with Turkey's material power credentials, has a double connotation in the Turkish context. First, it constitutes a framework for the Turkish ruling elite to align with the non-western great powers and balance the US-led hierarchical order. Second, and more importantly, it serves as a legitimating foreign policy discourse for the government to mobilize its electoral base at home, fragment opposition and accrue popular support. We conclude that the search for autonomy from its western allies and the move towards the Russia-China axis has led to Turkey's isolation and permitted the emergence of new forms of dependence.

The 2008 global economic crisis galvanized the debate on neo-developmentalism as the pendulum of economic thinking began to swing away from neoliberalism. The current shift in the modalities of market governance mainly deals with the ways through which industrial policies can be crafted in a more open-economy setting. Accordingly, the post-crisis literature turns a keen eye on the state's developmental role in the research and development (R;D) sector in an age of bit-driven' global political economy. On that note, the nature, properties, and limits of state policies of emerging powers in this particular realm are becoming increasingly central but remain an understudied theme. This article discusses the R;D policies of Turkey from a state capacity perspective and questions the rationale of those policies by linking the state's transformative capacity to the discussions on distributive pressures. Drawing on 21 in-depth semi-structured interviews, this article assesses Turkey's R;D policies.

[No abstract available]

The 2008 global economic crisis galvanized the debate on neo-developmentalism as the pendulum of economic thinking began to swing away from neoliberalism. The current shift in the modalities of market governance mainly deals with the ways through which industrial policies can be crafted in a more open-economy setting. Accordingly, the post-crisis literature turns a keen eye on the state's developmental role in the research and development (R;D) sector in an age of bit-driven' global political economy. On that note, the nature, properties, and limits of state policies of emerging powers in this particular realm are becoming increasingly central but remain an understudied theme. This article discusses the R;D policies of Turkey from a state capacity perspective and questions the rationale of those policies by linking the state's transformative capacity to the discussions on distributive pressures. Drawing on 21 in-depth semi-structured interviews, this article assesses Turkey's R;D policies.

Turkish foreign policy has dramatically transformed over the last two decades. In the first decade of the Justice and Development Party's (AKP) rule, the 'logic of interdependence' constituted the driving motive of Turkish foreign policy. In the second decade, however, the 'logic of interdependence' and the soft power-driven 'mediator-integrator' role were gradually replaced with a quest for 'strategic autonomy', accompanied by interventionism, unilateralism and coercive diplomacy. This article explores the causes of this dramatic shift. We argue that 'strategic autonomy', which goes beyond a moderate level of status-seeking compatible with Turkey's material power credentials, has a double connotation in the Turkish context. First, it constitutes a framework for the Turkish ruling elite to align with the non-western great powers and balance the US-led hierarchical order. Second, and more importantly, it serves as a legitimating foreign policy discourse for the government to mobilize its electoral base at home, fragment opposition and accrue popular support. We conclude that the search for autonomy from its western allies and the move towards the Russia-China axis has led to Turkey's isolation and permitted the emergence of new forms of dependence., NA

The conventional literature on the role of middle powers emphasises the importance of soft power, niche diplomacy and coalition building. This article explores a case of unusual middle power activism with a focus on recent Turkish foreign policy behaviour. It demonstrates how the interaction of domestic politics and external dynamics produced an unusual degree of foreign policy activism, going well beyond conventional middle power behaviour, with the government increasingly employing coercive diplomacy and militaristic methods. We demonstrate that unusual middle power activism in a shifting international order yielded 'populist dividends' to the ruling elite in the short run but led to a 'triple governance crisis' in the economy, politics and foreign policy, with each element feeding into the others in a path-dependent fashion., NA

This article highlights the weakening of the EU's transformative capacity in the broader European periphery in a rapidly shifting global order, with reference to Hungary and Turkey. Although Hungary is an 'insider' and Turkey a relative 'outsider', their recent experiences display strikingly similar patterns, raising important concerns about the EU's leverage. Under the influence of strong nationalist-populist leaders backed by powerful majorities, both countries have been moving in an increasingly illiberal direction, away from well-established EU norms. The article proposes an analytical framework based on a combination of push and pull factors that are driven by changing global political economy dynamics, which explains the EU's declining appeal in its periphery, not only in reference to the internal dynamics of European integration and its multiple crises, but also the appeal of illiberal versions of strategic capitalism employed by rising powers, which serve as reference points for the elites of several states in diverse geographic settings.

This article highlights the weakening of the EU's transformative capacity in the broader European periphery in a rapidly shifting global order, with reference to Hungary and Turkey. Although Hungary is an 'insider' and Turkey a relative 'outsider', their recent experiences display strikingly similar patterns, raising important concerns about the EU's leverage. Under the influence of strong nationalist-populist leaders backed by powerful majorities, both countries have been moving in an increasingly illiberal direction, away from well-established EU norms. The article proposes an analytical framework based on a combination of push and pull factors that are driven by changing global political economy dynamics, which explains the EU's declining appeal in its periphery, not only in reference to the internal dynamics of European integration and its multiple crises, but also the appeal of illiberal versions of strategic capitalism employed by rising powers, which serve as reference points for the elites of several states in diverse geographic settings.

This article sketches an analytical framework to account for new patterns of global governance. We characterize the emergent postliberal international order as a new age of hybridity, which signifies that no overriding set of paradigms dominate global governance. Instead, we have a complex web of competing norms, which creates new opportunities as well as major elements of instability, uncertainty, and anxiety. In the age of hybridity, non-Western great powers (led by China) play an increasingly counter-hegemonic role in shaping new style multilateralism-ontologically fragmented, normatively inconsistent, and institutionally incoherent. We argue that democracy paradox constitutes the fundamental issue at stake in this new age of hybridity. On the one hand, global power transitions seem to enable "democratization of globalization" by opening more space to the hitherto excluded non-Western states to make their voices heard. On the other hand, emerging pluralism in global governance is accompanied by the regression of liberal democracy and spread of illiberalism that enfeeble "globalization of democratization.", NA

This article attempts to understand the properties, potentials and limits of middle-power activism in a changing global order. Extensive debate on the rise of emerging powers notwithstanding, the potential contributions of emerging middle powers in regional and global governance, and the imminent challenges they face in their struggle for an upgraded status in the hierarchy of world politics, is an understudied issue. This study aims to fill this gap by offering a broad conceptual framework for middle-power activism and testing it with reference to the Turkish case. In this context, the authors aim to address the following questions: What kind of roles can emerging middle powers play in a post-hegemonic international system? What are the dynamics, properties and limitations of emerging middle-power activism in regional and global governance? Based on an extensive study of the Turkish case, the authors' central thesis is that emerging middle powers can make important contributions to regional and global governance. Their ultimate impact, however, is not inevitable, but depends on a complementary set of conditions, which are outlined in this study.

The aim of this study is to discuss the impact of social policies in reducing poverty and inequality that were implemented as part of the Post-neoliberal approach. The mentioned policies, conceptualized as social neoliberalism, have started to be employed especially in the developing countries before the 2008 global financial crisis. In this context, Conditional Cash Transfers are considered as means of combating poverty and inequality. In this study, though evaluated as part of neoliberal policies, the social neoliberal practices aiming at improving the status of the poor are discussed with particular reference to the Brazilian case, as an example of a comprehensive Conditional Cash Transfer program, the effects of the Bolsa Família on the poverty and inequality in Brazil are evaluated during 2003-2010. The way in which the 2008 crisis changed the current trend is also examined in this dissertation. Moreover, the degrees of improvement in the state of the poor concerning education and health services, which are compulsory aspects for the claimants to become eligible to receive cash transfers, are discussed as part of this research. This thesis is expected to contribute to the literature by revealing the impact of social neoliberalism on mitigating poverty and inequality in the Brazilian example as a critical case., Bu çalışmanın amacı, 2008 krizi sonrası alternatif ekonomi politikaları bütünü olarak sunulan Post-neoliberal yaklaşım kapsamında teşvik edilen sosyal politikaların yoksulluğu ve eşitsizliği azaltmadaki etkilerini tartışmaktır. Sosyal neoliberalizm olarak kavramsallaştırılan söz konusu politikaların özellikle gelişmekte olan ülkelerde 2008 krizi öncesinde uygulanmaya başlandığı vurgulanmakta, bu bağlamda Şartlı Nakit Transferleri yoksulluk ve eşitsizlikle mücadele aracı olarak ele alınmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, neoliberal ekonomi politikaları benimsenmiş olmasına rağmen yoksullara yönelik sosyal politikalarla onların durumunu iyileştirmeyi hedefleyen sosyal neoliberal uygulamalar, Brezilya örneği üzerinden ele alınmaktadır. Kapsamlı bir Şartlı Nakit Transferi örneği olarak Bolsa Família'nın 2003-2010 yılları arasında ülkenin yoksulluk ve eşitsizlik verileri üzerindeki etkileri değerlendirilerek 2008 krizinin söz konusu verileri nasıl değiştirdiği incelenmektedir. Bununla birlikte, nakit transferleri karşılığında devlet tarafından sunulan eğitim ve sağlık hizmetlerinden yararlanması şart koşulan yoksul kesimin söz konusu alanlarda gösterdiği gelişmeler tartışılmaktadır. Bu tezin, sosyal neoliberalizmin yoksulluk ve eşitsizlikle mücadeledeki rolünü, gösterge etkisi olan bir vaka analizi ile ortaya koyması bakımından literatüre katkı sağlaması beklenmektedir.

[No abstract available]

This study examines the relationship between political regime types and economic development. The existence, direction of determination, the degree of causality and the empirical dimensions of this relationship have been discussed widely in the literature. This thesis has emerged in a context in which the international power structure is undergoing a sea change in favour of emerging countries and the number of illiberal regimes is on the rise at a time that liberal development models have lost appeal in the post-2008 crisis. The main aim of the thesis is to reconsider the relationship between different constellations of political institutions and economic development performance, which have gained importance in a changing world order, and to contribute to the elucidation of causal mechanisms. In this thesis, in order to test the modernization theory's hypothesis based on the fact that economic development will ultimately lead to democracy, the Chinese case will be considered as the most likely case and it will be shown that modernization framework appears to lost its validity. It is also argued that political regime type, as explanatory variable, is one of the determinants of economic development. It is hypothesized in particular that liberal democratic regimes offer a more favourable political-institutional framework than illiberal institutional structures in promoting and sustaining economic development. In this thesis, an institutional analysis is developed from a comparative perspective in order to unveil the causal mechanisms. Liberal democratic regimes increase economic productivity through inclusive institutions as well as through civil rights and freedoms embedded in this institutional framework. They indirectly encourage human and social capital, technological development and inovation and development-enhancing economic reforms, and provide non-market conditions for development through conflict management institutions providing social and political stabilit, Bu çalışmada kurumlar, siyasal rejim tipleri ve ekonomik kalkınma arasındaki ilişki incelenmektedir. Söz konusu ilişkinin varlığı, belirlenim yönü, nedensellik derecesi ve ampirik boyutları literatürde kapsamlı bir şekilde tartışılmaktadır. Bu tez uluslararası güç yapısının yükselen ülkeler lehine değiştiği, illiberal rejimlerin sayısının arttığı ve 2008 Krizi-sonrası dönemde demokrasi-merkezli kalkınma modellerinin cazibesini yitirdiği bir bağlamın ürünü olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. Tezin temel amacı ise küresel güç geçişleri döneminde önem kazanan siyasal rejim-ekonomik kalkınma ilişkisini tekrar ele almak ve nedensellik mekanizmalarının aydınlatılmasına katkı sağlamaktır. Bu tezde Modernleşme kuramının ekonomik kalkınmanın nihai olarak demokrasiye neden olacağı yönündeki varsayımını test etmek amacıyla Çin örneği 'en-olası vaka' analizi olarak ele alınmakta ve bu teorinin günümüzde geçerli olmadığı ortaya konmaktadır. Bu tezde ayrıca siyasal rejim tiplerinin açıklayıcı değişken olarak ekonomik kalkınmayı belirlediği savunulmaktadır. Spesifik olarak ise, ekonomik kalkınma performansı ve sürdürülebilirlik açısından liberal demokratik rejimlerin diğer kurumsal yapılara kıyasla daha elverişli bir çerçeve sunduğu hipotezi ileri sürülmektedir. Tezin bu bölümünde nedensellik mekanizmalarını aydınlatmak amacıyla karşılaştırmalı perspektiften kurumsalcı bir analiz geliştirilmektedir. Liberal demokratik rejimler demokratik, anayasal ve ekonomik kurumlar ve koruduğu sivil hak ve özgürlükler vasıtasıyla ekonomik üretkenliği artırmakta ve dolaylı olarak beşeri sermaye, sosyal sermaye, teknolojik gelişmeyi ve kalkınma-yanlısı ekonomik reformları teşvik etmesi ve toplumsal ve siyasal istikrarı sağlayan çatışma yönetimi kurumları vasıtasıyla kalkınma için gerekli olan piyasa-dışı koşulları sağlamaktadır.

This article attempts to understand the properties, potentials and limits of middle-power activism in a changing global order. Extensive debate on the rise of emerging powers notwithstanding, the potential contributions of emerging middle powers in regional and global governance, and the imminent challenges they face in their struggle for an upgraded status in the hierarchy of world politics, is an understudied issue. This study aims to fill this gap by offering a broad conceptual framework for middle-power activism and testing it with reference to the Turkish case. In this context, the authors aim to address the following questions: What kind of roles can emerging middle powers play in a post-hegemonic international system? What are the dynamics, properties and limitations of emerging middle-power activism in regional and global governance? Based on an extensive study of the Turkish case, the authors' central thesis is that emerging middle powers can make important contributions to regional and global governance. Their ultimate impact, however, is not inevitable, but depends on a complementary set of conditions, which are outlined in this study.

This article highlights the weakening of the EU's transformative capacity in the broader European periphery in a rapidly shifting global order, with reference to Hungary and Turkey. Although Hungary is an 'insider' and Turkey a relative 'outsider', their recent experiences display strikingly similar patterns, raising important concerns about the EU's leverage. Under the influence of strong nationalist-populist leaders backed by powerful majorities, both countries have been moving in an increasingly illiberal direction, away from well-established EU norms. The article proposes an analytical framework based on a combination of push and pull factors that are driven by changing global political economy dynamics, which explains the EU's declining appeal in its periphery, not only in reference to the internal dynamics of European integration and its multiple crises, but also the appeal of illiberal versions of strategic capitalism employed by rising powers, which serve as reference points for the elites of several states in diverse geographic settings., NA