Revisiting Institutional/Occupational Model in Turkish Military

Year 2022, Volume: 42 Issue: 1, 261 - 272, 29.03.2022

Adem Başpınar

Abstract

This article questions the applicability of Moskos’ institutional/occupational model in a non-Western country whose modernization process resembles that of Western countries. This may be important for two reasons: First, most military sociologists have based their theories on the military’s position and development in Western societies. Whether the historical military development in Turkey resembles Western militaries due to the 19th-century military modernization efforts through Western experts’ guidance with the military as leader in the nation’s modernization or whether this historical military development had a unique structure and mission involving founding the country is debatable. Second, most existing studies on the Turkish military and civil-military relations in Turkey have been conducted by journalists, political scientists, and historians and lack a background in sociological theory. Instead, these studies have discussed the direct or indirect interventions of armed forces in politics. This paper begins building the theoretical foundation for a discussion of the opportunities and challenges of reorganizing Turkey’s civil-military relations by examining the applicability of one Western model to this non-Western country.

Keywords

Military sociology, Institutional/occupational Model, Charles Moskos, Civil-military relations, Turkish Military

References

• Akça, İ. (2004). Kolektif bir sermayedar olarak Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri. A. İnsel & A. Bayramoğlu (Eds.), Bir zümre, bir parti, Türkiye’de Ordu, Birikim’den seçmeler: 2 (pp. 225-269). Birikim Yayınları.
• Akyürek, S., & Yılmaz, M. A. (2013). Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri’ne toplumsal bakış (Bilge Adamlar Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi, Rapor no: 56).
• Caforio, G. (1988). The Military Profession: Theories of Change. Armed Forces & Society, 15(1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x8801500104
• Cakatay, O. (2019). Evaluation of paid military service in Turkey using a population representation model (Master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1073603. pdf
• Canveren, Ö. (2021). Türkiye’de ordu- siyaset- toplum ilişkilerinin genel bir panoraması: Tarihselsosyolojik bir değerlendirme. Mülkiye Dergisi, 45(1), 125–153. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ mulkiye/issue/61971/927461
• Çarkoğlu, A., & Adaman, F. (2000). Devlet reformu: Türkiye’de yerel ve merkezi yönetimlerde hizmetlerden tatmin, patronaj ilişkileri ve reform. https://www.tesev.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/ rapor_Turkiyede_Yerel_Ve_Merkezi_Yonetimlerde_Hizmetlerden_Tatmin_Patronaj_Iliskileri_ Ve_Reform.pdf
• Demirel, T. (2002). Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri’nin toplumsal meşruiyeti üzerine. Toplum ve Bilim, 93, 29–54.
• Hale, W. (1994). Turkish politics and the military. Routledge.
• Köktürk, A. (2021). Türk Ordusunun sermaye ile ilişkisi ve ordu-siyaset ilişkisinin dönüşümü. İnsan ve İnsan Dergisi, 8(29), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.29224/insanveinsan.908922
• Moskos, C. C. (1977). From institution to occupation. Armed Forces & Society, 4(1), 41–50. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0095327x7700400103
• Moskos, C. C. (1986). Institutional/Occupational Trends in Armed Forces: An Update. Armed Forces & Society, 12(3), 377–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x8601200303
• Nielsen, S. C. (2012). American civil-military relations today: the continuing relevance of Samuel P. Huntington’s The Soldier and the State. International Affairs, 88(2), 369–376. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01076.x
• Nuciari, M. (1994). Rethinking the Military Profession: Models of Change Compared. Current Sociology, 42(3), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/001139294042003003
• “Paşaların emekli ikramiyesi biliyor musunuz?” (2013, July 15). Milli Gazete. https://www. milligazete.com.tr/haber/1052933/pasalarin-emekli-ikramiyesi-biliyor-musunuz
• Pehlivan, C. (2009). Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri’nin güvenirliği üzerine bir araştırma ve ordu millet geleneği (Yüksek lisans tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul). http:// nek.istanbul.edu.tr:4444/ekos/TEZ/45202.pdf
• Pratt, G. J. (1986). Institution, occupation and collectivism amongst Australian Army officers. Journal of Political & Military Sociology, 14(2) 291–302.
• Sakallioğlu, Ü. C. (1997). The anatomy of the Turkish Military’s political autonomy. Comparative Politics, 29(2), 151–166.
• Segal, D. R. (1986). Measuring The Institutional/Occupational Change Thesis. Armed Forces & Society, 12(3), 351–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x8601200302
• Segal, D. R., & Segal, M. W. (1983). Change in Military Organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 9(1), 151–170. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.09.080183.001055
• Smokovitis, D. (1984). From institutional to occupational values: Trends in the Greek Military. In Military and society: The European experience (pp. 361–386) (SOWI-FORUM International 4). SOWI.
• Soeters, J. L. (1997). Value orientations in military academies: A thirteen country study. Armed Forces & Society, 24(1), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x9702400101
• Sørensen, H. (1994). New Perspectives on the Military Profession: The I/O Model and Esprit de Corps Reevaluated. Armed Forces & Society, 20(4), 599–617. https://doi. org/10.1177/0095327x9402000407