9 sonuçlar
Arama Sonuçları
Listeleniyor 1 - 9 / 9
Yayın Perspectives on Turkey’s 2017 presidential referendum(Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs, 2017-03) Celep, ÖdülUntil the 1980s, Turkey’s long-standing parliamentarism had precluded debates about presidentialism. In the following decade, the two right-wing presidents, Ozal and Demirel, briefly promoted presidentialism but failed to initiate a system change. However, the Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) 2002 electoral victory ushered in a new period; after over a decade of political dominance, the AKP, under President Erdogan, began pushing for radical and controversial constitutional changes. The April 16, 2017, constitutional referendum, proposed a new “partisan presidential system” with almost no separation of powers and without any checks and balances. The Nationalist Action Party (MHP), with a split and polarized base, initially objected to systemic constitutional changes, but later not only expressed support for them but became the key actor for the referendum. The entire process of the referendum seems to have produced a new cross-cutting cleavage in Turkish politics.Yayın The republican people's party and Turkey's EU membership(Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis Ltd, 2011-09) Celep, ÖdülAs the founder of the Turkish secular state, the Republican People's Party (CHP) has defended the Westernisation of Turkish society, supported Turkey's acceptance to the EU as a full member, and played crucial roles in Turkey-EU relations. Nevertheless, the CHP's language towards the EU started to sound critical during the 2000s. This study argues that the CHP's seeming scepticism towards the EU is not an ideological U-turn, but a conditional situation. The CHP's Euroscepticism is an outcome of its distrust of the Justice and Development Party government's honesty and ability in implementing the required reforms for Turkey's EU membership.Yayın Turkey's radical right and the Kurdish issue: The MHP's reaction to the "Democratic Opening"(2010-09) Celep, ÖdülTurkey's current government's 'democratic opening' project has led to a series of political discussions regarding the cause and resolve of the Kurdish issue. One major consequence of this debate has been the polarization of opinion between conservatives, represented by the ruling Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi, AKP) and nationalists, represented by the Nationalist Action Party (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi, MHP). This study elaborates on the major reasons for MHP's opposition to AKP on the 'democratic opening.' In doing so, the study examines the historical, ideological distinctions between the two parties and their perception of ethnic and linguistic differences in Turkish society. AKP comes from a political tradition that has been relatively more accommodating towards such differences. On the contrary, MHP has roots in an ethno-nationalist and mono-culturalist ideology, which can be observed in its denial of the identity component of the Kurdish issue.Yayın A contemporary analysis of intra-party democracy in Turkey's political parties(Routledge, 2021-09-03) Celep, ÖdülDespite Turkey's long-standing history of inter-party democracy, its political parties have remained distant from intra-party democracy (IPD). This study investigates the quality and level of Turkey's four big parties' IPD culture with a systematic, quantitative survey data collected from parties' district members in 2015. The data analysis demonstrates that despite its anti-systemic left-radicalism and alleged association with the armed groups, the Kurdish left (HDP) is relatively the most internally democratic party. The centre-left CHP has some edge owing to its limited use of primaries for candidate selection, yet it often comes secondary after the HDP. The two parties of the Turkish-Islamic right, AKP and MHP, are relatively more autocratic, sometimes indistinguishable. Despite the overwhelming effects of the failed coup and the system change with the 2017 referendum, the birth of new splinter parties such as the Good Party (IYI), Future Party and DEVA still points to potential future in-party dynamics that can help improve the IPD culture in Turkey.Yayın The 2019 municipal elections in Turkey: a democratic earthquake(TPQ, 2019-09-08) Celep, ÖdülThe 2019 municipal election had surprising consequences for both the incumbent and opposition actors in Turkey. The main opposition party won both Ankara and Istanbul for the first time in 25 years and swept the coastal provinces of the West and south. The Republican People’s Party’s (CHP) integrative coalition umbrella of secular-urban nationalists and Kurdish voters had a significant impact in winning in the west. Furthermore, the Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) political and electoral survival has come under question for the first time in years. If the CHP-won municipalities can take democratizing steps and perform well in local politics, the balance of power in the existing Turkish party system could radically change in favor of democratizing Turkey in the medium run.Yayın The political causes of party closures in Turkey(Oxford Univ Press, 2014-04) Celep, ÖdülPolitical parties are the integral components of democratic systems. Without political parties, democratic systems cannot function. Yet, not all political parties embrace the existing 'rules of the game'. After the experience with Nazi Germany and fascist Italy during the interwar period, dealing with anti-systemic parties has become a central debate in democratic systems. Even though party closures have taken place in some European democracies, the high frequency of party closures in Turkey raised criticisms that Turkey has become the 'graveyard' of political parties. Since the 1960s, a total of 27 parties were banned in Turkey. The purpose of this article is to provide a comparative analysis of the justifications of party closures in Turkey. In doing so, the article examines two major political causes of party closures on two major party traditions in Turkey: (1) Political Islamists and violation of secularism (separation of religion and politics) and (2) Kurdish left and violation of territorial integrity/national unity.Yayın Can the Kurdish left contribute to Turkey’s democratization?(SETA, 2014-03-01) Celep, ÖdülThe current peace process regarding Turkey’s Kurdish question could pave the way for the normalization of politics and democratization in Turkey if the existing opportunities are not missed. The major actors that represent the Kurdish left in Turkey, the PKK and the HDP (formerly BDP), are all equally significant parts of the peace process. The HDP in particular has the potential to turn into a constructive actor for Turkey’s democratization in the near future. This article argues that the Kurdish left of the democratic, parliamentary stage, lately the HDP, could contribute to Turkey’s democratization if it can fulfill the libertarian left policy space in Turkish politics, which has long been abandoned by all existing political parties.Yayın How can Akşener's Iyi Parti contribute to Turkey's Democracy?(Turkish Policy Quarterly, 2018-12-01) Celep, ÖdülSince the founding of Meral Aksener's Iyi Parti (Good Party) in October 2017, expectations for Turkey's newest political bloc have been mounting, particularly that it can reverse Turkey's march towards an empowered presidential system and return to democratic parliamentarism. This article argues that for the Iyi Parti to play a game-changing role and genuinely contribute to Turkey's democracy, it has to accomplish three missions: (1) leave the radical right, MHP heritage entirely behind once and for all, (2) promote intra-party democracy, and (3) embrace a positive and constructive discourse on the Kurdish issue. However, with a profile just like or at least similar to the former center-right parties of the pre-AKP period, the party is most likely doomed to fail.Yayın The moderation of Turkey's Kurdish left: the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP)(Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis Ltd, 2018-10-20) Celep, ÖdülModeration theory, within the political party context, has often been applied to European Socialists and Christian Democrats, as well as Islamic revivalists in the Muslim world. This article applies moderation theory to the Kurdish left of Turkey, namely the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP). The HDP's electoral breakthrough in June 2015 elections carried the potential for this party to transform itself into a larger and moderate actor. Nevertheless, the repeat elections of November 2015 weakened the HDP's prospects as the ruling AKP won enough seats to reconstitute a single-party government. This article puts forth three major explanations for the recent moderation of the Kurdish left: first, the then ongoing peace (resolution) process between the Turkish government and Kurdish actors; second, the Demirta factor', the personality and politics of Selahattin Demirta, the HDP's co-chair; and finally, the HDP's direct confrontation with President Erdoan in both electoral and political terms in the 2015 general elections.
