Masarykova univerzita V brně Fakulta sociálních studií
Download 370.43 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 3.5.2 Nationalist Action Party
- 3.5.3 Justice and Development Party
- 3.5.4 The party system
3.5 Europeanization analyses3.5.1 Republican People’s PartyWe will start the analysis of CHP’s Europeanization by analyzing its programmatic changes. The party does not devote too much space and focus in their programs to EU related topics, neither in particular policy areas, nor in the foreign policy section. Just the election program from 2007 shows the party’s interest in the EU issue. That is, considering the members’ rhetoric, at least a bewildering fact. In the parts of program where the EU is concerned, attention is being paid primarily to a prospective Turkey’s membership, and the party expresses its dissatisfaction with the current state of negotiations and basically, the EU’s attitude towards Turkey. We can presume their main fears concerning EU, which are the second-rate status instead of full membership and the inadequate respect to Turkey and its sovereignty. This seems to correspond with the general posture, which can be more or less regarded as in principle a reaction on AKP’s EU proactive politics. In terms of organization, we see that no significant changes took place in the examined periods in the context of the prospect of the EU membership. As it was mentioned, one representative has been sent to Brussels to communicate the membership strategy, but as it is not a permanent representative, we can not assume his significant influence on the party structure or functioning. Neither the participation on European or International level does not have a remarkable influence on the party organization, there was not created any committee or representative that would be responsible for the contact with the other party affiliations. Since in this chapter we consider the period of 2002 to 2008, which is characterized by majority government of the AKP, the relations of the party and the government are set throughout clearly. As was mentioned above, CHP rather reacts on AKP’s, respectively government’s European policy than that it would create its own initiatives. On the contrary, it rejects some of the reforms as not profitable for the country. On the basis of the described CHP’s approach to the EU and Turkey’s membership, we can try to classify the party in the context of Conti and Verzichelli typology. If we emanate from the statements written in the party’s program, then we could assume they fall into the category of functional Europeanism, as they support the integration as far as it is profitable for the national or party interests. Satisfying these interests is also the condition for other continuing or deepening of integration for the party. However, their rhetoric, or reaction to the steps taken by the AKP towards the European issues, differs markedly.52 That could be caused just by its opposition in the government in recent years, but as we can also see to what extent the EU topic is elaborated in their program, we can affirm that this rhetoric is of an important impact on the party’s actual stance. According to these facts, I would rather allocate it to the group of soft Euroskepticism – as the party expresses the feelings that national interests are threatened by the contemporary form of the EU, but at the same time willing to reform it. When we consider the statements about the EU, and membership “under some conditions”, this classifying would according to me be suitable to CHP. 3.5.2 Nationalist Action PartyWhen observing the EU issues in the MHP’s programmatics, we see that the party mentions this topic in its basic program as well as in the election program. Similarly to the CHP they stress the fact they do not oppose the EU or the membership, but also mention several factors that are not satisfying them in this context. It is lack of respect from the EU side and opposing to the second-class membership. As well as CHP it does not build the EU related topic into concrete policy areas, and comment it just as a separate issue or as a part of foreign policy. In the organizational structure we can not observe any changes. The party has not created any specialized committees or positions responsible for dealing with the EU issues. It does not participate in any international association, which implies it does not create any ties beyond the national structure. For the relations with the government we can claim it has a similar character as was described in the CHP case. The MHP is in opposition since the last elections, and also we can see that they refuse a considerable number or reforms that AKP is introducing to meet the Copenhagen criteria (similarly, in the government of 1999 to 2002 the Motherland Party was suggesting the reforms and the MHP opposed these harmonization packages). Generally we can observe that the party emphasizes mainly the economic stance when concerning the EU and Turkey’s membership. The important thing is the strong discontent with the current situation, mistrust to the EU in terms of accepting Turkey as a full member in the future and the need to be treated equally with the EU states. Although in the programs we read that the party supports Turkey’s membership and assumes it is profitable for both sides, we can (again, similarly to the CHP) also observe some discrepancies between what is written and what is the actual quotidian party’s rhetoric and practice. As they express even more reproaches to the EU issue than CHP, mainly to the current situation, to the position of Turkey in the negotiations and to the fact that EU makes the Cyprus issue a condition for membership, I would classify it also as a soft Euroskeptic party. 3.5.3 Justice and Development PartyIn the party programmatics we can observe significant influence of the EU topic on both the basic and election programs. Since the party was established just at the beginning of the examined period and its programs encompasses the topic from the very outset, we can not claim the programmatics was changed considerably but rather that the Europeanization influenced the party programmatics since it was created. The AK Party mentions the EU issue not just in separate domain or in context of foreign policy, but also includes it in the areas of policies of economic or social matters. As the AKP is in the surveyed period the governing party, its attitude can be also observed in the government’s programs, statements and activities. From the organizational point of view, we can mention the position which exists in the party’s Central Executive Committee dealing with and responsible for communication with EU member countries, civil society organizations and establishment of foreign representation offices of the AKP or forming of organizational structures abroad. Generally we can say that this position was not created especially because of the EU influence, rather that the scope of the duties was broadened with the EU issues. Since this position serves also for the communication with the party’s structures abroad or on different levels, we can assume that the party tries to keep the ties with structures beyond the national system. The relations with the government are quite clearly set in the case of AKP, as it has been in all the surveyed period the majority governing party. Therefore basically, the party’s opinions appeared also in the governments’ programs and statements and no significant discrepancy between the governments’ activities and party’s beliefs can be observed. In all the statements, rhetoric and programs of the AK Party we see strong commitment to follow the EU-backed reforms and to promote Turkey’s membership in the EU as a political goal. Also the AKP members stress that the reforms that it introduces are not adopted to satisfy the EU but on the contrary, they are approved for the pursuit of process of democratization and transformation of Turkish political as well as economic system. Therefore, while being the party in power, they approved a considerable number of reforms in behalf of reaching this goal. On grounds of the above stated evidence we could classify the party in the Conti and Verzichelli typology as identitarian Europeanist party. They support the transition of competency to supranational level and continuing in integration is one of the basic goals for the party. 3.5.4 The party systemFor analyzing the functioning and possible changes of political party system in terms of Europeanization, we can follow Ladrech’s analytical framework introduced in the first chapter. I will mainly concentrate on the patterns of party competition and relations in the political arena. As it was mentioned, the significant features of the party system were high volatility, fragmentation and regionalization. In 2002, however, just two parties managed to get their representatives to National Assembly, one of which occurred just one year before these elections. In 2007 for the first time in the era of multi-party system in Turkey, most of the voters favored in elections the actual ruling party, the Justice and Development Party, and no significant regional representation won places in the Parliament. Some of these facts seem to oppose the attributes of the system that prevailed for long time (as described above). The question that emerges is if there is any influence of Europeanization perceptible in this case. In the first period (1999-2002) I would say the prevalent character of the system remained the same. At the same time it is the period when the EU issue itself started to play a significant role (for example first harmonization packages were approved) and the parties started to profile themselves more on this topic. However, it did not become a significant subject for the elections or for the public discussion, therefore we can not claim that emerging of the AKP as a new party in power for the period 2002-2007 was a result of its Euro-optimistic attitude. This is also clear when we consider the conditions under which the early elections of 2002 took place. The determinant factors were economic and social policies and voters’ willingness to change the ruling government. The EU issues were not widely discussed before the elections, thus the voters did not have a real and concrete vision of the possible influence of adopting EU-driven political agenda into the Turkish political system. The elections were not affected by the EU topics (as first because of perceived higher importance of clearly domestic problems and as second the because of the parties’ fear of loosing the voters, as happened in the end to ANAP) despite the high public support of the EU at that time. In the following periods, the EU stance of the governing party was highly discernible, and we can also observe counter denotations on this area starting to appear in the opposition party – CHP. In this period the most significant EU-driven reforms were approved and I assume that in this context we can already interpret the influence of the EU issue as apparent in the parties’ competition. The successive early elections in 2007 were again highly influenced by the actual domestic political situation and their result could be presented as a support expressed to the ruling party in the reforms which it put through, and which were in that sense perceived by the public as a part of the process of democratization of the country. But on the other hand these elections brought the system into a paradox situation when the voters, allegedly ceasing to support the EU on such a high level as in the previous periods, elected again the party which is the most adherent to the West and the EU particularly. In sum, we can claim that the characters of the party system and to a certain extent also the elections were affected by Europeanization in partial or more exactly in indirect way. The new formed, EU-oriented party that came to system in 2002 made the EU an emphasized issue, which led also its opponent(s) to clarify their attitude towards this matter. Europeanization itself did not entail the change of pattern of competition but approving the reforms required by the EU and this way coming along with the democratization process in this period eventuated in change of the prevailing level of volatility, fragmentation and also regionalization which was apparent in the elections of 2007.
Directory: 52095 52095 -> Key Concept 1 Technological advances, large-scale production methods, and the opening of new markets encouraged the rise of industrial capitalism in the United States Download 370.43 Kb. Share with your friends:
|