Resat Bayer

Turkey: An Emerging Hub of Globalization and Internationalist Humanitarian Actor?

In an era of global turmoil generating significant challenges to global security and requiring global solutions, humanitarian intervention, and assistance become central concerns at the intersection of globalization studies and international relations. In this context, Turkey is emerging as a more proactive and autonomous actor in foreign policy and as a regional and global force in peacekeeping and humanitarian operations, making the country one of the key actors of world politics. In this article, we demonstrate Turkeys contributions to global security through its increasing involvement in humanitarian assistance in different regions of the world, and suggest that in doing so Turkey is not only contributing to global security but also creating new norms of democratic global governance that bridge several seemingly contradictory formations: European integration and Islamic solidarity; global South ascendance and NATO stabilization; Ottoman nostalgia and internationalist modernism. But the primary focus will be Turkish protagonism in peacekeeping interventions in Afghanistan to demonstrate the multilateral manner through which humanitarian assistance norms are implemented. En una era de confusión global que genera desafíos importantes a la seguridad global y que requiere soluciones globales, la intervención humanitaria y la ayuda se convierten en asuntos centrales en la intersección entre los estudios de globalización y las relaciones internacionales. En este contexto, Turquía está surgiendo como un actor más proactivo y autónomo en la política exterior y como una fuerza regional y global en el mantenimiento de la paz y las operaciones humanitarias, haciendo del país un actor clave de la política mundial. En este artículo, demostramos las contribuciones de Turquía a la seguridad global a través de su creciente participación en la ayuda humanitaria en diferentes regiones del mundo y sugiere que de este modo, Turquía no sólo contribuye a la seguridad global, pero que también está creando nuevas normas de gobierno democrático global, que reduce varias constituciones aparentemente contradictorias: La integración europea y la solidaridad islámica; la dominación global del sur y la estabilización de la OTAN; la nostalgia otomana y el modernismo internacionalista. Pero el primer enfoque debe de ser el protagonismo turco en las intervenciones para el mantenimiento de la paz en Afganistán, para demostrar la manera multilateral a través de la cual se implementan las normas de ayuda humanitaria. 在一个全球动荡对全球安全提出重大挑战并要求全球性解决的时代，人道主义干预和援助成为全球化研究和国际关系学交汇处的中心关注点。在此情境下，土耳其兴起为一个更为积极和自主的外交政策行为者，以及维和与人道主义行动方面的一支地区和全球力量，使该国成为世界政治中的关键行为体之一。在本文中，我们通过土耳其日益介入世界上不同地区的人道主义救援，表明了土耳其对全球安全的贡献，并显示在如此作为时，土耳其不仅为全球安全作出了贡献，而且创建了全球民主治理的新准则，在一些似乎相互矛盾的构成之间架设了桥梁：欧洲一体化与伊斯兰团结；全球南方兴起与北约稳定化；奥斯曼怀旧与国际现代主义。但首要重点将是土耳其在阿富汗维和干预行动中的积极倡导，以表明人道主义援助准则得到执行的多边方式。 지구적 안보에 대한 심각한 도전을 낳고 지구적 해결을 요구하는 지구적 혼란의 시대에 인도주의적인 개입과 지원이 세계화 연구와 국제관계에서 중심적인 관심사가 되었다. 이러한 맥락에서 터키가 외교정책에서 더 예방적이고 자율적인 행위자로 그리고 세계 정치의 핵심적인 행위자로 부상하면서 평화유지와 인도주의적 활동에서 지역적 그리고 지구적 세력으로 등장하고 있다. 이 논문은 터키가 세계 여러 다른 지역에 인도주의적 지원에 점차 더 많이 가담하여 지구적 안보에 터키가 기여하는 바를 보여주고, 그렇게 함으로써 터키가 지구적 안보에 기여할 뿐만 아니라 몇 가지 모순적인 변화(유럽통합과 이슬람 연대; 남반부 등장과 나토 안정화; 오토만 터키 노스탤지어와 국제주의적 근대주의)를 이어주는 민주적인 지구적 가버넌스의 새로운 형태를 만들어 내는데 기여하고 있다는 것을 보여준다. 그러나 인도주의적 지원 규범이 집행되는 다자적 방식을 보여주기 위하여 본 논문의 초점은 터키의 주된 아프카니스탄 평화유지 개입 역할이 될 것이다.

Democratization in Conflict Research: How Conceptualization Affects Operationalization and Testing Outcomes

ABSTRACT Using the debate over democratization and conflict, we demonstrate how the connection between conceptualization and operationalization can play a decisive role in testing falsifiable hypotheses. We discuss seven different operationalizations of regime change based on three different conceptualizations of democracy. Although we find high correlations between different measures of democracy, when they are used to capture regime change, the correlations drop precipitously. In multivariate estimations of the effect of regime change on a range of conflict variables, we generate widely disparate results, providing no consistent support that democratization affects conflict. We thus demonstrate that decisions about conceptualization and subsequent operationalization have decisive impact on the inference we produce. In contrast, our controls for the effect of institutionalized democracy consistently show a negative relationship between joint democracy and conflict. Finally, autocratic regime change seems to be more robustly correlated with a range of conflict behaviors than heretofore recognized in this literature.