week 2- part 1 turkey in the orbit of globalization
TRANSCRIPT
Week 2- Part 1
Turkey in the orbit of Globalization
Structural factors (Traditional inputs of continuity) on TFP
• Important/sensitive geostrategic position: national security concerns have always been paramount in fp considerations.
• Security thinking: Shaped by the historical experiences of foreign intervention and economic dependency.
• An identity crisis: Laicism vs.Islam , Turkisness vs.Ethnicity
• Self-desire to become an economically developed country
• The legality of its actions in the international arena• International image
THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF TFP
1) Maintenance of the Status-Quo (Preserving Existing Frontiers and Balance)
2) Westernism or Modernization
The MILITARY,POLITICAL, and ECONOMIC BACKGROUND of TFP
1) Strategic Medium Power (SMP)
2) The Security Factor of FP
3) The Political Economy of FP
Outline
1. The Internationl Enviroment and Dynamics 1.1. International Developments
1.1.1.The New Political-Economic Order 1.2.1. The Disintegration of the USSR
1.2.Regional Developments (The Balkans, the Middle East , FSU)2. The Domestic Enviroment and Dynanmics
2.1. The Economy (The Structural Adjustment Programs & Privitizations)
2.2. The Politics (Islamism, Kurdish Seperatism, the Deep State)3. The Foreign Policy of the Period
3.1.Foreign Policy against the Bakcgrop of Globalization (The Debt Spiral, An Asymetrical Rlt with the EU
3.2. The Aftermath of the USSR (Fluctuations in Turkey’s Importance, Human rights/Armenian Question, the Sevres Sydrome)
1988: Nagorno-Karabakh region seeks to become part of Armenia. 1990: German reunification. Ethnic strife between Armenians and Azeris escalates. 1991: Gulf War ends in US withdrawal Dissolution of the Soviet Union and independence of 15 former Soviet republics. Boris Yeltsin becomes the first President of the Russian Federation. Ten-Day War in Slovenia begins the Yugoslav Wars. 1992: Maastricht Treaty creates the European Union. Bill Clinton is elected President of the United States. Bosnian War begins. Hostilities develop into full-scale war over Karabakh. 1993: Velvet divorce between Czech Republic and Slovakia. Oslo accords end 1993 World Trade Center bombing.1994: First Chechen War begins. Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh sign a ceasefire. Ethnic Armenians remain in control of Karabakh and a swathe of Azerbaijani territory around it1995: Establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Srebrenica massacre. NATO bombing raids in Bosnia end the Bosnian War; Dayton Accords signed. Assassination of Yitzhak Rabin. Austria, Finland and Sweden join the European Union.1996: First Chechen War ends. The Taliban government takes control of Afghanistan.1997: Tony Blair becomes Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong from UK to China. 1998: Osama bin Laden publishes a fatwa against the West. Kenya and Tanzania bombings. Good Friday Agreement brings an end to the troubles in Northern Ireland. 1999: Euro is introduced. Kosovo War ends the Yugoslav Wars. Second Chechen Warand Second Liberian Civil War begin.
The End of Bi-Polar System : The Post-Cold War Period
New World Order ? • The collapse of the SU created a massive shift in the international
balance of power and left the US as the sole remaining
superpower.
• Early conflicts like the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait that led to the Gulf
War and clashes in the former Yugoslavia brought the US together
with new allies ( including Russia) to solve international problems.
• President G. H. W. Bush defined the shift as a "New World Order“
• At this unipolar moment, whether the US should work to promote
security/stability ( i.e.prevent ethnic conlicts , proliferation) or
democracy or open markets ?
Contending Visions on the Post-Cold War: “End of History” or “Clash of Civilizations” ?
“ What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War,
or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the
end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's
ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal
democracy as the final form of human government.” The End of
History
“…The fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily
ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the
dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most
powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will
occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of
civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will
be the battle lines of the future.” The Clash of Civilizations
…the forces of Jihad and the forces of McWorld operate with equal strength in opposite directions, the one driven by hatreds, the other by universalizing markets, the one re-creating ancient subnational and ethnic borders from within, the other making national borders porous from without. They have one thing in common: neither offers much hope to citizens looking for practical ways to govern themselves democratically.
NATO: 'out of area' or out of business?
The reason why this did not happen is because what defines NATO is not only what it is against, but also what it is for. That is why the basis of NATO is more than a military alliance, it is a security community built on a basis of shared values and norms.(G.Aybet,2012,21)
The multilateral process initiated in Helsinki in 1975 was further developed during the second CSCE Summit, held in Paris in November 1990, which laid the foundations of the institutionalization process and defined a common democratic foundation for all participating states in a new Europe free of dividing lines. The Charter of Paris enshrines a set of common values affirming the direct relevance to security not only of the respect for human rights but also of democratic governance and a free market economy.
‘After the Paris Charter of CSCE ( later OSCE) minority rights ceased to be viewed as a matter pertaining to the domestic jurisdiction of a particular country and became the legitimate concern of the international community’
Accession criteria to the EU (Copenhagen criteria)
Any country seeking membership of the European Union (EU) must conform to the conditions set out by Article 49 and the principles laid down in Article 6(1) of the Treaty on European Union. Relevant criteria were established by the Copenhagen European Council in 1993 and strengthened by the Madrid European Council in 1995.
To join the EU, a new Member State must meet three criteria:
political: stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities; economic: existence of a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union; acceptance of the Community acquis: ability to take on the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
For the European Council to decide to open negotiations, the political criterion must be satisfied.
Any country that wishes to join the Union must meet the accession criteria. The pre-accession strategy and accession negotiations provide the necessary framework and instruments.
To be continued with Part 2