اقتصاد سیاسی توسعه و دموکراسی در ترکیه در دوران تورگوت اوزال (۱۹۸۳-۱۹۹۳)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دکترای تخصصی سیاست تطبیقی، پژوهشگر دوره پسادکتری سیاست تطبیقی دانشگاه مونیخ، مونیخ، آلمان

چکیده

تجربۀ چرخش سیاسی و اقتصادی ترکیه در دوران زمامداری اوزال، برایندی از آزادسازی اقتصادی و سیاسی بود. برگرفته از این تحول، فهم نسبت توسعۀ اقتصادی و توسعۀ سیاسی در این دوره، پیشران درک تجربۀ ترکیه در سال‌های اخیر است. مطالعۀ چنین نسبتی با آغاز نخست‌وزیری اوزال در سال ۱۹۸۳ اهمیت بیشتری می‌یابد که توسعۀ اقتصادی به‌عنوان «معجزۀ ترکی» و توسعۀ سیاسی به‎عنوان «دموکراسی‌خواهی» ظهور یافت. روند توسعۀ ترکیه در شش دهۀ حکمرانی نظامیان و غیرنظامیان از زمان تکوین جمهوری در سال ۱۹۲۴ تا اوایل دهۀ 1980 به همراه رشد و توسعۀ به‌نسبت پایدار در دوران اوزال، نسبت میان توسعۀ اقتصادی و سیاسی در این زمان را دوچندان نیازمند تحلیل می‌کند. از این‌رو، این پرسش مطرح می‌شود  که چه نسبتی بین رشد و توسعۀ اقتصادی و توسعۀ سیاسی ترکیه در سال‌های ۱۹۸۳ تا ۱۹۹۳ وجود دارد؟ ایدۀ اصلی مقاله این است که عمل‌گرایی اقتصادی، سیاست درهای باز و استخدام سیاست‌ خارجی توسعه‌گرا و اصلاح‌گرایی سیاسی و تشویق فرهنگ سیاسی مشارکتی، سبب اجرای آیین نوعثمانی‌گرای اوزالیستی و احیای موقعیت (فرا)منطقه‌ای ترکیه شد. بنابر یافتۀ پژوهش، شکنندگی توسعۀ اقتصادی بدون توسعۀ سیاسی در جمهوری اول و دوم و ناپایداری توسعۀ سیاسی بدون توسعۀ اقتصادی نشان می‌دهد که تنها با برقراری توازن نسبی توسعه‌ای بین اقتصاد و سیاست، ترکیه شاهد رشد و ثبات ‌پایدار در دوران اوزال بود.      

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Political Economy of Development and Democracy in Turkey during Turgut Ozal (1983-1993)

نویسنده [English]

  • Vahid Zolfaghari
PhD in Comparative Politics, Postdoctoral Researcher in Comparative Politics, University of Munich, Munich, Germany
چکیده [English]

The experience of political and economic transformation in Turkey during Ozal's rule was due to economic and political liberalization. Accordingly, understanding the relationship between economic prosperity and political development in this period is the driving force to the Turkish experience in recent years. The study of such a relationship becomes even more important with the beginning of Ozal's premiership in 1983, when economic development emerged as the “Turkish miracle” and political development as the “pro-democratic wave”. Historically, Turkey has witnessed two stages in the development process during the 1924-1993. Thus, with the domination of left-wing parties and ideas, especially the People's Republican Party, during the 1924-1983, economic growth and development in Turkey was unbalanced. Despite a multi-party system alongside military governments during this period, Turkey has not experienced lasting economic and political stability. But under Ozal's administration, in addition to relatively stable economic growth, Turkey witnessed the promotion of democratic standards and relative political stability.
In fact, Turkey experienced three republican governments in the twentieth century, during which the government was divided four times between dictatorial systems and democracy. Thus, the rule of Generals and dictatorships (1924-1950), the quasi-democratic government (1950-1960), the rule of Generals and the military (1960-1983), and the establishment of a democratic government (1983-1993) were the dominant political order. In parallel with this political arrangement, economic growth and development in Turkey has been also shocked. Thus, despite the independence war and the problems resulting from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire (1938-1924), the economic trend in Turkey, with the exception of the Great Depression (1930-1933), was somewhat balanced. But during the reign of Ismet Inonu (1938) until the intervention of military forces in politics (1960), Turkey has witnessed an economic catastrophe. After the return of troops to the barracks during 1963-1973, Turkey experienced relative economic growth for eleven years. However, the rise of the era of instability and terror (1980-1974) brought the Turkish economy to the brink of crisis. Finally, the rise of Ozal to power in the 1980s brought a period of economic prosperity to Turkey.
By analyzing the trend of development in Turkey during the Ozal’s era, it will be clear that economic and political development was stable. In this period, Kenan Evern as president and Ozal as prime minister were the main actors in Turkish politics until 1989. But Ozal's presidency in 1989, however, coincided with the beginning of the Third Republic in Turkey. Studying Ozal’s administration shows double simultaneous stages of “political-economic development with economic priority and economic pragmatism (1989-1989)” and “political-economic development with the priority of democracy and political reformism (1989-1993)”. The end of seven different periods of rule, from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the beginning of the republic to the transition to an elected government and democracy in the Ozal era, can once again reflect the relationship between economic and political growth and development. During the Ozal era, the trend of economic indicators was upward. This trend followed the implementation of strategic policies of economic stabilization, the employment of extroverted logic, and developmental foreign policy. Moreover, the Turkish economy has emerged from its precarious and fragile position and experienced stability. Furthermore, political development was accompanied with the same trend in this period. So, Not only the freedom of the media and press increased, but political parties were encouraged to operate more freely and competitively. The parliamentary system emerged from a priori dysfunction, and a growing civil society emerged as well. Hence, by paying considerable attention to the Turkish development, the main question is what is the relationship between economic prosperity and political development of Turkey during the 1983-1993?
The main idea of the current paper is that economic growth has been relied on the relative progress of the indicators of democratization and political development. Turkey's experience of economic and political development shows that economic development without democracy has been fragile and unstable. Seventy Years of development in Turkey (1993-1924) shows that although authoritarian military rule suppressed dissent and political obstruction, and elected government, despite political instability and economic crises, laid the groundwork for a relative economic rise before the reign of Turgut Ozal, But the fragility and instability of this process made it more harmful than beneficial for Turkey.
Finally, despite the short period of Ozal's rule (1993-1993) compared to previous periods, the trend of economic growth and development during the Turgut Ozal era was not only progressive and stable, but also the stability of its economic development was higher than the previous periods.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Political Economy Development Democracy Turkey
Alagoz, Emine A. (2021). “Turkey’s Own Pivot to Asia: A Neoclassical Realist Analysis”, Asia Europe Journal, Available from; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10308-021-00603-9.
Alessandari, Emiliano (2010). “The New Turkish Foreign Policy and the Future of Turkey- EU Relations”, Documenti IAI, 100(3): 1-19.
Alper, C. Emre and Ziya Onis (2001). “Financial Globalization, Democratic Deficit and Recurrent Crisis in Emerging Markets: The Turkish Experiences in the Aftermath of Capital Account Liberalization”, Middle Eastern Studies, 29: 1-32.
Aral, Berdal (2001). “Dispensing with Tradition? Turkish Politics and International Society During Ozal Decade”, Middle Eastern Studies, 37(1): 72-88.
Arbay, Doruk (2020). The Modernization of the European Union’s Customs Union with Turkey. Berlin: German Institute for International and Security Affairs. Available from; https://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/arbeitspapiere/CATS_Working_Paper_Nr_5_Doruk_Arbay.pdf.
Arslan, Ali (2005). “The Evaluation of Parliamentary Democracy in Turkey and Turkish Political Elites”, Hoal, 6: 131-141.
Atli, A. (2011). “Business Associations and Turkey’s Foreign Economic Policy: From the Ozal Model to the AKP Period”, Bogazici, Journal Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, 25(2): 171-188. 
Aydin, Mustafa (2005). “Turkish Foreign Policy at the End of Cold War: Roots and Dynamics”, The Turkish Year Book, XXXXVI: 1-16.
Bilgin, Pinar (2008). “The Securityness of Secularism?: The Case of Turkey”, Security Dialogue, 39(6): 593-614.
Burak, Begum (2011). “The Role of the Military in Turkish Politics: To Guard whom and from What?”, European Journal of Economic and Political Studies, 4(1): 143-169.
Chambers, R. (2005). Ideas for Development. London: Earthscan Press.
Chhotray, V., and Stoker, G. (2009). Governance Theory and Practice (A Cross-Disciplinary Approach). London: Palgrave.
Hic, Mükerrem (2009). Turkish Economy and Politics: From 1923, the Foundation of the Republic until 2002. Turkey: Beykent University.
Hine, R. (1996). “Turkey and the European Community: Regional Integration and Economic Convergence”, In S. Togan and V.N. Balasubramanyarn (ed.), The Economy of Turkish since Liberalization, London, Macmillan.
Kalaycioglu, Ersin (2002). “The Motherland Party: The Challenge of Institutionalization in a Charismatic Leader Party”, In M. Heper and B. Rubin (ed.), Political Parties in Turkey, London: Frank Cass Publication.
Karadag, Roy (2010). Neo-Liberal Restructuring in Turkey: From State to Oligarchic Capitalism. Berlin: Max- Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, MPIFG Discussion Paper, www.mpifg.de.
Kirsci, Kemal (2005). “A Friendlier Schengen System As a Tool of Soft Power: The Experience of Turkey”, European Journal of Migration and Law, 7(4): 346-368.
Knudsen, B. (2005). The Role of the Military in Turkish Politics. Available from; www.videt.dk/mili.html.
Laciner, Sedat (2009). “Turgut Ozal Period in Turkish Foreign Policy: Ozalism”, The Journal of Turkish Weekly, 2: 153-205.
Landlau, Jacob M. (1995). Pan-Turkism: From Irredentism to Cooperation. London: Hurst & Co.
Leftwich, A. (1994). “Governance, the State and the Politics of Development”, Development and Change, 25(2): 363-386.
Metin, Heper (2013). “Islam, Conservatism and Democracy in Turkey: Comparing Turgut Ozal and Recep Tayyip Erdogan”, Read Periodicals. Available from; Http://www.readperiodicals.com/201304/2969263811.html#ixzz2YYwuxQlb.
Nilgun, Onder (1990). Turkey's Experience with Corporation. M.A Thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University.
Oniz, Z. (2004). “Turgut Ozal and His Economic Legacy: Turkish Neo-Liberalism in Critical Perspective”, Middle Eastern Studies, 40(4): 113-134.
Ozbudun, E. (2013). Party Politics and Social Cleavages in Turkey. New York: Boulder, Co.  
Pamuk, Sevket (2007). “Economic Change in Twentieth- Century Turkey: is th Glass more than Half Full?”, Working Papers Series at the American University, Available from: http://www.ata.boun.edu.tr/faculty/sevketدرصد20 30. pamuk/publications/2007-cambدرصد20 درصد histدرصدturkey- pamuk. Polf.
Selami, Erdogan and Acar Eray (2012). Legacy of Turgut Ozal and Sustainable Transformation of Turkey with AK Party Governments. 3rd International Symposium on Sustainable Development. 31 May – 1 June. Sarajevo.
Sener, Meltem Yilmaz (2005). The Relationship between Neoliberalism and Authoritarian States: The Case of Turkey. Available from; http://www.rrojasdatabank.info/neolibstate/meltemyilmazsener.pdf.
State Institute of Statistics (SIS) (1996). Statistical Indicators, 1923-1995. Ankara, Publication No.1883.
Steckler, Jordan and Darrin Altman (2011). Strategic Depth or Strategic Drift?: Contending with Turkey's Rapproachment with Syria and the Middle East. America, The Elliott school of international affairs, Institute for Middle East Studies, George Washington University.
Tok, Gul Ceylan (2010). “Capital, Identity and the State: An Analysis of State- Business Relations in Turkey”, Ritsumeikan Annual Review of International Studies, 9: 167-185.
Topal, Aylin (2000). The New Right Ozalism. Turkey: Yuksek Lisans Tezi, Bilkent.
Toussaint, Eric (2020). The World Bank’s Support of the Dictatorship in Turkey. Available from; https://www.cadtm.org/The-World-Bank-s-support-of-the.
United Nations Development Program (2014). Governance for Sustainable Development- Integrating Governance in the Post 2015 Development Framework. Washington: United Nations Publication.
Vicini, Fabio (2020). “Worship is not Everything: Volunteering and Muslim Life in Modern Turkey”, In; Kirstine Sinclair (ed.). Muslim Subjectivities in Global Modernity: Islamic Traditions and the Construction of Modern Muslim Identities, London: Brill. Pp. 97-120.
World Bank (1992). Governance and Development. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Publication.
Yadirgi, Veli (2020). “Turkey’s Kurdish Question in the Era of Neoliberalism”, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 22(6): 793-809.
Yesilada, Birol (1993). “Turkish Foreign Policy toward the Middle East”, In Atila Eralp et al (eds.), The Political and Socioeconomic Transformation of Turkey, London: praeger