English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article argues that the AKP government in Turkey is carrying on a strategy of securitization (Buzan, B., O. Wæver, and J. de Wilde. 1998.  Security: A New Framework for Analysis . Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers) of the Kurdish minority. This strategy, thought to be to the benefit of Turkish democracy and indeed to the goals of the AK party itself, is not conducive to more stability and democracy, but on the contrary is jeopardizing the practice of democratization in Turkey. Following the arguments of Wæver (1995), Roe (2004. “Securitization and Minority Rights: Conditions of Desecuritization.”  Security Dialogue  35 (3):279–94.), and Aradau (2004. “Security and the Democratic Scene: Desecuritization and Emancipation.”  Journal of International Relations and Development  7:388–413) the article also recommends that in order to go back on the path to democracy and stability, Turkey would need either to de-securitize the Kurdish issue, “manage” its securitization with liberal democratic forms, or create politics of universality and recognition, in a new emancipatory course. The importance of this study is based on the fact that the failure or success of democracies, especially in Muslim countries as the Arab Spring has shown, depends often on the exclusion or inclusion of ethnic, religious, or political minorities by the elites (see Egyptian, Iraqi, and Turkish democratic regression versus Tunisian and Indonesian progresses). This study therefore argues that with the securitization of Kurds, among other things, Turkey is going backwards on its path towards a meaningful and substantial democracy. This is particularly worrisome due to Turkey’s membership in NATO – meaning Turkey is not only a member of a collective defense organization but also part of a group of countries that share the values of democracy – and in the process of EU candidacy. Unfortunately, the intensification of the securitization after the end of the ceasefire in summer 2015 coincided with the war in Syria and the refugee crisis in Europe, and so the EU recently reduced the pressure on Turkish domestic issues, representing Turkey as a bastion against DAESH-ISIS expansion and also a buffer zone for millions of refugees. This, indirectly, contributed to the recent re-securitization of the Kurdish minority in Turkey. The methodology followed in this research is based on two main theoretical approaches: the concept of inclusiveness in democracies and the securitization theory, as well as on an historical excursus of the treatment of the Kurdish minority by the Turkish Republic and since the recent events of summer 2015. The article starts with an introduction on the concept of inclusiveness in democracies and on the Turkish history of exclusion of ethnic minorities, specifically the Kurds. Later, following the securitization theory, the study analyzes the past and current securitization of the Kurdish minority as the element that is jeopardizing democratic rule in Turkey. Finally, the article concludes with policy recommendations on desecuritization, management of the securitization process, and emancipatory policies, as the only paths for Turkey to get back on track on its democratization.

From a History of Exclusion to the Securitization of the Kurdish Issue: A Step of Democratic Regression in Turkey