Party Politics and the European Union Agenda: Political Competition, Ideology and Identity Politics

Yıl 2020, , 233 - 250, 28.12.2020

Önder Canveren , Müge Aknur

https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.549994

Öz

Political parties play significant roles in the European Union (EU) accession process of candidate countries. Party positions at both domestic and the EU levels have a direct impact on the dynamics, direction, and the content of the integration as well as the candidate country’s relations with the EU. Therefore, a systemic re-evaluation of the party positions on the EU agenda would contibute to Turkish literature. This article designed a theoretical and methodological framework for the analysis of party positions on the EU agenda for causal explanation underlying these positions. This framework which is developed by reviewing Europeanization literature, as the main parameters of party politics focuses on political competition, ideology and identity politics models. The framework developed eight alternative hypotheses to analyze and compare alternative party positions (pro-European, soft-Eurosceptic, and hard-Eurosceptic).

Anahtar Kelimeler

European Union, Europeanization

Parti Politikası ve Avrupa Birliği Gündemi: Siyasi Rekabet, İdeoloji ve Kimlik Siyaseti

Öz

Aday ülkelerin Avrupa Birliği'ne (AB) katılım sürecinde siyasi partiler önemli roller oynamaktadır. Hem ulusal hem de AB düzeyindeki parti pozisyonları, entegrasyonun ve aday ülke-AB ilişkilerinin içerik, yön ve dinamiği üzerinde doğrudan bir etkiye sahiptir. Bu nedenle Türkçe literatürde, AB gündemine ilişkin parti pozisyonlarının sistematik bir şekilde yeniden değerlendirilmesi gerekmektedir. Bu makale, AB gündemine ilişkin parti pozisyonları ve bu pozisyonların altında yatan sebepler için nedensel açıklamaya imkân sağlayan teorik ve metodolojik yeni bir çerçeve sunmaktadır. Bu çerçeve, parti politikasının temel parametreleri olan siyasi rekabet, ideoloji ve kimlik siyaseti modelleri üzerinden Avrupalılaşma literatürünü irdeleyerek geliştirilmiştir. Çalışma, alternatif parti pozisyonlarını (Avrupa taraftarlığı, yumuşak Avrupa karşıtlığı ve sert Avrupa karşıtlığı) analiz etmek ve karşılaştırmak amacıyla sekiz alternatif hipotez önermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Avrupa Birliği, Avrupalılaşma, Parti Politikası, Siyasi Partiler, Parti Pozisyonu

Kaynakça

• ADAMS, James, Lawrence EZROW ve Zeynep SOMER‐TOPCU (2011), “Is Anybody Listening? Evidence that Voters do not Respond to European Parties’ Policy Statements during Elections”, American Journal of Political Science, C: 55, S: 2, ss. 370-382.
• ARISOY, Alper ve Hüseyin GÜL (2011), “Avrupa Siyasi Partilerinin “Avrupalılaşması”, Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, C: 9, S: 1, ss. 179-197.
• Avrupa Birliği Bakanlığı, “22 Haziran 1993 Avrupa Birliği Konseyi Kopenhag Zirvesi Sonuç Bildirgesi”, (http://www.ab.gov.tr/index.php?p=302&), (05.04.2019).
• BİLLİG, Michael (1984), “Political Ideology: Social Psychological Aspects”, (ed.) Henri Tajfel, The Social Dimension, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ss. 446-470.
• BİLLİG, Michael (1995), Banal Nationalism, Sage, London.
• BÖLÜKBAŞI, H. Tolga, Ebru ERTUGAL, ve Saime ÖZÇÜRÜMEZ (2011), “Avrupa Entegrasyonu Kuramlarıyla Türkiye’yi Konu Alan Yazının Etkileşimi: Avrupalılaşma Araştırma Programını Türkiye Özelinde Yeniden Düşünmek”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, C: 8, S: 30, ss. 79-82.
• BÖRZEL, Tanja A. (1999), “Towards Convergence in Europe? Institutional Adaptation to Europeanization in Germany and Spain”, Journal of Common Market Studies, C: 37, S: 4, ss. 573-596.
• BULMER, Simon ve Christian LEQUESNE (2002), “New Perspectives on EU-Member State Relationships”, Questions de Recherche/Research Questions, Centre d'études et de Recherches Internationales, C: 4, ss. 1-35.
• CHECKEL, Jeffrey T. (1999), “Social Construction and Integration”, Journal of European Public Policy, C: 6, S: 4, ss. 545-560.
• DE VRİES, Catherine E. vd. (2011), “Individual and Contextual Variation in EU Issue Voting: The Role of Political Information”, Electoral Studies, C: 30, S: 1, ss. 16-28.
• DE VRİES, Catherine E. (2010), “EU Issue Voting: Asset or Liability? How European Integration Affects Parties’ Electoral Fortunes”, European Union Politics, C: 11, S: 1, ss. 89-117.
• DECHEZELLES, Stéphanie ve Michel PEROTTİNO (2008), “Right Wing Populist Parties and Their Effect on National Identity Politics under the Conditions of Europeanization”, ECPR Workshop: Is Populism a Side-Effect of the Europeanization of Political Competition?, Rennes.
• DESCARTES, René (1991), The Principles of Philosophy, (çev.) Valentine Rodger Miller vd., Kluwer Academic Publisher, Boston.
• DİEZ, Thomas (2005), “Constructing the Self and Changing Others: Reconsidering Normative Power Europe”, Millennium-Journal of International Studies, C: 33, S: 3, ss. 613-636.
• DOWNS, Anthony (1957), “An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy”, The Journal of Political Economy, C: 65, S: 2, ss. 135-150.
• ELİAS, Anwen (2009), Minority Nationalist Parties and European Integration: A Comparative Study, Routledge, London.
• ELSTER, Jon (1993), Political Psychology, Cambridge University Pres, Cambridge.
• GÖKÇE, Orhan (2001), İçerik Çözümlemesi: Teori-Metod-Uygulama, Selçuk Üniversitesi Yayınları, Konya.
• GRABBE, Heather (2002), “European Union Conditionality and the Acquis Communautaire”, International Political Science Review, C: 23, S: 3, ss. 249-268.
• GREEN-PEDERSEN, Christoffer ve Stefaan WALGRAVE (2014), Agenda Setting, Policies, and Political Systems: A Comparative Approach, University of Chicago Pres, Chicago.
• HAAS, Ernst B. (1958), The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957, Stanford University Pres, Stanford.
• HABERMAS, Jürgen (2001), Justifications and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics, (çev.) Ciaran P. Cronin, MIT Pres, Cambridge.
• HEATH, Anthony F., Roger M. JOWELL ve John K. CURTICE (2001), The Rise of New Labour: Party Policies and Voter Choices, Oxford University Pres, Oxford.
• HELBLİNG, Marc, Dominic HÖGLİNGER ve Bruno WÜEST (2008), “How Political Parties Frame the European Integration Process”, The Annual Meeting of the Swiss Political Science Association, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen.
• HEYWOOD, Andrew (2012), Political Ideologies: An Introduction, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
• HİX, Simon ve Klaus H. GOETZ (2000), “Introduction: European Integration and National Political Systems”, West European Politics, C: 23, S: 4, ss. 1-26.
• HİX, Simon ve Christopher LORD (1997), Political Parties in the European Union, St. Martin's Pres, New York.
• HOOGHE, Liesbet ve Gary MARKS (2009). “A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus”, British Journal of Political Science, C: 39, S: 1, ss. 1-23.
• HUBER, John ve Ronald INGLEHART (1995), “Expert Interpretations of Party Space and Party Locations in 42 Societies”, Party Politics, C: 1, S: 1, ss. 73-111.
• HUME, David (2003), A Treatise of Human Nature, Dover Publications, New York.
• HUTCHESON, Francis (1726), An Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, J. and J. Knapton, London.
• KEATİNG, Michael (2004), “European Integration and the Nationalities Question”, Politics & Society, C: 32, S: 3, ss. 367-388.
• KEULMAN, Kenneth ve Agnes Katalin KOÓS (2014), European Identity: Its Feasibility and Desirability, Lexington Books, Maryland.
• KOPECKÝ, Petr ve Cas MUDDE (2002), “The Two Sides of Euroscepticism Party Positions on European Integration in East Central Europe”, European Union Politics, C: 3, S:3, ss. 297-326.
• LAVER, Michael ve Ben W. HUNT (1992), Policy and Party Competition, Routledge, New York.
• LAVER, Michael (1998), “Party Policy in Britain 1997: Results from an Expert Survey”, Political Studies, C: 46, S: 2, ss. 336-347.
• LEWİS, Paul, ve Zdenka MANSFELDOVÁ (2006), The European Union and Party Politics in Central and Eastern Europe, Springer, New York.
• LİPSET, Seymour Martin ve Stein ROKKAN (1967), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives, Free Pres, New York.
• MARCH, James G. ve Johan P. OLSEN (1998), “The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders”, International Organization, C: 52, S: 4, ss. 943-969.
• MARKS, Gary ve Marco STEENBERGEN (2002), “Understanding Political Contestation in the European Union”, Comparative Political Studies, C: 35, S: 8, ss. 879-892.
• MARKS, Gary ve Carole J. WİLSON (2000), “The Past in the Present: A Cleavage Theory of Party Response to European Integration”, British Journal of Political Science, C: 30, S: 3, ss. 433-459.
• MARKS, Gary, Carole J. WİLSON ve Leonard RAY (2002), “National Political Parties and European Integration”, American Journal of Political Science, C: 46, S: 3, ss. 585-594.
• MARTİN, John Levi ve Matthew DESMOND (2010), “Political Position and Social Knowledge”, Sociological Forum, C: 25, S: 1, ss. 1-26.
• MİLLER, David (1995), On Nationality, Clarendon Pres, Oxford.
• MJOSET, Lars (1997), “Historical Meanings of Europeanisation”, ARENA Working Paper, S: 24, ss. 1-43.
• NEUMAYER, Laure (2008), “Euroscepticism as a Political Label: The Use of European Union Issues in Political Competition in the New Member States”, European Journal of Political Research, C: 47, S: 2, ss. 135-160.
• OLSEN, Johan P. (2002), “The Many Faces of Europeanization”, Journal of Common Market Studies, C: 40, S: 5, ss. 921-952.
• ÖNER, Selcen (2014), “Avrupa'da Yükselen Aşırı Sağ, Yeni 'Öteki'ler ve Türkiye'nin AB Üyeliği”, Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi, C: 13, S: 1, ss. 163-184.
• PİSCİOTTA, Barbara (2016), “The Center-Periphery Cleavage Revisited: East and Central Europe from Postcommunism to Euroscepticism”, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, C: 22, S: 2, ss. 193-219.
• POLLACK, Mark A. (1996), “The New Institutionalism and EU Governance: The Promise and Limits of Institutionalist Analysis”, Governance, C: 9, S: 4, ss. 437-438.
• RADAELLİ, Claudio M. (2003), “The Europeanization of Public Policy”, (eds.) Kevin Featherstone and Claudio M. Radaelli, The Politics of Europeanization, Oxford University Press, Oxford, ss. 27-56.
• RAWLS, John (2009), A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Pres, Cambridge.
• RAY, Leonard (1999), “Measuring Party Orientations towards European Integration: Results from an Expert Survey”, European Journal of Political Research, C: 36, S: 2, ss. 283-306.
• REAL-DATO, José, György LENGYEL ve Borbala GÖNCZ (2012), “National Elites' Preferences on the Europeanization of Policy-making”, (eds) Heinrich Best, György Lengyel ve Luca Verzichelli, The Europe of Elites: A Study into the Europeanness of Europe's Economic and Political Elites, Oxford University Press, Oxford, ss. 67-93.
• COWLES, Maria Green, James CAPORASO ve Thomas RİSSE (2001), Transforming Europe: Europeanisation and Domestic Change, Cornell University Pres, New York.
• SCHİMMELFENNİG, Frank ve Hanno SCHOLTZ (2008), “EU Democracy Promotion in the European Neighbourhood Political Conditionality, Economic Development and Transnational Exchange”, European Union Politics, C: 9, S: 2, ss. 187-215.
• SCHİMMELFENNİG, Frank ve Ulrich SEDELMEİER (2004), “Governance by Conditionality: EU Rule Transfer to the Candidate Countries of Central and Eastern Europe”, Journal of European Public Policy, C: 11, S: 4, ss. 661-679.
• SİTTER, Nick (2001), “The Politics of Opposition and European Integration in Scandinavia: Is Euro-scepticism a Government Opposition Dynamic?”, West European Politics, C: 24, S: 4, ss. 22-39.
• SJURSEN, Helene (2002), “Why Expand? The Question of Legitimacy and Justification in the EU’s Enlargement Policy?”, Journal of Common Market Studies, C: 40, S: 3, ss. 496-499.
• SMİTH, Anthony D. (1991), “Towards a Global Culture?”, (ed.) Mike Featherstone, Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity, SAGE Publications, London, ss. 171-192.
• SNİDERMAN, Paul M., Richard A. BRODY ve Phillip E. TETLOCK (1993), Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology, Cambridge University Pres, Cambridge.
• SOUSA, Maja M. (2006), “The Domestic Turn in Europeanization Studies: Elite Perceptions of Europe”, The ECPR Joint Sessions Workshop at Nicosia, Nicosia.
• SZCZERBIAK, Aleks ve Paul A. TAGGART (2000), “Opposing Europe: Party Systems and Opposition to the Union, the Euro and Europeanisation”, SEI Working Paper, S: 36, ss. 1-16.
• TAGGART, Paul (1998), “A Touchstone of Dissent: Euroscepticism in Contemporary Western European Party Systems”, European Journal of Political Research, C: 33, S: 3, ss. 363-388.
• TAJFEL, Henri ve John C. TURNER (1979), “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict”, The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, C: 33, S: 47, ss. 33-47.
• TEZCAN, Ercüment ve İlhan ARAS (2015), “Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi’nde Euroseptisizm: Avrupa Birliği Desteğinin Eleştiriye Dönüşümü”, Uluslararası Hukuk ve Politika, C: 11, S: 41, ss. 1-35.
• VAN DER BRUG, Wouter, Meindert FENNEMA ve Jean TİLLİE (2000), “Anti-Immigrant Parties in Europe: Ideological or Protest Vote?”, European Journal of Political Research, C: 37, S: 1, ss. 77–102.
• WELTMAN, David ve Michael BİLLİG (2001), “The Political Psychology of Contemporary Anti-Politics: A Discursive Approach to the End-of-Ideology Era”, Political Psychology, C: 22, S: 2, ss. 367-382.
• YAZGAN, Hatice (2012), “Bir Kavramsal Çerçeve Olarak “Avrupalılaşma”: Kapsam, Gereklilik ve Sınırlar”, Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, C: 12, S: 4, ss. 123-140.
• YILDIRIM, Yavuz (2017), “Liberal Demokrasinin Krizi Bağlamında Avrupa'da Sağ-Popülizm ve Yükselen Aşırı-Sağ”, Amme İdaresi Dergisi, C: 50, S: 2, ss. 51-72.