Impact of mutual interaction between civil society and conditionality by an external actor on democratization: Cases of Turkey and Malaysia

Öz

With their functioning democracies albeit accompanied by various deficiencies, Turkey and Malaysia are often referred to as models in the Islamic world. This study aims to assess progresses and setbacks in democratization in Turkey and Malaysia since the early 2000s with a particular attention to their civil societies and conditionality by an external actor. In Turkey, civil society has had a positive impact on democratic consolidation through encouraging political reforms in line with the EU accession process. In addition, AKP government was highly motivated by EU conditionality in adopting remarkable political reforms particularly in its early years in power. Malaysian civil society has also played an effective role in voicing demands for democratic values as long as shared concerns enabled it to transcend ethnic and religious boundaries. Yet, democracy promotion through conditionality has not existed in Malaysia’s relationship with the ASEAN. It is argued that Turkey has had a more favorable internal and external environment to encourage democratization compared with that of Malaysia.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Turkey,Malaysia,democratization,civil society,conditionality,democracy promotion

Kaynakça

1. Ahmad, Razak. (2014). Najib to witness signing of historic Manila-Milf Peace Deal. The Star, March 27. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2014/03/27/najib-to-witness-signing-of-historic-manilamilf-peace-deal/
2. Alessandri, Emiliano. (2010). Democratization and Europeanization in Turkey after the September 12 Referendum, Insight Turkey 12(4), 23-30.
3. Aydınlı, Ersel. (2011). Ergenekon, New Pacts, and the Decline of the Turkish Inner State. Turkish Studies, 12(2), 227-239.
4. Aydınlı, Ersel. (2012). Turkey under the AKP: Civil-Military Relations Transformed. Journal of Democracy, 23(1), 100-108.
5. Başkan, Filiz. (2010). The Rising Islamic Business Elite and Democratization in Turkey. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 12(4), 399-416.
6. Bowie, Alasdair. (2004). Civil Society and Democratization in Malaysia. In Y. Sato (Ed.), Growth and Governance in Asia (pp.193-202). Hawaii: Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.
7. Chin, James. (1999). Going East: UMNO’s Entry into Sabah Politics. Asian Journal of Political Science, June 7, no. 1, 20-40.
8. Chin, James. (2004). Sabah and Sarawak, The More Things Change the More They Remain the Same. Southeast Asian Affairs, No.4, 156-168.

9. Chinese Tsunami’s Shock. (2013). Daily Express, May 6.
10. Daim: Najib Employed Wrong Strategy in Polls. (2013). The Star, May 28. Retrieved from http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/5/28/nation/13166550&sec=nation
11. Democracy in Crisis: Corruption, Media and Power in Turkey. (2014). Freedom House Special Report, February 3, pp. 1-20. Retrieved from http://freedomhouse.org/report/special-reports/democracy-crisis-corruption-media-and-power-Turkey#.uxzy9iy5nmx
12. Diamond, Larry. (Ed.) (1994a). Political Culture and Democracy in Developing Countries. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
13. Diamond, Larry. (1994b). Toward Democratic Consolidation. Journal of Democracy, 5(3), 4-17.
14. Higley, John and Gunther, Richard. (Eds.) (1992). Elites and Democratic Consolidation in Latin America and Southern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Huntington, Samuel P. (1968). Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
16. International Crisis Group. (2012). Malaysia’s Coming Election: Beyond communalism? Asia Report, no.235, October 1. Retrieved from http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/files/asia/south-east-asia/Malaysia/235-Malaysias-coming-election-beyond-communalism.pdf
17. Keyman, E. Fuat. (2010). Modernization, Globalization and Democratization in Turkey: the AKP Experience and its Limits. Constellations, 17(2), 312-327.
18. Kheng, Cheah Boon. (2002). Malaysia: the Making of a Nation. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
19. Kubicek, Paul. (2005). The European Union and Grassroots Democratization in Turkey. Turkish Studies, 6(3), 361-377.
20. Lin, Juoyo. (1999). A Structural Analysis of the 1999 Malaysian General Election: Changing Voting Preference of Ethnic Chinese and Malay Groups and Party. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/fp/cnaps/papers/lin20021219.pdf
21. Lipset, Seymour Martin. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69-105.
22. Liow, Joseph. (2005). The Politics behind Malaysia’s Eleventh General Election. Asian Survey, 45(6), 907-930.
23. Loh, Francis. (2003). New Politics in Malaysia. Aliran Monthly, Retrieved from
24. http://aliran.com/archives/monthly/2003/6h.html
25. Loh, Francis. (2005). Politik Baru Di Malaysia? Siri Syarahan Umum, Syarahan Umum
26. Pelantikan Profesor. Pulau Pinang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.
27. Mahathir, Mohamad. (2011). A Doctor in the House. Selangor: MPH Group Publishing SDN. BHD.
28. Malaysia Department of Statistics. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.statistics.gov.my Malaysia Factbook. (2014). Malaysian General Election, 2008. Retrieved from
29. http://Malaysiafactbook.com/Malaysian_general_election,_2008
30. Martinez, Patricia. (2001). Malaysia in 2000: A Year of Contradiction. Asian Survey, 41(1), 189-200.
31. Mills, C. Wright. (1956). The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.
32. Müftüler Baç, Meltem. (2005). Turkey’s Political Reforms and the Impact of the European Union. South European Society and Politics, 10(1), 17-31.
33. Öniş, Ziya. (2013). Sharing Power: Turkey’s Democratization Challenge in the Age of the
34. AKP Hegemony. Insight Turkey, 15(2), 103-122.
35. Political reforms in Malaysia: In with the Unknown. The Economist, September 24, 2011.
36. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/21530156
37. Przeworski, Ada. and Limongi, Fernando. (1997). Modernization: Theories and Facts. World Politics, 49, January, 155-183.
38. Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia. (2013). Retrieved from
39. http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=page&page=1932
40. Puyok, Arnold. (2013). Sabah’s Rise to National Prominence and Deepening UMNO
41. Dominance. In Bridget Welsh and James Chin (Eds.), Awakening: The Abdullah Years in Malaysia (pp. 226-238). Petaling Jaya: Strategic Information and Research Development Centre (SIRD).
42. Schimmelfennig Frank and Scholtz, Hanno. (2010). Legacies and Leverage: EU Political
43. Conditionality and Democracy Promotion in Historical Perspective. Europe-Asia Studies, 62(3), 443-460.
44. Schmitter, Philippe C. (2001). The Influence of the International Context upon the Choice
45. of National Institutions and Policies in Neo-Democracies. In Laurence Whitehead (Ed.), The International Dimensions of Democratization: Europe and the Americas (pp.26-54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
46. Severino, Radolfo C. (2006). Southeast Asia in Search of an ASEAN Community: Insights
47. from the Former ASEAN Secretary-General. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
48. Singh, Bilveer. (2010). Malaysia in 2009: Confronting Old Challenges through a New
49. Leadership. Asian Survey, 50(1), 173-184.
50. Symonds, Peter. (1998). A Legal Farce: Malaysian Judge Orders Anwar's Lawyer Jailed.
51. World Socialist Web Site, December 2. Retrieved from https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1998/12/mal-d02.html
52. Sukma, Rizal. (2009). Democracy Building in Southeast Asia: the ASEAN Security Community and Options for the European Union. Stockholm, Sweden: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Retrieved from http://www.idea.int/resources/analysis/loader.cfm?csmodule=security/getfile&pageid=35040
53. Taşkın, Yücel. (2013). Hegemonizing Conservative Democracy and the Problems of Democratization in Turkey: Conservatism without Democrats? Turkish Studies, 14(2), 292-310.
54. Teik, Khoo Boo. (2003). Beyond Mahathir: Malaysian Politics and its Discontents. London:
55. Zed Books Ltd.
56. Tol, Gönül. (2014). The Clash of Former Allies: the AKP versus the Gülen Movement. Middle East Institute, March 7. Retrieved from http://www.mei.edu/content/clash-former-allies-akp-versus-gulen-movement
57. Turkey 2013 Progress Report by the EU Commission. (2013). EU Official Web Site, pp. 1-
58. Retrieved fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2013/package/brochures/Turkey_2013.pdf
59. Turkey in Transit: Democratization in Turkey. (2008). Freedom House Report, pp.1-26.
60. Retrieved from http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/inline_images/Turkey%20in%20transit.pdf
61. Turkish Politics: Justice or Revenge. (2013). The Economist, October 8. Retrieved from
62. http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21583312-harsh-verdicts-are-handed-down-ergenekon-trial-justice-or-revenge
63. Türkmen, Füsun. (2008). The European Union and Democratization in Turkey: the Role
64. of the Elites. Human Rights Quarterly, 30(1), 146-163.
65. Weiss, Meredith L. (2000). The 1999 Malaysia General Elections: Issues, Insults, and
66. Irregularities. Asian Survey, 40(3), 413-435.
67. Weiss, Meredith L. (2009). Edging Toward a New Politics in Malaysia. Asian Survey,
68. (5): 741-758.
69. Weiss, Meredith L. (2014). Of Inequality and Irritation: New Agendas and Activism in Malaysia and Singapore. Democratization, 21(5), 867-887.
70. Whitehead Laurence. (Ed.) (2001). The International Dimensions of Democratization, Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
71. World Population Review. (2015). Turkey Population, July 24. Retrieved from
72. http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/turkey-population/