Search

Begin New Search Publishing Institution Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)

111. The Perception of Turkey in the Middle East 2010

Author:
David Barchard, Gökçe Perçinoğlu, Jonathan Levack, Mensur Akgün, and Sabiha Senyücel Gündoğar
Publication Date:
02-2011
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
This study contains the results of the second survey conducted by KA Research Limited between August 25th and September 27th 2010 with my contribution and that of TESEV’s researchers. Again, the 2010 survey was conducted in the same seven Arab countries but, unlike 2009, it was also conducted in Iran. In total, 2,267 people were surveyed by telephone or face-to-face. These results show a statistically significant increase in positive opinion of Turkey. Although they are dealt with more thoroughly in the report, there are a few social and thus political findings that are different from the previous year.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, and Public Opinion
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan

112. Headscarf Ban and Discrimination

Author:
Dilek Cindoğlu
Publication Date:
11-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
The headscarf ban applied in institutions of higher education, in the public sector, and as this research has shown, in the private sector, reveals the perspectives of the state and its institutions and as well of the society on human, women’s and citizens’ rights. The restrictions and barriers to entry of women to study and work in institutions of higher education and public sector institutions, in place since the 1960s, rest on a mentality that views women’s choices to wear headscarves as an attack on the secular regime, instead of treating their choices as a manifestation of their freedom of religion and belief. Consequently, the practices that were initially violating freedom of belief gradually deteriorated to cause further violations of rights to education, to employment, to equal access to public life and of basic rights and liberties such as the right to equality. The headscarf ban in institutions of higher education has for many years been and remains to be a widely debated and contested issue. Though there is a wealth of analysis, dialogue, debate and research on the subject, it is largely restricted to whether the headscarf ban in universities is justified or not. The impact that the ban has had on headscarved women’s lives have, on the other hand, been absent in the debates and analyses on the headscarf ban. A question that has not been featured in research and public debates so far is despite the public sector ban on the headscarf what are the experiences of those headscarved women at work who were able to graduate from university, but did not abandon their choice to wear headscarf to practice their faith and without? In other words, what is the impact of the headscarf ban in the public sector on the professional lives of higher educated headscarved women? Does this ban, which applies to public sector institutions, also hinder or restrict professional headscarved women as they apply for or work in private sector jobs? What obstacles are there for professional headscarved women to entering job markets in Turkey and to advancing their careers? This report is a product of TESEV Democratization Program’s quest to answer these questions. It examines one of the greatest roadblocks on Turkey’s path to democratization, the headscarf ban, and the implications of the ban on public and private sector employment to document the myriad forms of discrimination and rights violations that headscarved women face immediately after they decide to become working professionals. Though some forms of workplace discrimination 6 that headscarved women face also affect non-headscarved professional women with similar socio-economic backgrounds, the headscarf is the primary source of the majority of discrimination faced by professional headscarved women. Again, this report shows that the ban on the public sector spilled over to the private sector. Cases of discrimination and rights violations that are believed to have diminished and to even have been reversed in favor of headscarved women during the two terms of the AK Party administration continue to be recorded, especially and more vehemently in the private sector.
Topic:
Democratization, Gender Issues, Religion, Women, Inequality, and Discrimination
Political Geography:
Turkey and Middle East

113. Turkey-Armenia Dialogue Series: Assessing the Rapprochement Process

Author:
Alexander Iskandaryan, Aybars Görgülü, David Barchard, and Sergey Minasyan
Publication Date:
10-2010
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
After unimaginable steps in recent years, Turkish-Armenian relations have reached a point where full diplomatic relations could be established and the land border between the two countries could be opened. However seven months on from the signing of the historic protocols in Zurich, the process has stalled. TESEV Foreign Policy Program and Caucasus Institute’s new report “Assessing the Rapprochement Process” attempts to analyse progress to this point, identify why the process has stalled and offers recommendations aimed at solving the current impasse. Working in a collaborative fashion, the authors from both organisations identified the following areas where progress can be made: The ratification process must continue. Momentum is fickle and letting the protocols sit and fester is in no one’s interest. Rapprochement is a two pronged process: one involves the technical normalisation of relations and the other is reconciliation between the two societies. Both are extremely important and require both states and society to play a significant and active role. The media in both Turkey and Armenia has a responsibility to create an atmosphere conducive to rapprochement. Unbiased, positive and accurate reporting is far more favourable than the existing sensationalism common on both sides of the border.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Turkey, Caucasus, Middle East, and Armenia

114. Turkey: Arab Perspectives (English/Arabic)

Author:
Meliha Benli Altunisik and Mustafa Ellabbad
Publication Date:
06-2010
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
The main objective of this study is to uncover different views on Turkey among opinion makers and bureaucrats as well as among the public in the Arab world. To this aim, along with the aforementioned survey data, personal interviews were also conducted and incorporated into the publication. As the report makes clear, not only have Arab perspectives on Turkey become increasingly positive in recent years but also debate of Turkey in the Arab world has become more nuanced.
Topic:
International Relations, Regional Cooperation, and Public Opinion
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Arab Countries

115. Toward a Solution to the Kurdish Question: Constitutional and Legal Recommendations

Author:
Dilek Kurban and Yılmaz Ensaroğlu
Publication Date:
06-2010
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
There is more to the dominance of “rule of law” or “supremacy of law” in a state than the mere availability of a constitution or laws, or the presence of judicial institutions. Indeed, it is a fact of history that even the bloodiest dictatorships had their idiosyncratic laws and courts. In addition, there are countless historical examples of tyrannical and oppressive policies being implemented through courts. Thus, in paying special attention to the matter, international human rights law emphasizes in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that “…it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.” Article 3 of the Statute of the Council of Europe follows suit: “Every member of the Council of Europe must accept the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights and fundamental freedoms…” Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in addition, states: “The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention.” These and other instruments of law confer on the states substantial responsibilities for the protection of human rights. Of a state’s obligations in that regard, the most important include constitutional and legal recognition of citizens’ human rights, non-interference in individuals’ exercise of those rights as long as such exercise does not violate the freedoms of others, and protection of those rights against interventions by others. These obligations have also become sources and criteria for a state’s claim to legitimacy. In other words, states are now considered to be legitimate to the extent they recognize and protect human rights. As a matter of fact, the protection of states’ rights to sovereignty cannot hold its ground against human rights, thus no state can have recourse to the ‘non-intervention in domestic affairs’ discourse in the face of violations within that state’s borders. The judiciary is the most important mechanism that will check the compliance of government policies and practices with the law and protect citizens’ rights and freedoms. This is why all acts and transactions of the administration need to be subject to judicial review in a state where rule of law prevails. In short, the judiciary is the one and only power that will put the principle of the rule of law into practice. In order for the judiciary to serve that function, that is, to protect human rights, it is indispensable that constitutional and legal arrangements be compatible with human rights law. Put differently, implementing the principle of rule of law necessitates that the law should, instead of siding with the state, have an autonomous standing vis-à-vis the state. The law must maintain equal distance to the state and the citizen. Otherwise, it will not be able to serve its arbitral function between the two sides, and as a result, its legitimacy becomes contested. Considering Turkey in this light, one sees that the legal framework has adopted the ideology of creating a homogenous society and a modern nation, instead of securing all individuals’ rights. Founded as a modern state upon the remnants of the multi-religious, multilingual, and multiethnic Ottoman Empire, the Turkish Republic decided that it would not be possible for it to realize the plans to construct the new nation without denying room to the distinct identities. In line with the secularist and nationalist policies pursued as an outgrowth of this approach, the legal framework underwent a complete overhaul. It has become widely accepted today that Kurds were one of the primary targets of these policies. As a matter of fact, in addition to general legal and constitutional amendments necessary for a Turkey committed to human rights and the rule of law, a number of particular arrangements are also required for a lasting and democratic solution to the Kurdish Question. Constituting the main focus of this report, these arrangements can be broken down into two groups: constitutional and legal. Although the constitutional articles and legal provisions examined in detail and the regulations and statutes which occupy lesser space in the report might appear to have a general character and do not include the words “Kurd” or “Kurdish”, they are essentially instruments aiming to restrict Kurds’ fundamental rights and freedoms and practically causing indirect discrimination against the Kurds. It goes without saying that several administrative measures that do not necessitate any particular legal arrangements must also be taken to solve the Kurdish Question. Discussed as part of the debates on the ‘democratic initiative’, some of these measures include the restitution of names in Kurdish and other languages to places plastered with Turkish names, removal of nationalist slogans etched by the state onto mountain slopes in Turkey’s eastern and southeastern region, changing the militarist names given to schools in the same region, and appointment of Kurdish-speaking public servants in the region to facilitate the use of Kurdish language in accessing public services. Though they are outside the scope of this report, these administrative steps and similar others need to be negotiated upon with Kurdish political representatives and opinion leaders and put in practice soon.
Topic:
Human Rights, Law, Constitution, Legislation, and Kurds
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Kurdistan

116. A Tale of Reciprocity: Minority Foundations in Greece and Turkey (English/Greek)

Author:
Dilek Kurban and Konstantinos Tsitselikis
Publication Date:
07-2010
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
This report aims to analyze the implications of reciprocity policies on the day-to-day lives of Muslim and non-Muslim minorities in Greece and Turkey, specifically their impact on the community foundations2 belonging to these minorities. With a specific focus on the property and self-management issues of Muslim and non-Muslim community foundations in Greece and Turkey, the report will try to situate the issue in its historical context and trace the evolution of the ‘community foundation issue’ from Lausanne to the present day. Drawing similarities and differences between the laws, policies, and practices of Greek and Turkish states vis-à-vis their minority foundations, the report will critically assess the progress made to this day as well as identify the outstanding issues. In the hope of contributing to efforts to develop a democratic, sustainable, and just resolution of the problems facing community foundations, the report will propose policy solutions to the governments of Turkey and Greece.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Treaties and Agreements, Law, and Minorities
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Greece