Framing as Lobbying with Limited Resources: A Conceptual Discussion On Contemporary Ethnic Lobbying in The US / Sınırlı Kaynaklarla Bir Lobicilik Yöntemi Olarak Çerçeveleme: ABD’deki Güncel Etnik Lobicilikle İlgili Kavramsal Bir Tartışma

Abstract

Due to the main characteristic of the American society as well as its political system, ethnic lobbying has become an important concept and activity in order to influence the domestic and foreign policy of the United States. By providing a conceptual discussion on the contemporary ethnic lobbying in the US, this article aims at demonstrating the importance of framing strategy for ethnic lobbying groups which have limited resources to promote their interests. The article reviews the existing literature on ethnic lobbying in the US by specifically considering the recent studies regarding the relatively new lobbying groups. Consequently, it argues that framing strategy can become an effective lobbying strategy not only for the lobbies that have access to the United States’ system with an institutional existence in its capital but also for those attempting to gain access to the policymaking communities in this country. Additionally, in order to achieve their specific purposes, ethnic lobbies can apply to the methods of strategic framing and normative framing during their lobbying campaigns.

Keywords

• United States
• Policymaking
• Ethnic Lobby
• Successful Ethnic Lobbying
• Framing

Framing as Lobbying with Limited Resources: A Conceptual Discussion On Contemporary Ethnic Lobbying in The US / Sınırlı Kaynaklarla Bir Lobicilik Yöntemi Olarak Çerçeveleme: ABD’deki Güncel Etnik Lobicilikle İlgili Kavramsal Bir Tartışma

Öz

Amerikan toplumunun kendine has toplumsal yapısı ve siyasal sistemi etnik lobiciliğin bir kavram ve eylem olarak önemini arttırmış ve ülkedeki etnik lobilerin bu yolla ABD’nin iç ve dış politikasına etkide bulunmalarına olanak sağlamıştır. Bu makale çerçeveleme (framing) yönteminin özellikle kısıtlı kaynaklara sahip etnik grupların lobi faaliyetlerindeki önemine dikkatleri çekerek kavramsal bir tartışma ortaya koymaktadır. ABD’deki etnik lobiciliğe dair mevcut literatürü yakın zamanda yapılan çalışmaları da göz önünde bulundurarak inceleyen makale, çerçeveleme (framing) yönteminin sadece ABD’nin başkentinde fiziksel olarak bulunup politika yapım sürecine katılma imkânı elde edebilen etnik lobiler için değil aynı zamanda ülkeye giriş imkânı olmayan ve sınırlı kaynaklara sahip etnik lobiler için de önemli ve etkin bir lobicilik stratejisi olabileceğini iddia etmektedir. Bu kapsamda etnik lobilerin hedeflerine ulaşmak için hem stratejik hem de normatif çerçeveleme (framing) stratejilerini kampanyalarında kullandıkları görülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Amerika Birleşik Devletleri
• Politika Yapımı
• Etnik Lobi
• Başarılı Etnik Lobicilik
• Framing (Çerçeveleme)

Kaynakça

1. Aldikacti, G. M. (2001). Framing, Culture, And Social Movements: A Comparison of Feminist and Islamist Women’s Movements in Turkey. (Unpublished PhD Thesis). University of Pennsylvania, USA.
2. Ambrosio, T. (2002a). Ethnic Identity Groups and U.S. Foreign Policy. T. Ambrossio (Ed.). Ethnic Identity Groups and U.S. Foreign Policy (pp.1-19) In: London.
3. Ambrosio, T. (2002b). Congressional Perceptions of Ethnic Cleansing: Reactions to the Nagorno-Karabagh War and the Influence of Ethnic Interest Groups. The Review of International Affairs, 2(1), 24-45.
4. Ambrosio, T. (2002c). Entangling Alliances: The Turkish Israeli Lobbying Partnership and Its Unintended Consequences. T. Ambrosio (Ed.), Ethnic Identity Groups and U.S. Foreign Policy. (pp.143-167) In: London.
5. Baumgartner, F. R. (2007). EU Lobbying: A View from the US. Journal of European Public Policy. 14(3), 482–88.
6. Çiftçi, O. (2020). Amerikan Çokkültürlülüğünü Yeniden Düşünmek: Hispanik/Latinolar ve Amerikan Toplumu İçerisindeki Rolü. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 25(100), 91-114.
7. Coxall, W.N. (2001). Pressure Groups in British Politics. Harlow: Longman.
8. Demir, T. (2023). Syrian Kurds, The Democratic Union Party (PYD), and The Strategic Framing of the Civil War: Selling The New Model of Governance. Lexington Books: Lanham Maryland.

9. Desrosiers, M.-E. (2012). Reframing Frame Analysis: Key Contributions to Conflict Studies. Ethnopolitics, 11(1), 1–23.
10. Dietrich, J.W., (1999). Interest Groups and Foreign Policy: Clinton and the China MFN Debates. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 29(2), 280-296.
11. Donnelly, J. (2017). Human Rights. John Baylis, Steven Smith and Patricia Owens, (Eds.), The Globalization of the World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. (pp.497-513) In: Oxford University Press.
12. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
13. Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Gamson, W. A., and G. Wolfsfeld. (1993). Movements and Media as Interacting Systems. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528(1), 114–25.
15. Gardner, R., and Guy Burges. 2003. Analysis of Colorado Growth Conflict Frames. R. Lewicki, B. Gray, and M. Elliott, (Eds.). Making Sense of Intractable Environmental Conflicts: Concepts and Cases. (pp.387-405) In Washington, DC: Island Press.
16. Garrett, S.A., (1978). Eastern European Ethnic Groups and American Foreign Policy. Political Science Quarterly, 93(2), 301-323.
17. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
18. Grant, W., (2000). Pressure Groups and British Politics. MacMillan: Basingstoke.
19. Gray, B. (2003). Framing of Environmental Disputes. R. Lewicki, B. Gray, and M. Elliott, (Eds.), Making Sense of Intractable Environmental Conflicts: Concepts and Cases. (pp.11-34) In Washington, DC: Island Press.
20. Haney, P.J. and Vanderbush, W., (1999). The Role of Ethnic Interest Groups in US Foreign Policy: The Case of the Cuban American National Foundation. International Studies Quarterly, 43(2), 341-361.
21. Herner-Kovács, E., (2013). Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Ethnic Lobby Success in the United States: The Case of HHRF. Minority Studies, 15(1), 199-223.
22. Huntington, S.P., (1997). The Erosion of American National Interests. Foreign Affairs,76(5), 28-49.
23. Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. (1984). Choice, Values and Frames. American Psychologist, 39(4), 341–50.
24. Kaufman, S., M. Elliott, and D. Shmueli. (2013). Frames, Framing and Reframing. Beyond Intractability 1, 1–8.
25. Kirk, J.A., (2008). Indian‐Americans and the US–India Nuclear Agreement: Consolidation of an Ethnic Lobby?. Foreign Policy Analysis, 4(3), 275-300.
26. Koinova, M. (2011). Can Conflict-Generated Diasporas Be Moderate Actors During Episodes of Contested Sovereignty? Lebanese and Albanian Diasporas Compared. Review of International Studies, 37(1), 437–62.
27. Marrar, K., (2009). The Arab Lobby and US Foreign Policy: The Two-State Solution. Routledge.
28. McCormick, J.M., (2012). Ethnic Interest Groups in American Foreign Policy. McCommick, J.M. (Ed.), The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence, (p.67-87).
29. Mead, W. R. (2001). Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World. New York: Century Foundation.
30. Mearsheimer, J. J., and Walt, S.M., (2007). The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. London: Allen Lane.
31. Oswiecimski, K., (2013). What Makes Ethnic Groups in the United States Politically Effective. Horyzonty Polityki, 9, 43-74.
32. Pienkos, D.E., (2011). Of Patriots and Presidents: America's Polish Diaspora and US Foreign Policy Since 1917. Polish American Studies, 68(1), 5-17.
33. Pluwak, A., (2011). The Linguistic Aspect of Strategic Framing in Modern Political Campaigns. Études Cognitives/Studia Kognitywne/Cognitive Studies, 11, 307–19.
34. Princen, S. (2011). Agenda-setting Strategies in EU Policy Process. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(7), 927–43.
35. Reese, E., and E. Ramirez. (2002). The New Ethnic Politics of Welfare: Struggles over Legal Immigrants’ Rights to Welfare in California. Journal of Poverty, 6(3), 29–62.
36. Rubenzer, T. (2008). Ethnic Minority Interest Group Attributes and U.S. Foreign Policy Influence: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Foreign Policy Analysis, 4(2), 169-185.
37. Rubenzer, T., and Redd, S.B. (2010). Ethnic Minority Groups and US Foreign Policy: Examining Congressional Decision Making and Economic Sanctions. International Studies Quarterly, 54(3), 755-777.
38. Shain, Y., (1994). Ethnic Diasporas and US Foreign Policy. Political Science Quarterly, 109(5), 811-841.
39. Shain, Y., (1999). Marketing the American Creed Abroad: Diasporas in the US and Their Homelands. Cambridge University Press.
40. Smith, T., (2000). Foreign Attachments: The Power of Ethnic Groups in the Making of American Foreign Policy. Harvard University Press.
41. Snow, D. A., and Benford, R.D. (1992). Master Frames and Cycle of Protest. A. D. Morris and C. M. Muller, (Eds.), Frontiers in Social Movement Theory. In New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
42. Snow, D. A., and C. Corrigall-Brown. (2005). Falling on Deaf Ears: Confronting the Prospect of Nonresonant Frames. Croteau et al., (Ed.), Rhyming hope and history: Activists, academics, and social movement scholarship (pp.222-238) In Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
43. Snow, D. A., and R. D. Benford. (1988). Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization. B. Klandermans, H. P. Kriesi, and S. Tarrow, (Eds.), International Social Movement Research 1, (pp.197–217).
44. Snow, D. A., E. B. Rochford, Jr., S. K. Worden, and R. D. Benford, R.D. (1986). Frame Alignment Process, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation. American Sociological Review, 51(4), 464–81.
45. Snow, D., R. Benford, H. McCammon, L. Hewitt, and S. Fitzgerald. (2014). The Emergence, Development, and Future of the Framing Perspective: 25+ Years Since “Frame Alignment.” Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 19(1), 23–46.
46. Storey, W. (2010). US Government and Politics. Edinburgh University Press.
47. Swart, W.J. (1995). The League of Nations and the Irish Question: Master Frames, Cycles of Protest, and “Master Frame Alignment”. The Sociological Quarterly, 36(3), 465-481.
48. Vanderbush, W., (2009). Exiles and the Marketing of US Policy toward Cuba and Iraq. Foreign Policy Analysis, 5(3), 287-306.
49. Zarifian, J. (2018). The Armenian and Turkish Lobbying, and the (Non)Recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the United States. Thurber, et al., (Eds.), Congress and Diaspora Politics: The Influence of Ethnic and Foreign Lobbying. Albany. (pp.117-138) In State University of New York Press.