Search

Begin New Search Topic Authoritarianism Political Geography Asia

71. Prospects for Regime Change in North Korea

Author:
Soyoung Kwon
Publication Date:
10-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
The view of convergence in terms of how former socialist countries change invites questions about cases of non-transition and their typological regime features. This paper examines the North Korean regime to assess its unique path of post-communist transition and analyzes behavioral explanations for the divergent outcome. A combination of institutional and behavioral features point to a countryspecific development, which may have taken a distinctive path due to different historical experiences, leadership features, legitimation, and political culture. This also invites a new comparative perspective on the remaining socialist countries in Asia in order to discuss the prospects and challenges of political change within the framework of transition from the authoritarian rule.
Topic:
Politics, Regime Change, Authoritarianism, Kim Jong-un, and Kim Jong-il
Political Geography:
Asia and North Korea

72. Erdoğan’s Proposal for an Empowered Presidency

Author:
Alan Makovsky
Publication Date:
03-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
On April 16, the Turkish people will vote on a package of constitutional amendments passed by Turkey’s Parliament on January 21, 2017, that greatly expands the powers of the presidency. If the package passes the nationwide referendum, it will broaden and deepen the de jure powers of the presidency, giving it authority over all executive branch institutions, including the military. It would give the president the power to appoint key senior-level judges and other judicial officials without parliamentary—or any other—review. It would abolish the post of prime minister, with the president assuming the powers of that office. And it would allow, under certain circumstances, the president to serve three terms totaling just short of 15 years. In short, Turkey’s long-standing parliamentary political system would be transformed into something more appropriately called a presidential system, in which an “executive presidency”1 amasses unprecedented power in the hands of one man. The referendum will take place amid the ongoing erosion of Turkish democratic institutions, freedom of speech, and political rights. Moreover, the referendum campaign and the vote itself will be held under some of the least democratic circumstances imaginable—namely, emergency rule.
Topic:
NATO, International Cooperation, Governance, Authoritarianism, and Leadership
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

73. Turkey’s Parliament

Author:
Alan Makovsky
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The combination of post-coup emergency rule and the phasing in of the new presidential system has reinforced President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s role as the virtually unassailable ruler of Turkey. Emergency rule has now been extended five times since the attempted coup in July 2016, with no end in sight. But even without emergency rule, the new presidential system affirmed in the April 16 referendum promises the hollowing out of institutions that once, for better or worse, were fairly autonomous. The judiciary is now little more than an arm of the Justice and Development Party, better known as AKP, government; its key positions are appointed by Erdoğan—who is AKP leader as well as president of the nation—and by the AKP-dominated Parliament. The military, too, is now mostly under the thumb of the government—unlike the judiciary, appropriately so, if not politicized. Following the next election, the prime ministry will be abolished. The president will stand alone atop the executive branch, his power of appointment unreviewable. The reach of the executive branch itself will be significantly broadened, including increased authority even over civil society.1 Many observers expect that Erdoğan’s position will remain unchallenged and that the AKP will hold onto power for many years to come. But AKP dominance of Turkish governance actually could be limited or removed entirely in elections that must be held by November 3, 2019—assuming those elections are conducted fairly.2 The winning presidential candidate must win with a majority of votes cast, at least by the second round. This requirement is enshrined in the constitution; unlike the rules on parliamentary elections, it is not changeable without a constitutional amendment. And, although the polarizing Erdoğan is far ahead of other potential candidates in popularity thus far,3 it is by no means clear that he would win a majority of votes in a fairly conducted, head-to-head second round.4 As for Parliament, the AKP has won a sizable majority of seats in 4 of the 5 elections it has contested since its founding—winning a clear plurality of seats in the other election. The AKP has also captured more than 49 percent of the popular vote in 2 of the last 3 elections.5 Yet, the next election will be Turkey’s first in which voters cast separate, simultaneous votes for president and Parliament. It is difficult to predict how that may affect voter preferences. Significantly, the result of the parliamentary vote could still affect how Turkey is governed. As suffocating as presidential power is likely to be under the new system, there may nevertheless be some breathing room for a meaningful Parliament, and some measure of parliamentary checks and balances on the presidency, depending on the preferences of the Turkish voter. The following briefly details the duties and responsibilities of Parliament under the new system.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Democracy, Leadership, Legislation, Parliamentarism, and Power
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

74. What Is Really Happening to Turkish Media?

Author:
Mustafa Akyol
Publication Date:
04-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The crackdown on Turkey’s media freedom has become notorious across the globe. Yet the exact mechanisms behind this problem, and the political purposes they serve, are not always apparent. This essay offers a snapshot of what is happening to the Turkish media and what it means for the future of Turkish democracy. Here are the basics: Over the past 10 years, dozens of Turkish journalists have been jailed for months or sometimes years. Meanwhile, hundreds of others have been pushed out of their jobs for reasons other than the normal dynamics of journalism. And despite their diverse ideological backgrounds, all of these unlucky journalists had one simple common trait: They were critical of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his political movement led by the incumbent Justice and Development Party, or AKP. The mechanisms behind this crackdown operate on both the legal level and the political-economic level. On the legal level, journalists are prosecuted and sometimes jailed for various so-called crimes. These crimes have nothing to do with journalism, government spokespeople typically insist in the face of criticisms, but are serious offenses such as “being a member of terrorist organization,” “spreading terrorist propaganda,” or “taking part in a coup plot.” These alleged crimes, however, are committed only through headlines, news stories, or op-eds that supposedly help terrorists and coup makers—all, of course, adversaries of President Erdoğan.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Media, Journalism, Repression, and The Press
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

75. Burma Votes for Change: The Challenges Ahead

Author:
Igor Blazevic
Publication Date:
04-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Democracy
Institution:
National Endowment for Democracy
Abstract:
Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy’s sweeping victory in Burma’s November 2015 elections and the military’s acquiescence in allowing the NLD to take the reins of power have justly been described as remarkable and historic milestones. Yet a number of unresolved critical issues still loom. The aspirations of the people of Burma and of the newly elected democratic forces are still seriously constrained by the constitution imposed by the military, by Burman Buddhist nationalism, by entrenched oligarchic interests, and by tough structural conditions. The biggest challenge of all: Burma is a “robustly” plural and deeply divided society. Without political consensus about the nature of the state among key stakeholders, including all significant ethnic and religious groups, the military will not withdraw from politics, the transition to civilian rule will not happen, peace will remain elusive, and Burma’s democratization will stagnate. Burma’s transition can succeed and serve as an example of a “hard-case” country that successfully democratizes despite lacking favorable structural conditions. Yet it is important to understand just how fragile and unsettled the whole process still is.
Topic:
Nationalism, Authoritarianism, Elections, Democracy, and Military Government
Political Geography:
Asia, Burma, Southeast Asia, and Myanmar

76. Romanian Perspectives on Korean Unification: Regime Change and the Romanian Precedent

Author:
Greg Scarlatoiu
Publication Date:
10-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu was a great admirer of North Korean leader Kim Il-sung, attempting to duplicate the personality cult, national-Communism and other aspects of the North Korean dynastic totalitarian regime. Systematic human rights violations were common in both countries. Despite the relentless repression, indoctrination and surveillance, there are several factors that could potentially erode the Kim Family Regime’s grip on power, including informal marketization and increased information inflow from the outside world. As such, Romania provides an important precedent for the current situation in North Korea. Of particular note, understanding those factors that conferred legitimacy on the Romanian military enables a deeper appreciation of the military’s role in the anti-communist revolution and turbulent times that followed. Kim Jong-il learned from the Romanian experience, adopting a military first policy in North Korea. In contrast, Kim Jong-un has attempted to return some power to the Korean Workers Party. Kim Jong-un’s success in gaining the support of the country’s elites would be a key factor in avoiding a Romanian-style revolution and obliteration of the top leadership.
Topic:
Human Rights, History, Regime Change, Authoritarianism, and Capitalism
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and Romania

77. Will China Allow North Korea to Collapse?

Author:
Gordon G. Chang
Publication Date:
04-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Relations between China and North Korea have deteriorated during the last year, but Beijing has not fundamentally changed its approach toward its neighbor because that approach serves vital Chinese interests. If the regime of Kim Jong Un should look like it might fail—and there are several reasons why it could—Beijing’s leaders will undoubtedly do all they can to effect a rescue. The Chinese state, however, is not as stable or as capable as it appears, and it may not be in a position to lend needed assistance.
Topic:
International Relations, Bilateral Relations, Authoritarianism, and Political stability
Political Geography:
China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and United States of America

78. Protecting the West’s Interests in Turkey

Author:
Ross Wilson
Publication Date:
03-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Ambassadors Review
Institution:
Council of American Ambassadors
Abstract:
Turkey has recently come to look like a beat-up boy. At home, it seems to have regained the authoritarianism of its past. Abroad, its behavior looks rough edged and militaristic. It gets blamed for not doing enough, or the right things, on Syria, the problem of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and Europe’s migrant crisis. Some have concluded that this country, its regional policies in tatters and under the assault of an autocratic president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, can no longer be regarded as an ally. Much of the criticism is on target, some less so. Real issues exist in Turkey and in the relationships that the United States and European countries have with it. At a tough time for the region, concerted and effective strategies to protect the interests the United States and its allies have in and with this key European and Middle Eastern country are more important than ever.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Authoritarianism, and European Union
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Turkey, Middle East, and Asia

79. The Process Behind Turkey’s Proposed Extradition of Fethullah Gülen

Author:
Michael Werz and Max Hoffman
Publication Date:
09-2016
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
It is hard to overstate the gravity of what happened in Turkey during the failed July 15 coup attempt. More than 270 people were killed and thousands wounded in clashes related to the attempted overthrow of the elected government. Tanks and armored vehicles rumbled through the streets of Istanbul and Ankara; soldiers fired into civilian crowds; and rogue F-16 jets and military helicopters bombed and strafed targets in Ankara, including the parliament, the intelligence ministry, and the presidential palace. This litany of atrocities is now familiar to those covering Turkey but should provoke no less soul-searching. There has been a troubling tendency in some Western quarters to respond glibly to Turkey’s trauma, but it is worth considering how the United States government and public would react in the wake of such a crisis. The outpouring of anger and emotion from Turks of all political backgrounds is natural. Without question, those behind the coup attempt must be brought to justice and face trial. As the coup attempt unfolded through the night of July 15, Turkish officials quickly pointed to Fethullah Gülen and his followers—generally referred to collectively as Gülenists or the Hizmet movement—as the driving force behind the overthrow plot. Gülen, an Islamic scholar and U.S. permanent resident, has been living in a compound in rural Pennsylvania since his self-imposed exile from Turkey in 1999, granting few interviews and rarely seeing outside visitors. Gülen’s movement has set up schools in hundreds of countries—including the United States—and established cultural exchange programs, business associations, and media outlets. The exact personal relationship of Gülen to many of these bodies and his degree of direct control over them is not clear. Gülen and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan are former political allies, and members of the Gülen movement helped populate the state bureaucracy following the 2002 election victory of the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP. For a decade, the AKP and the Gülenists cooperated and, indeed, the movement was an integral part of the burgeoning AKP political, media, academic, and business establishment. The alliance helped both the AKP and the Gülen movement, allowing them to erode the control of traditional military and secular elites in Turkey; there is strong evidence that Gülenists in the police and judiciary collaborated with the AKP government to purge military officers and secular rivals in two massive—and manufactured—cases against supposed coup plotters in 2008 and 2010. But Gülenist prosecutors turned on the AKP in December 2013, opening major corruption cases against senior party leaders and their families. Gülenists are believed to have leaked—or, Erdoğan supporters say, manufactured—tapes implicating Erdoğan and his family in widespread corruption, possibly in a bid to swing upcoming elections. Erdoğan and the AKP decried the corruption cases as a coup attempt and declared open political war with the Gülen movement, seizing businesses and closing media outlets and schools associated with the movement. The Turkish demand for Gülen’s extradition, then, is not new and is part of a long-running political fight. But Turkish officials and the public are absolutely convinced of Gülen’s personal complicity in the coup attempt, and the request for his extradition is a primary element of Turkey’s response to the crisis. Despite the gravity of the wider issues surrounding the coup attempt for Turkish politics and society, this brief is primarily focused on the narrower question of Gülen’s potential extradition, the process by which such extraditions are pursued under the treaty between Turkey and the United States that governs extradition, and the political ramifications for U.S. policy and relations with Turkey.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Authoritarianism, Coup, Judiciary, and Extradition
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

80. rom Poisonous Weeds to Endangered Species: Shenghuo TV, Media Ecology and Stability Maintenance

Author:
Wanning Sun
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
he most common framework through which we under- stand media communication and political/social stability in China is that of hegemony and control. This characterization may have served us well in documenting how the mandate for stability often results in censorship, regulation and restriction, but it has two major faults: First, the focus on crackdowns, bans and censorship usually tells us something about what the party-state does not like, but does not convey much about what it does like. Second, it often obscures the routine ways the party-state and the market work together to shore up ideological domination and maintain stability. In this analysis of the policies, economics and content of a broad range of television programmes, I suggest that we look at the media and communication as an ideological-ecological system in order to arrive at a more nu- anced understanding of the relationship between China’s media prac- tices and its ongoing objectives.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Media, Propaganda, and State Media
Political Geography:
China and Asia