Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

TURKISH STATE AND SYRIAN REFUGEES: CONFLICTING POLICIES AND INSTRUMENTAL RATIONALITY

Year 2022, Volume: 21 Issue: Özel Sayı - Türkiye’nin Göç Siyaseti Özel Sayısı, 316 - 334, 11.11.2022
https://doi.org/10.46928/iticusbe.1182299

Abstract

Purpose: The main aim of this article is to explain the contradictory policies of Turkish state, towards Syrian refugees in the domestic and foreign policy areas, with the theoretical framework of policy inconsistency stemming from the state's "instrumental rationalism" point of view.
Methodology: The data collection method of the research is based on a systematic and comprehensive qualitative analysis of policy documents and online news articles. With a process tracing methodology, the article tests the power of “instrumental rationality” theoretical framework to explain the development of Turkish state policies against Syrians in Turkey.
Findings: The findings show that in the last ten years, Turkish state has introduced policies of integration, resettlement and repatriation towards Syrians as alternatives to each other, with varying, and even contradictory, discourses. The “guest” perspective, was acquired with the expectation that the crisis in Syria would be short-lived and that the incoming refugees would return to their countries. When it was understood that they would stay longer, a process of integration emerged, first by giving them the status of "temporary protection" (2014), and then, albeit very limitedly, by providing "work permits" and "transition to citizenship" (2016). After 2017, a rapid increase in the discourse of "repatriation" for Syrians has emerged in Turkish state. In 2019, on the one hand, these "repatriation" discourse began to be evolved into concrete policies, and on the other hand, concrete plans for the integration of Syrians are added to the main policy documents such as the “11th Development Plan” (2019-23) and the “Integration Strategy Document and National Action Plan” (2018-23). As these examples show, Turkish state has tended to regulate the future of asylum seekers with plural policy options, in parallel with the three accepted in the international asylum regime. Sudden changes in these policies and discourses in response to the domestic and foreign political conjuncture show that the conflicting inconsistency in immigration policies stems from an instrumental rationality. The main finding is that, this rationality causes a problem of inconsistency in the state's policies against Syrian refugees in Turkey.
Originality: The original value of the article is that it offers a critical perspective on the policy options that the state makes available to Syrians in Turkey. In Turkey, the state's effort to make all policy options for Syrian refugees, such as integration or refoulement, as available, is presented as a positive situation by Turkish policy makers. Possible political, social and individual consequences of this policy inconsistency are deliberated in this article. 

References

  • Aksel, D. B., & İçduygu, A. (2019). Borders and the mobility of migrants in Turkey.. http://ceaseval.eu/publications/32_WP4_Turkey.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 16 Eylül 2022).
  • Broome, A., & Quirk, J. (2015). The politics of numbers: The normative agendas of global benchmarking. Review of International Studies, 41, 813-818.
  • Chimni, B. S. (2004). From resettlement to involuntary repatriation: Towards a critical history of durable solutions to refugee problems. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 23(3), 55-73.
  • Erdoğan, M. M. (2020). Suriyeliler barometresi 2019: Suriyelilerle uyum içinde yaşamın çerçevesi. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Erdoğan, M. M. (2021). Suriyeliler barometresi 2020. Ankara: Eğiten Kitap Yayıncılık.
  • European Council. (2016). EU-Turkey Statement, 18 March 2016. Brüksel: Foreign Affairs & International Relations.
  • Frelick, B. (2007). Paradigm shifts in the international response to refugees. İçinde J. White, & A. Marsella, (der.), Fear of persecution: Global human rights, international law, and human well-being (s. 33-58). MD: Lexington Books.
  • Galagher, D. (1994). Durable solutions in a new political era. Journal of International Affairs. 47(2), 429-450.
  • Gammeltoft-Hansen, T. (2014). International refugee law and refugee policy: The case of deterrence policies. Journal of Refugee Studies, 27(4), 574-595.
  • ICG. (2018). Turkey's Syrian refugees: Defusing metropolitan tensions. Brüksel: International Crisis Group.https://www.crisisgroup.org/europe-central-asia/western-europemediterranean/turkey/248-turkeys-syrian-refugees-defusing-metropolitan-tensions (Erişim Tarihi: 5 Eylül 2022).
  • İçduygu, A. (2015). Syrian refugees in Turkey: The long road ahead. Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute.
  • İçduygu, A., & Aksel, D. B. (2021). Turkey's responses to refugees: past and present. İçinde J. Jongerden, The Routledge handbook on contemporary Turkey, (s. 444-455 ), Londra: Routledge.
  • İçduygu, A., & Millet, E. (2016). Syrian refugees in Turkey: Insecure lives in an environment of pseudo-integration. İstanbul: Global Turkey in Europe.
  • İçduygu, A., & Nimer, M. (2019). The politics of return: Exploring the future of Syrian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 41(3), 1-19.
  • Kaya, A., Rottman, S., Gökalp-Aras, E., & Şahin-Mencütek, Z. (2020). Reception and integration of Syrian refugees in Turkey. Uppsala: RESPOND.
  • KNOMAD, OECD, UNDP. (2020). Measuring policy coherence for migration and development: A new set of tested tools. Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development (KNOMAD).
  • May, P. J., Sapotichne, J., & Workman, S. (2006). Policy coherence and policy domains. Policy Studies Journal, 34(3), 381-403.
  • Memişoğlu, F., & Igıt, A. (2016). Syrian refugees in Turkey: Multifaceted challenges, diverse players and ambiguous policies. Mediterranean Politics, 22(3), 1-22.
  • Newland, K. (2019). Temporary protection as the new normal in refugee policy. Vicious cycles: Toward a research agenda on return and repeat displacement. Philadelphia: Perry World House, University of Pennsylvania.
  • Nozick, R. (1993). The nature of rationality. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
  • Parsons, W. (2004). Not just steering but weaving: Relevant knowledge and the craft of building policy capacity and coherence. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 63(1), 43-57.
  • Rygiel, K., Baban, F., & Ilcan, S. (2016). The Syrian refugee crisis: The EU-Turkey 'deal' and temporary protection. Global Social Policy, 16(3), 315-320.
  • Sert, D. (2014). Elements of uncertainty in Turkey's refugee system. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 13(1), 160-164.
  • Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An out-Line of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Yanaşmayan, Z., Üstübici, A., & Kaşlı, Z. (2019). Under the shadow of civilizationist populist discourses: Political debates on refugees in Turkey. New Diversities, 21(2), 37-51.

TÜRKİYE’DE DEVLET VE SURİYELİ MÜLTECİLER: ÇELİŞKİLİ POLİTİKALAR VE ARAÇSAL RASYONELLİK

Year 2022, Volume: 21 Issue: Özel Sayı - Türkiye’nin Göç Siyaseti Özel Sayısı, 316 - 334, 11.11.2022
https://doi.org/10.46928/iticusbe.1182299

Abstract

Amaç: Bu makalenin amacı Türkiye’nin Suriyelilere yönelik iç ve dış politika alanlarında ortaya çıkan çelişkili politikaları, devletin “araçsal rasyonellik” (instrumental rationalism) bakış açısından kaynaklanan politika tutarsızlığı teorik çerçevesi ile açıklamaktır.
Yöntem: Araştırmanın yöntemi, politika belgelerinin ve internet haber sitelerinin sistematik ve kapsamlı bir nitel analizine dayanmaktadır. Makale süreç izleme (process tracing) metodu ile, “araçsal rasyonellik” teorik çerçevesinin Türkiye devletinin Suriyelilere yönelik politikalarını açıklamaktaki geçerliliğini test etmektedir. Bulgular: Bulgular son on senede Türkiye’de devletin Suriyelilere yönelik uyum üçüncü ülkeye yeniden yerleştirme ve geri gönderme politikalarını zaman içinde değişen - hatta çelişen - söylemlerle birbirlerini alternatifi olarak dile getirdiği yönündedir. Başlangıçtaki Suriye’deki krizin kısa süreceği ve gelen sığınmacıların ülkelerine geri döneceği beklentisi ile edinilen “misafir” bakış açısı; daha uzun süre kalacakları anlaşılınca, önce “geçici koruma” statüsü verilerek (2014), sonra da çok sınırlı da olsa “çalışma izni” ve “vatandaşlığına geçiş” sağlanarak (2016) nerdeyse onlar için bir entegrasyon sürecinin öngörülmesine evirilmiştir. 2017 yılından sonra ise devlet söyleminde, Suriyeliler için hızla “geri gönderme” eğiliminin yükselişine tanıklık edilmiştir. 2019 yılında bir yandan bu “geri gönderme” söylemlerinin somut politikalara doğru evirildiği, diğer yandan ise “11. Kalkınma Planı”(2019-23) ve “Uyum Strateji Belgesi ve Ulusal Eylem Planı” (2018-23) gibi temel politika belgelerinde Suriyelilerin entegrasyonu için somut planlamalar yapıldığı görülmüştür. Bu örneklerden de deneyimlendiği gibi Türkiye’de devlet sığınmacıların geleceğini çoğul bir dizi politika seçeneği ile uluslararası iltica rejiminde normatif kabul gören üç politika seçeneğine paralel olarak düzenleme eğiliminde olmuştur. Bu politika ve söylemlerdeki iç ve dış politik konjonktüre cevaben ortaya çıkan ani değişiklikler, göç politikalarındaki birbiri ile çelişen uyumsuzluğun, Türkiye’de devletin göç politikalarını araçsal bir rasyonalite ile şekillendirmesinden kaynaklandığını göstermektedir. Ana bulgu bu rasyonalitenin Türkiye’de devletin Suriyeli mülteciler üzerine olan politikalarında bir tutarlılık problemine yol açtığı yönündedir.
Özgünlük: Makalenin özgün değeri, Türkiye’de devletin Suriyelilere yönelik ulaşılabilir kıldığı politika seçeneklerine yönelik eleştirel bir bakış açısı sunmasıdır. Türkiye’de devletin Suriyeli mültecilere yönelik, uyum ya da geri gönderme gibi mevcut tüm politika seçeneklerini ulaşılabilir kılma çabası, politika yapıcılar tarafından olumlu bir durum olarak ortaya konulmaktadır. Bu politika tutarsızlığının olası siyasi, toplumsal ve bireysel sonuçları bu makalede irdelenmiştir. 

References

  • Aksel, D. B., & İçduygu, A. (2019). Borders and the mobility of migrants in Turkey.. http://ceaseval.eu/publications/32_WP4_Turkey.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 16 Eylül 2022).
  • Broome, A., & Quirk, J. (2015). The politics of numbers: The normative agendas of global benchmarking. Review of International Studies, 41, 813-818.
  • Chimni, B. S. (2004). From resettlement to involuntary repatriation: Towards a critical history of durable solutions to refugee problems. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 23(3), 55-73.
  • Erdoğan, M. M. (2020). Suriyeliler barometresi 2019: Suriyelilerle uyum içinde yaşamın çerçevesi. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Erdoğan, M. M. (2021). Suriyeliler barometresi 2020. Ankara: Eğiten Kitap Yayıncılık.
  • European Council. (2016). EU-Turkey Statement, 18 March 2016. Brüksel: Foreign Affairs & International Relations.
  • Frelick, B. (2007). Paradigm shifts in the international response to refugees. İçinde J. White, & A. Marsella, (der.), Fear of persecution: Global human rights, international law, and human well-being (s. 33-58). MD: Lexington Books.
  • Galagher, D. (1994). Durable solutions in a new political era. Journal of International Affairs. 47(2), 429-450.
  • Gammeltoft-Hansen, T. (2014). International refugee law and refugee policy: The case of deterrence policies. Journal of Refugee Studies, 27(4), 574-595.
  • ICG. (2018). Turkey's Syrian refugees: Defusing metropolitan tensions. Brüksel: International Crisis Group.https://www.crisisgroup.org/europe-central-asia/western-europemediterranean/turkey/248-turkeys-syrian-refugees-defusing-metropolitan-tensions (Erişim Tarihi: 5 Eylül 2022).
  • İçduygu, A. (2015). Syrian refugees in Turkey: The long road ahead. Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute.
  • İçduygu, A., & Aksel, D. B. (2021). Turkey's responses to refugees: past and present. İçinde J. Jongerden, The Routledge handbook on contemporary Turkey, (s. 444-455 ), Londra: Routledge.
  • İçduygu, A., & Millet, E. (2016). Syrian refugees in Turkey: Insecure lives in an environment of pseudo-integration. İstanbul: Global Turkey in Europe.
  • İçduygu, A., & Nimer, M. (2019). The politics of return: Exploring the future of Syrian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 41(3), 1-19.
  • Kaya, A., Rottman, S., Gökalp-Aras, E., & Şahin-Mencütek, Z. (2020). Reception and integration of Syrian refugees in Turkey. Uppsala: RESPOND.
  • KNOMAD, OECD, UNDP. (2020). Measuring policy coherence for migration and development: A new set of tested tools. Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development (KNOMAD).
  • May, P. J., Sapotichne, J., & Workman, S. (2006). Policy coherence and policy domains. Policy Studies Journal, 34(3), 381-403.
  • Memişoğlu, F., & Igıt, A. (2016). Syrian refugees in Turkey: Multifaceted challenges, diverse players and ambiguous policies. Mediterranean Politics, 22(3), 1-22.
  • Newland, K. (2019). Temporary protection as the new normal in refugee policy. Vicious cycles: Toward a research agenda on return and repeat displacement. Philadelphia: Perry World House, University of Pennsylvania.
  • Nozick, R. (1993). The nature of rationality. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
  • Parsons, W. (2004). Not just steering but weaving: Relevant knowledge and the craft of building policy capacity and coherence. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 63(1), 43-57.
  • Rygiel, K., Baban, F., & Ilcan, S. (2016). The Syrian refugee crisis: The EU-Turkey 'deal' and temporary protection. Global Social Policy, 16(3), 315-320.
  • Sert, D. (2014). Elements of uncertainty in Turkey's refugee system. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 13(1), 160-164.
  • Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An out-Line of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Yanaşmayan, Z., Üstübici, A., & Kaşlı, Z. (2019). Under the shadow of civilizationist populist discourses: Political debates on refugees in Turkey. New Diversities, 21(2), 37-51.
There are 25 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Ahmet İçduygu 0000-0002-8145-5888

Birce Demiryontar 0000-0003-3345-970X

Early Pub Date October 19, 2022
Publication Date November 11, 2022
Submission Date September 30, 2022
Acceptance Date November 2, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 21 Issue: Özel Sayı - Türkiye’nin Göç Siyaseti Özel Sayısı

Cite

APA İçduygu, A., & Demiryontar, B. (2022). TÜRKİYE’DE DEVLET VE SURİYELİ MÜLTECİLER: ÇELİŞKİLİ POLİTİKALAR VE ARAÇSAL RASYONELLİK. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(Özel Sayı), 316-334. https://doi.org/10.46928/iticusbe.1182299