Siyaset Bilimi ve Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü Yayın Koleksiyonu
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12416/249
Browse
Browsing Siyaset Bilimi ve Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü Yayın Koleksiyonu by Issue Date
Now showing 1 - 20 of 139
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Book Part Prens Sabahaddin'in Düşünsel Kaynakları ve Aşırı-Muhafazakar Düşüncenin İthali(Sol Kitap, 2001) Kansu, Aykut; 531Book Part 20. yüzyıl Başı Türk Düşünce Hayatında Liberalizm(2001) Kansu, Aykut; 5315Article Tarih Öğretiminde Tek Kişilik Akademi: Halil İnalcık(2002) Arı, Bülent; Aslantaş, SelimBook Türk Denizcilik Tarihi(2002) Arı, Bülent; Arı, BülentArticle Article The Turkish military's decision to intervene: 12 September 1980(Sage Publications INC, 2003) Demirel, TanelThis article analyzes the Turkish military's decision to take over the government on 12 September 1980. It argues that just because the military believed itself to be a true guardian state, it easily considered intervention a legitimate solution. The perceived threats to the integrity of the Republican state posed by rampant terrorism were the key elements driving soldiers towards intervention. In retrospect, the military's willingness to learn from experience and the role played by civilians in encouraging the military to take over the reins of government are striking features of the whole episode.Book Part Tek Parti Döneminde bir Radikal Muhafazakar Politika Mektebi olarak 'Sosyal Siyaset'(İletişim Yayınları, 2003) Kansu, Aykut; 5315Book Part Early Ottoman Diplomacy: Ad Hoc Period(2004) Arı, BülentThroughout many centuries, until the period of overall reform by Selim III, the Ottoman sultans carried out their relations with foreign rulers in the form of ad hoc diplomacy. Although that was the general practice of the Middle Ages, as early as 1454 the Ottoman court had become acquainted with a residential ambassador in Constantinople. The Venetian bailo permanently resided in Istanbul to carry out relations with the Ottoman Empire as well as secure the interests of Venetian merchants. Nevertheless, successive Ottoman sultans preferred ad hoc diplomacy, and sent out representatives of various ranks as necessity required. In this study, the reasons for such a preference — Ottoman approach to diplomacy, Islamic influences, Ottoman diplomatic protocol and conduct of diplomacy — will be illuminated by the archives, with selected examples from contemporary sources and chronicles.Article The Process of Globalization in International Politics(2004) Akşemsettinoğlu, Gökhan; 104466Uluslararası ilişkilerin çalışma alanı, ulusal sınırları aşan bir karaktere sahip olduğu için, doğasmın "küresel" olduğu kabul edilebilir. Devletler arasındaki ilişkilerin derinleşmesi; uluslararası aktörlerin yayılması ve daha etkili olmaya başlaması; ve siyasi konularda ulusal ve ulusal sınırları aşan olaylardaki farklılıkların ve benzerliklerin anlaşılmaya başlanması, uluslararası ilişkilerin sözkonusu karakteristiğini pekiştirmiştir. Bu da, geleneksel ulus-devlet sisteminden farklı olarak, değişik düzeylerde ulusların sınırlarını aşan yaklaşımların oluşmasına olanak sağlamıştır. Bu çerçevede, devletlerin ve toplumların değişen doğası ve ekonominin sınır ötesi mahiyetinin gelişmesi ve derinleşmesi, uluslararası politika çalışmaları için yeni bir çağ yaratmıştır.Article Early Ottoman-Dutch political and commercial relations after 1612 capitulations(Publ House Bulgarian Acad Sci, 2004) Arı, BülentArticle Dilemmas of Turkish democracy: the encounter between Kemalist laicism and Islamism in 1990s Turkey(2004) Aydın, Ertan; Çolak, YılmazBook Part Secular Conversion As A Turkish Revolutionary Project In The 1930s(Converting Cultures, 2004) Aydın, ErtanBook Adalet Partisi İdeoloji ve Politika(2004) Demirel, Tanel; 4812Adalet Partisi (AP), 27 Mayıs 1960 sonrasından 12 Eylül 1980'e dek Türkiye'nin siyasal hayatına damgasını vuran bir olgu. Bu dönemin önemli bir bölümünde iktidar veya iktidar ortağıydı AP. Dönemin siyasal ve ideolojik tartışmaları içinde mayalanan sağ-sol kutuplaşmasının bir tarafıydı. DP'nin selefi ve ANAP/DYP (hatta devamında AKP) çizgisinin halefi olarak, AP'nin, Türkiye'de sağcılığın inşasını gerçekleştirdiği söylenebilir. Tanel Demirel bu kitapta AP'nin politik ve ideolojik kimliğini analiz ediyor. Partinin, modernleşme, demokrasi ve özgürlükler, kalkınma konularındaki tutumunu; buralardaki gerek 'tutarlılıkların' gerekse 'çifte-standartların' saiklerini ortaya koyuyor. Bu bağlamda, Türkiye'de liberal siyasal ideolojinin açılımlarını ve kısıtlarını sorguluyor. AP'nin siyasal elitten ve Kemalist ideolojiden kopuş noktaları ve onunla devamlılıklar da, çalışmasının önemli bir tartışma eksenini oluşturuyor. Bu yanıyla kitap, Türkiye'nin siyasal kültürü hakkında da zengin gözlemler sunuyor. AP, aynı zamanda, 1960 sonrası Türkiye siyaset tarihinin 'kalıcı' bir figürü olarak Süleyman Demirel'in siyasal liderlik kariyerinin doğuşuna ebelik yaptı. Kitap, Demirel'in görüşlerine ve AP liderliğindeki ideolojik stratejisine dair bir inceleme niteliği taşıyor, aynı zamanda.Book Küreselleşme ve Alternatif Küreselleşme(Phoenix Yayınevi, 2005) Karadeli, Cem; 21252Article Lessons of military regimes and democracy: The Turkish case in a comparative perspective(Sage Publications INC, 2005) Demirel, Tanel; 4812How the nature of an outgoing authoritarian regime affects the advent of a new democracy continues to be a matter of controversy. One line of argument states that in countries which experience repressive and discredited authoritarian regimes, political actors have come to better appreciate the virtues of democracy.(1) It is presumed that gross human-rights violations, widespread state-sponsored terror, and consequent fear and insecurity under military rule might result in attitudinal changes that favor democracy. Those who criticize the democratic regime for a slow decision-making process, or for failing to improve socioeconomic inequalities, for instance, might better understand the difference between military rule and democracy in terms of the protection of basic human rights. Similarly, disappointments caused by the military regimes in the economic and/or military spheres could shatter myths about the effectiveness of military rule or authoritarian decision-making processes. It might become clear, for instance, that the army's combat effectiveness is severely damaged under military dictatorships, or that military officers at the top might be as divided, inefficient, or corrupt as civilian politicians. Such value change, it is further assumed, helps the new democratic regime to withstand considerable strains because the alternative-authoritarian regression-is perceived to be even worse.(2) While not contradicting the idea that a repressive and/or discredited authoritarian regime might lead to a positive view of democracy, other scholars do not consider this factor as very significant. Juan Linz and Alfred Stephan, for instance, argued that the positive attitude toward democracy "as the best alternative for now and for the future, does not require a negative attitude toward the past."(3) Neither in cases of established democracies nor in recent transitions to democracy, they claim, can one find any strong evidence that rejection of the authoritarian past had taken place. Positive assessment of the past regime is not an obstacle to securing the loyalty of citizens to the democratic regime; one can prefer the democratic regime while also believing that an authoritarian regime had its own achievements. In the same vein, emphasizing new incentive structures that came into existence during the transition process as the most important variable affecting behavior of the elites, authors such as Guiseppe Di Palma and Adam Przeworski also came to similar conclusions.(4) This article highlights the point that the nature of an outgoing authoritarian regime has a significant impact on a new democracy. It attempts to do so through discussion of the Turkish case. Turkey's long experience with constitutional and representative government stretches back to the nineteenth century. It has maintained a more-or-less democratic system of government since its first transition to democracy in 1946, despite three military interventions (in 1960, 1971, and 1980). The complex interactions of various factors have helped the Turkish military to protect itself from the damaging consequences associated with military rule. The military interludes in Turkey (1960-61, 1971-73, 1980-83) have hardly been seen by a significant number of civilians as highly repressive, nor have they been conceived as failures in political, economic, or military terms. In all formal transitions, the military has hardly been compelled to exit from power. The thesis advanced here is that this particular experience of a military regime, of authoritarian interludes, has to be taken into account to understand the trials and tribulations of Turkish democracy. The positive evaluation of military rule was one reason why the political actors have found it difficult to regard a democratic regime as "the only game in town."(5) In other words, the Turkish experience has given rise to a conviction that the costs of abandoning democracy are not so high; therefore, in some cases, the military regime might be acceptable. This presumption has, in turn, weakened the civilian resolve to seek remedies within the democratic system. The military regime seemed to offer quick, clear-cut, and less costly solutions. The problem-solving capacity consideration that they might avoid the worst of what the others experienced, the idea that "it will not happen here," appears to have worked as a hindrance for learning in many settings. Few opponents of Allende who looked forward favorably to a military coup were able to foresee that a repressive regime was on its way given Chile's rather noninterventionist military tradition.(71) Civilians invoking a dictatorship generally consider that they might manipulate it, or minimize the possible costs. For these reasons, it would be misleading to talk about political learning as a spontaneous and natural process, or to condemn actors for failing to learn due largely to selfish short-sightedness or individual traits. One should also stress that some perceptions of military rule are the result of careful construction. Those who value democracy should not fail to recall the painful memories of the past; on the other hand, it would be inappropriate to attribute undue weight to an artful deception. If the real experience of the people has not made them receptive to recalling such collective memories, the whole effort might be destined to remain futile. A brief examination of military regimes and their impact on a change of values shows how complex the issues are, and how difficult it is to make straightforward inferences. A recognition of this complexity, however, does not change the fact that political learning, either through interaction or comparison, is critical for sustaining democracy.Book Geçmişten günümüze dönüşen orta Asya ve Kafkasya(Palme Yayıncılık, 2006) Demirağ, Yelda; Karadeli, Cem; 21252Article The rapprochement between Turkey and the EU: The transformation process in the strategic perceptions from the 1999 Helsinki Summit to the 2003 Iraq War(2006) Gözen, Ramazan; 3610This article analyses the rapprochement process between Turkey and the EU which has been developing since the 1999 Helsinki Summit and especially in the wake of the US invasion of Iraq. As a result of differing perceptions of Turkey and the EU in the post Cold War, the Turkey-EU membership process had faced a deep "structural" crisis. However, after some important changes in the years from 1999 to 2003, Turkey and the EU rediscovered, and approached each other in such a way that it is incomparable with the past. The basic character of this rapprochement is the strategic transformation in the perceptions.Article Is The J-Curve Effect Observable In Turkish Agricultural Sector?(2006) Yazıcı, Mehmet; 144084This paper investigates whether or not the J-curve hypothesis holds in Turkish agricultural sector. The analysis is conducted using the model the most commonly employed in j-curve literature. Based on the data covering the period from 1986: I to 1998: III, our results indicate that, following devaluation, agricultural trade balance initially improves, then worsens, and then improves again. This pattern shows that J-curve effect does not exist in Turkish agricultural sector. Another important finding is that devaluation worsens the trade balance of the sector in the long run, a result contradicting with the earlier findings for the Turkish economy as a whole.Book Part
