POLS 254 MIDTERM

Comparing and Contrasting Various Political Systems

I) Large Sample
- Industrialized Democracies - Established Democracies
- Consolidated Democracies - Developing Nations
* Distinguishing Characteristic
- Multi – Party competitive politics in a periodically recurring (tekerrür eden)
fashion has been intact (eksiksiz, tam) for over decades even beyond a century.
- Parliamentary  Constitutionally defined tenure (ayrıcalık) of the legislature
the maximum period for which the legislature keeps office.

II) The Former Communist Political Systems

Ex: Russian Federations, Ukraine, Belarus, Central Asian Republics.
- Baltic Republic States
- CECs – Slovakia, Hungary, Czech R., Poland.
- Serbia, Montenegro (Karadağ), Croatia (Hırvatistan), Macedonia.
- Albania, Romania, Bulgaria.
Not : Bu ülkeler Komunist mirasa sahipler (Communist Legacy). Bu ülkeler
1990 dan sonra 2 başlı bir geçiş sistemine girdiler. (1990 on dual transition). Bu
gün bu ülkeler çok partili sistemlere geçtiler.

III) Third World

- Developing Nations ; Africa, Latin America, Middle East, Asia.
* Distinguishing Nature ;
1) Colonial Legacy : Latin America the last decade of 19 th century 1830s.
Asia : 1940s-50s.
Africa : 1960s-70s.
Middle East : 1940s- into 1960s.  Colonial
Administration were to be installed (kurulmuş) later 19th century.
2) Political, Economical and Social Change Transformation (dönüşüm).

FORMER COMMUNIST POLITICAL SYSTEMS

* Distinguishing Characteristics :
1) All these systems have a communist legacy  all experienced communist
rule as part of their political history.
- Communist Party – led Politics : Dominance of one party in political
structure. The state and the party in a symbiotic relationship. Competitive
politics involved the competition between candidates appointed by the party.
- Centrally – Planned or Command Economics : All the decisions on what to
produce, sell, store, export, import and at what costs were made at a center.
2) 1990s – Communist party – led regimes collapsed. This era of Dual
Transition.
a) Political Pillar (dayanak) : From communist party led politics to multi-party
competitive politics. In an increasing number of political systems, a huge
number of political parties were established. Competitive elections were
organized from 1991 on.
b) Economic Pillar : From centrally planned economies to reforms on instaling
market economies.
I) Quick privatization in many economic systems in the former communist
world government spending many of the State Economic Enterprises sold to
private enterpreneurs. (Privatization ; as a means of cutting costs / expenses).
(State Economic Enterprises ; state used to be the main provider or main
employer.)
Not ; Kamu iktisadi teşebbüslerinin yöneticileri, bu kuruluşları satın aldılar.
- Public sector was widely structured delivery of many services – undertaken by
the state. Public employment was huge.
- Quick privatizations involved the selling off of see in a very short period of
time so that the state will be relieved of its financial burden and channel larger
resources to transition efforts.
- deregulation : (gerekli altyapı düzenlemesi yapılmadan) veya yasal düzenleme
yapılmadan çok büyük değişiklikler yapıldı.

Former Communist Political Systems :

- 1990 on Dual Transition (Political and Economic Transition)
Economic Transition : centrally- planned economies to market economies.
Privatization : quick wave from 1990 of the selling off of state economic
enterprises to private enterpreneurs.
Privatization in a context of deregulation : period of collapse of the legal
framework wich could govern the transfer of enterprises.
- From 2000 on Increasing :
1) Examination of how the privatization efforts in early changes 1990s evolved
of taxevasion, undervalued sales, embezzlement and Money laundering.
Quick Privatization : Few private enterpreneurs could quickly a mass
enormous wealth. (Political and economic elite  continuity (devamlılık)).
 Later to be tried.
“Oligarchs”, and “Tyloons” : few wealthy enterpreneurs who acquired
ownership in quick.
2) Social Consequances and Costs :
- Private enterpreneurs  aimed at profit maximization.;
-- cut expenses and losses
-- layoffs (işten çıkarma)
-- unemployment.
-- Production was previously handled by the state periods of lapses in production
limited output.
* Rising prices and inflationary trends Rolling back the state many of the social
security guarantees and spending were cut off.
-- Unemployment insurance
-- Health “
-- Education
-- Hausing / Elderly care / Disability care.
Centrally- planned economy until 1990s comprehensive and all encompossing
social security network..
1990 on Social spending by the state cut  aimed at limiting spending and
losses generating resources to finance the transition.
Growing dissatisfaction and disenchantment among the masses owing to their
declining welfare.
* Shock Theraphy (opposite meaning =“Gradual Reform”) ; very quick
changes.

Political Pillar of Transition ; 1990 on experimentation with multiparty

competitive politics.
- A sudden growth in the numbers and variety of parties.
- Communist Party of the renamed as “Socialist Party” previous regime or
“Social – Democratic Party”.
 Disowned the communist legacy.
 Explicitly voiced a resemblance to Social – Democratic or Socialist Parties in
North and west Europe models.
 Moderation of discourse (söylev) and policy practices.
Also, The formation of various political parties from 1990 on liberal, reformist,
nationalist, xenophobic, agrarian minority.

* 1991 and 1992 years of 1st Post – communist competitive and multi – party
elections.
* Central Europe and Baltic Republic ; major successes for liberal and
reformist parties.
* Early 1990s “Coalitions” and “Movements” rather than “Parties”. (Parti
ismini kullanmak yerine koalisyon veya haraket dediler).

* Largely / widely – based coalitions with members of various persuasion.

1) Negative connotation (çağrışım) of the concept of “Party”.
2) Disagreements on what the institute replace the communist regime with
movements or coalitions not willing to present themselves as fully – fledged
(tam deneyimli) / institutionalized parties.

* Exit from communist rule consented by all what to replace communist

regime with ; Ultimate discord no monolithic vision for future could be found
in movements or coalition.
* As 1990s progressed  growing disagreements and resultant splits /
disintegration among members of coalitions and movements.
Not: The reformist and anti-communist coalition of early 1990s around former
communist world was experiencing splits and tensions in its own ranks.

* The reformist movements and coalitions presiding over the difficult era of
transition of early 1990s.
 were soon to be popularly discredited and voted out in elections of mid-1990s
 2nd immediate post-communist elections of mid-1990s ;
- reformists and liberals lost
- social democrats and socialists won
Not: Eski soviet rejiminin dönüşümündeki zorluklar dönemin partilerine mal
edildi ve sosyalistler geri döndü.

FORMER COMMUNIST POLITICAL SYSTEM

* The Political Transition
- Differing institutional choices / preferences in different former communist
world.
- Political Institutions : Differently structured
--- CECs, Baltic Rep., Balkans  evolved (evrim geçirmek) in system paralel to
Continental European with Parliamentarism and Proportional Representation.
* Continental European pattern of institution building replicated (kopyalamak)
or taken as a model Competitive Elections  Parliamenary Governments were
formed.
 Highly Fragmented Legislatures ; a large number of parties together shared
legislature seats.
 Huge number of parties in the legislature dozens of parties.
 Complicated the process of forming the government.
PR  with low percentages of threshold or a mixed design with a heavy PR
component (bileşen).

1990 on Frangile Governments ; CECs, Baltic Rec., Balkans. ; Made up of

multiple partners (3 or more parties could from the government in coalition).
- The coalition forged held a bare majority in the legislature.
- Confidence vote and all the other votes on the bills proved to be major tests for
governing parties.
* Indisciplined Parties : Highly / Strictly / Strongly disciplined parties 
parties which agree on a common attitude, hold this attitude to be binding on all
their members and punish the defecting members with various sanctions.
Variety of opinion in their ranks the potential of scaring members away and
pushing them to join other parties.
- Parties deliberatelly refrained from imposing strict discipline on their
members.
- On every bill, members of each party could vote as he/ she liked.
- Due to weak / coose party discipline, even the pro-government majorities in
the legislature could not be kept together.
- Quick turnover of governments frequent fall of governments with bare
majorities failed to keep all their members acting together for a long time.

1990 on  average life-span (yaşam süresi) of governments in CECs, Baltic

Rep., Balkans ranged somewhere between a year or 2 year.
* The Economist (1993- March to 2004) Hung. Pol. Czech R., Slovakia,
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia. 5 – 10 governments in this period .

Variety of Institutional Preferences

- CECs, Baltic Rep., and Balkans = institution preferences there resembled the
Continental European preferences ; PR and Parliamentarism.
-- PR or Mixed election system with a heavy PR component.

* Substantial degree of executive instability,

- Complicated process of government formation
- Challenge of keeping governments intact (tam) (hükümetleri sağlam tutma
zorluğu)
* Huge inflation in the number of competing parties and growing ideological
diversity of competing parties.
* Parties with highly divergent opinions or ideologies could cooperate in
forming coalition governments.
-- Unusual partnership : parties of different ideology could join together.
-- Centrist, Leftist, Right-wing parties  Teaming up.

Why governments did not prove to be enduring (devamlı)  partner sat on

irreconcilable (uzlaştırılamaz) ideological differences (farklı ideolojiler birlikte
olamaz).

* Ukraina, Belarus, Central Asia, Russian Federation =

PRESIDENTIALISM.
- Recipe for political stability : The formation of a constitutional system
resting on strong executives, dominant presidents and centralized forms of
decision making.

* Popular Elected President ; would accumulate comprehensive executive

authorities.
* Russian Federation : 1993 constitution, proposed Formula for politic stability
a presidency.
* With Extensive Authorities.
- Enlarged presidents’ appointments
- Decrees (kararname) can be issued by presidents.
- Martial law (olağan üstü hal, sıkı yönetim) emergency powers.
- Presidents can appoint a dismiss the Prime Ministers.(devlet başkanı görevden
uzaklaştırabilir).
- Disband the Duma and call for elections provided that :
a) The Duma 3 times rejects the PM’s nomination by the president.
b) The Duma twice denies confidence in the government.

* Basic Differences Two Era ; 1990s and 2000 on.

* 1990s ; Communist party had stil been most influential and popular party in
Russian party system.
- President Yeltsin lacked the majority support in the Duma.

* 2000 on ; Unity Blog

- United Russia emerging as an alternative political party.
- President Putin could obtain the support of Legislature majorities.

* Ukraina, Belarus and Central Asia = Presidential designs from 1991 on

Constitutionally widely empowered (yetkili) presidents.
- Direct popular elections for the presidents 1991 and 1992 direct popular
presidential elections.
- The parties formed or chaired by the elected president could win legislature
majority of seats.
- Concurring majorities in presidency and the legislature.
- President supported by the legislature.
* Reforms were undertaken by presidents ;
The Presidents ;
1) Extended their tenure.
2) Sought (araştırma) the elimination of term limits  continuous re-elections.
3) Presidential authorities were enlarged through constitutional amendaments.
4) The presidents period in Office were extended through popular vote in
referanda or legislature vote rather than in competitive elections.

* In the case of UKRAINE 1994 until the Orange Revolution of late 2004.
* Belarus 1994  Present.
* Uzbekishtan 1991, Kazakhstan 1992  Present.
* Kyrgyzstan 1991  2005.

- Long time serving presidents  There is no quick turnover or circulation in

executive Office.
- Protest Politics ; Yugoslavia 2002 (Buldozer devrimi), Georgia 2003 (Rose
Revolution), Ukraina 2004 (Orange R.), Kyrgyzstan 2005 (Tulip Rev.) were
named colored revolutions.

* Initally Elections :
- Presidential ; Yugoslavia, Ukraina
- Parliamentary : Georgia, Kyrgyzstan
- Pro-government actors were declared to be winners opposition parties or
candidates did not acknowledge defeat claims of electoral fraud  vote rigging
 popular protests calling for resignation of presidents or re-run elections.

COLORED REVOLUTİONS
* Major shifts in power
* Pro-governments parties or candidates are no longer declared to be the winners
* Official declaration of opposition groups as winners
YUGOSLAVIA  Past Miloseviç Era
1) “Disintegration” (gradual and continuing nature of earl 1990s
2) “Extradition” (suçluların iadesi) Hague or Belgrade 2008s (Uluslar arası
Mahkemeler Lahey ; suçluların nerede yargılanacağı sorun oldu.
3) “Integration into EU”
- “CONCESSIONS” (taviz vermek) Avrupa birliği için taviz mi veriliyor sorusu
gündeme geldi.
* 2006 Karadağ ve 2008 Kosova ; bunların ayrılması milliyetçi kesimin
önemini artırdı.
BALKANS = Stateness issue dominated politics from 1990 on.
* Bosnia Hersek  Federation / Rebuplic of Srpska
GEORGIA (2003)  End of Shavardnadze’s rule (President Saakashvili).

UKRAINE (2004)  Compromise candidate of opposition Yuschenko became

the president.
- Orange Revolution ; Yuschenko (reforms to limit president authorities 
Legislature.
* Divisions within the political camp that achieved power ; Yuschenko X
Tymoshenko.
- Return of Yanukovich  Prime Minister, then as President.
- 2010 Constitutional Court overruled reforms to reduce Presidential powers.
KYRGYZSTAN (2005)  Tulip Revolution, President Akayev ousted.

- Reforms to limit Presidential powers have been put into practice  Step
toward Parliamentary.
-- Revolution Alliance falling apart ; Bakiyev in Presidency / Kulov as Prime
Minister.
* 2010  President Bakiyev ousted through protests.
- Constitutional Reforms  Transform the country into 3 party coalition a
parliamentary design Presidential Authorities (decrease).

The Variance Different Nature of The Pace (Speed) of The Dual Transition:
1) In systems where full membership in the EU has been set as a prospective
goal
- Transition has been facilitated  Pledge for accession in case of successiful
completion of reforms  Prize.
- Made it more reasonable to endure hardship.

Accession to the EU :
I. Wave (dalga) ; Hungary, Czech Rep., Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, Estonia,
Lihhuania and Latvia (May 2004 e kadar).
II. Wave ; Romania, Bulgaria (January 2007)
Not : Bu ülkelerin SSCB den ayrılması hakkında, ikna edilmesi için izlenen yol;
1) Ultimate reward / prize for citizens in EU membership.
2) In flow of EU fonds  in making reforms (geçiş sürecinde EU fonlarıyla
desteklendiler / EU financial assistance )
3) Criteria  provided a road map (iki kısma ayrılabilir)
a) Copenhagen Criteria (for political reforms)
b) Meastrichy Criteria (for economic reforms)

This trasition has been examined in two title.

1) EU factor : bu factörün, bu ülkelerin geçiş sürecini nasıl etkilediğini
inceledik.
2) Geographical, cultural proximity (yakınlık) and ties
a) all the states from the former communist world that joined the made it. EU ;
have borders with the EU members or are pre-geographically in close proximity
to member states.
3) Former Parts of USSR / Allies of the USSR. (direct influence and intervention
of Moscow) ;
- Russian Federation, Ukraina, Belarussia, Kazakistan, Azerbaican, Moldova,
Georgia, Turkmenistan, Tacikistan, Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kırgızistan, Lithuania,
Latvia and Estonia.
* Allies of the USSR not under jurisdiction of USSR or less direct influence of
Moscow ;
- CECs and Balkans.

THE DEVELOPING WORLD

* “The Third World”
- Latin America, Asia, Africa and Middle East  Colonial Legacy have been
ruled from the Continental Europe.
** Latin America  (enduring nature of colonization lasted until 1820 – 1830)
1st to have been colonized 1492. Europeans stepped into the Americas. Then
came “Conquestadores”.
- Spreading the Faith : Riches of the Americas (gold) search for glory and
social status.
- Economic Aspects ;
a) Row materials would be transfered to Europe.
b) Americas would also provide a market for EU goods.
- A major legacy of colonial rule in Americas has been impact on race relations
 social stratification based on descent.
- Stratification ;
1) “Peninsulares” (Iberian – Spain and Portugal.
2) “Creoles” (of European descent born in the Americas)  they led the war of
independence.
Not : bu iki grup arasında başlayan zıtlaşma sonucu Amerika’da doğanlar
bağımsızlığı getiriyor.
3) “Mestizos” (mixed race) intermarriage btw people of European descent and
Indigenous people .
4) “Indigenous” population, orginal inhabitants of Americas.  wars against
each other and conquestadores bring kind of diseases. They forced relocations
and labor.
5) People of African orgin.
* ECON : Unilateral transfer of raw materials from America to Europe.
Americas as market  1820 on with independence .
- Free market, Anti-protectionism, Export – Import oriented growth. Lasted until
1929 Great depression  Brought greater protectionism.

* Throughout the first century of Latin American Independence liberal and pro-
free trade policies.
- Protectionism and Major shift in economic model  1929 Great Depression.
* Politics After Independence ; Initally, decentralized and fragmented politics.
- Creoles  control over large landholdings and they controlled local militias
- “Caudillo” rule (Strong Men) ; control over land with political power.
- Caudillos provided for shelter, income and protection for people who inturn
declared their loyalty (sadakat).
- Caudillos fighting against each other.

* 1850 on Consolidation (birlik) of State Authority ;

- Signs of “State Building”
- Centralization ;
1) Role of the Church
2) Growing demands of classes with no land ownership Traders and Artisans.
3) Monarchy or Republicanism  Congress / Presidency. (Yönetim şekli
monarşi mi yoksa cumhuriyet mi olsun ayrıca cumhuriyet olursa, başkamlık
sistemi mi yoksa meclis idaresi mi olsun).
* Greater penetration (yaygınlık, idrak, anlayış) by a central govern into
territories.
* Liberals, Conservatives and Radicals ; Political competition btw the 3. (19th
century on.)
- Conservatives ; associated (ilişkilendirildi) with landowners. Envisioned
(tasarlamak) the continuing central role of church and military. Paternalistic (aile
şefkati) links to indigeneous communities largely protectionist in economic
sphere.
- Liberals , free-trade stood to represent other interests than the landed interests
asked for a reduction of role of churc and military.
* Major Social Cleavages (büyük sosyal bölünme) : due to IDEOLOGY and
CLASS differences.
* 1929 Great Depression  hit all Latin American States very hard.
(korumacılık dikkate alınmamış, liberal yapı çok geniş bir şekilde kullanılmış
ve sonunda büyük çöküş).
* In Decades to Follow  populistic regimes  Peron, Vargas, Cardenas and
Betancourt.
 Juan Peron – Argentina
 Getulio Vargas - Brazil
 Lazaro Cardenas - Mexico
 Romulo Betancourt – Venezuela
* 1930s – Massive economic shift 1940s.
* Imports substitution model of industrialization ; Previously  export – led
growth. This model aimed to break the dependency of Latin American economy
on industrialized economy.
- Reduce imports replace / substitute them with home production. Central role of
production, factory and labor.
* Populist Era ;
- shift to a model of ISI (import-substitution-industrialization).
- defined the labor as their natural allies.

* Significant break in economic model of development.

 After 1929 Great Depression
- ISI
- 1930s to 1940s Populist Regimes Acquired Power.;
1) The shift to ISI
2) Alliance between the regime / populist leadership and labor
3) Expension of Labor’s political integration through labor confederations.
- Confederations were licensed by the regime itself  Controlled
mobilization of Labor.
4) Charismatic Leadership  Highly popular presidential figure.
5) A party assembled and chaired by the populist leader.
6) Disassociated themselves from all the previous political parties  Anti
establishment political discourse (söylem).
7) Economic Discourse ;
- Critical of privatization
- Critical of free trade
- Critical of Liberalism
- Engaged in nationalization.
- Also made a commitment to alleviation of poverty and redressing socio-
economic inequalities.
* Reduction of Populist Regimes.
- By 1950s, the economic achievements of these regimes were questioned  no
eradication of poverty and socio-economic inequality remained.
- Resulted in redistribution rather than genvine (hakiki) economic restructuring.
- Inıtally, opposition to populist regimes came from the business, the
enterpreneurs and middle class.
- In time  due to failure in economic development and restructuring (yeniden
yapılanma) and labor began to withdraw its support.
- Growing repressive tendencies in populist regimes.
- Populist regimes ended with military coups.
* 1950s and 1960s  rise of Left-wing parties and Altivism of bans imposed by
military leaderships
Bolivian Revelution (1952) / Cuban Revelution (1959).
* Formation of Left-wing political parties.
 Youth Altivism / Protest activism.
 Left-wing armed militant.
* All this combined, whether a leftist revelution tide was on rise late 1960s and
1970s  another round of interruption in competitive politics.
* A New Regime / Era
- Bureaucratic Authoritarian (BA) O’Donnell
- Military Coups
1) Alliances were formed with national and international capital “National” and
international monopolies and aligopolies.
2) Technocratic Rule : Ruled by figures with expertise in a particular field and
with no links to established political parties.
3) Depoliticization – political party activism was prohibited, banned, or limited.
4) Labor  Excluded  Organized representation of their interests was no
longer allowed.
5) Key political issues were left out of popular debate.
* Bureaucratic Authoritarian Regime ;
- The longest and most enduring era of interruption in competitive politics.
- 1970s until mid-1980s  resurrection and return of competitive politics
- Costarica / Mexico / Venezuela = survival of competitive elections.

09/03/2011
* End of the B.A (Bureaucratic Authoritarian Era)
- Transition to competitive civilian politics (rekabetci sivil siyasete geçiş);
 Mid 1980s on negotiated pacted
 Agreements between B.A. Leaders and Civilian Political Elite
1) B.A regimes clashed in confrontation (karşı karşıya gelme) with masses ; loss
of life and disapperances major social costs
2) Some could achieve economic growth whereas other had a very unsuccessful
economic record.
* Variation in economical performance of B.A.
- Militaries strategy of exit  Through negotiations, they retreat from polities
 Bargaining their way out of politics.
 Bargaining for organizational autonomy and reserved domains (örgütsel
özerklik ve ayrılmış alanlar için pazarlık.
Geçiş Sıralaması ; Bargaining  Guarantees  Transfer.
* Democratization Literature :
- Argentina : B.A. leadership was
1) – held responsible for massive casualties –“Dirty War”
2) – dismal (çok kötü) economic record.
3) – Falklands / Malvinas war lost.
- Bargain from a point of weakness  exit with limited guarantees, dismantling
the BA regime was easier.
* Mid 1980s on Transition to competitive politics  most enduring (sürekli) of
return to competitive politics.
- From 2000 on  left-wing victories across Latin America, Venezuela,
Equador, Bolivia, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Guatemala, El Salvador
and Nicaragua.
Not ; Kolombiya, Mexico ve Peru bunlar istisnadır (right-wings hakim).
* Applications of the Left Parties ;
- Land reform
- Social Progress
- Redressing the costs of trade liberalization (serbestleştirilmiş ticari faliyetlerin
telafisi)
- Conditional cash transfers.
- Welfare policies.
- Socio-economic equality.

14/03/2011
LATIN AMERICA
- 2000 on  Left-wing policies victories why in 2000s ;
1) Widespread nature of socio-economic inequalities  in popular support for
left’s emphasis on socio-economic equality.
2) 1990s. Market-based neo-liberal policies leftist parties promised to redress
the difficulties caused in 1990s.
Not : Gap btw the poor and the wealthy.
3) Left-wing parties  reformed
- Moderation of their political discourse no longer radical did not oppose
market-based policies in total.
- Commitment to competitive elections was emphasiszed.
4) Pacted transition meant that the transfer of power to the left would be gradual.
- Civilian political Elite from mid-1980s on.  coalitions took over.
Not : Transitional period of power sharing btw different actors.
Latin America :
* All across  Presidentialism : Directly popular elected presidents with
executive power.
* Legislature (congress)  A seperate direct elections.
- A difficult co-existence btw L and E very rare for presidents to serve with
supportive L majorities.
- Frequently, presidents had to work with rival L majorities  many presidents
have not been affiliated (bağlantılı olmak) with established political parties.
- Non-party figures, not from political career. “Outsiders” from politics  made
it impossible for then to build strong ties with L.
- Parties  weakened with continuous intervals (kesinti) and interruptions
(aralık) in competitive politics.
Not: in batting against the L. many Latin American presidents prepared to
directly appeal to voters  by pass the L, Judiciary, parties.
- Finally, The Indigeneous rights  Ind. parties, Ind. liders and Ind.
movements.
 Recognition of culture, language, tradition and beter Access to social services
and provision.
 For 1st Time : 1990s on indigeneous direct representation in politics.
* American Political Systems : (bu ülkelerin sistenlerini 3 başlık altında
inceleyebiliriz. Bunlar ; Life expectancy, GNI Per capital and Main Exports.)
- Life expectancy figures 40s – 50s.
- Famine (kıtlık)
- Malnutrition (kötü beslenme)
- Undernutrition (açlık sınırının altı)
- Poverty
- Conflict
- Epidemic (salgın) and Endemic (kronikleşmiş) diseases.
- Infant Mortality (çocuk ölümü)
* North Africa : Algeria (Cezayir), Morocco (Fas), Tunisia, Egypt, Libya.
* Colonial Legacy  Berlin Conference (1884-5)
- African Continent was carved up into European zones of control.
- 1960s to 1970s African independence
 When Decolonization 1960 on ;
1) Presidential systems with strong presidents and centralizing tendencies single
party and leaders rule.
2) Conflict btw. the various cleavage (ayrışma) groups.
 Conflict in Africa ; For the control of the state and the scarce resources.
* Social Cleavages ; have been translated into conflict in Africa. (2000 e kadar
beyazların elinde olan topraklara yeni iktidarlar tarafından el konularak, bu
topraklar yerli halka dağıtılıyor. Fakat bu halk toprak işleme konusunda yeterli
bilgiye sahip olmadığı için üretim azalıyor ve açlık başlıyor.

 Race ; South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia apartheid (Racial-seperation) 

Until 1994 election all South African citizens could vote (1994 öncesi sadece
beyaz azınlık oy kulanırdı)  power-sharing government Mandela, FW De
Klerk.
* Religion, ; Bazı bölgelerde Müslüman – hiristiyan birlikte yaşıyor, fakat
yeryer çatışmalarda oluyor.
* Tribe,; they use same language. Africa is so linguistic continet and tribe very
important many aspect in africa, they provide security own people.
* Language
* Region ; Güneyli kuzeyli ayrımı vardır.
* 1990s  massive conflict and bloodshed across Africa.
* 2000 on two major changes ;
1) Competitive elections  on ever expanding number of countries began
experimenting with competitive elections.
- Prior to year 2000  power was transfered through a combination of
extraordinary circumstances.
- Wars, coups  assasinations civil wars.  Prsidents fell.
- Normalization of transfer of power with competitive elections.
2) Peace Settlements ; 2000 on peace settlement in relation to conflicts.  DR
of Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan, Ivory Coast, Angola, Liberia …
* Peace settlements from year 2000 on incorparate ;
2/1) The scheduling of competitive multi-party elections  an instrument of
conflict resolution. (herkesin seçime katılması isteniyor, bu şekilde sorunların
çözümü bekleniyor.)
2/2) Power-sharing government after elections  former rebels were invited not
only to join the elections but also the government provided that they did
successfully in elections.
2/3) Dismantling (tavsiye) and disagreement of the rebel militia on certain
occassions, their integration into the standing national armies.
2/4) Natural resources and wealth  a equitable sharing of resources.
(kaynakların iki grup arasında eşit paylaştırılması çatışmaları önlemek için
yararlı olmuştur.
- These settlement no total end to conflicts. (Roadblocks)
First Difficulty ; major difficulty came with the organization of elections. 
many were suspended or delayed on security grounds.
Second Difficulty : Intimidation (göz korkutmak)  disqualification of certain
candidates.
Finally ; voterigging (seçim sonuçları ile oynamak)  electoral froud.
- Failure in disarmanent  many groups retained (alıkonmuş) their weapons
“Microwars” continued in distant parts of countries.

21/03/2011
AFRICAN POLTICAL STSTEM (SUB-SAHARAN)
- Life Expectancy  40s – 50s
- GNI Per Capital  mostly in the hundreds ($) 140 – above $6000.
- Basic of Economic Production  primary commodities rather than
manufactures  little hint / clues as to the industrial capacity (South Africa).
* Extreme Powerty  Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC).
Extreme Poor ; are those who survive on less than $1.25 a day.  Extremly poor
constitute the majority of the population – Sub-Saharan Africa >51%.
* The other aspect : in the largest number of people  Asia.
- Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC)  Predominantly Sub-Saharan
African countries heavy debt burden.
“Debt trap” (borç tuzağı)  rescheduling and cancellation (bu fakir ülkeler
sürekli borç almak yerine, adil düzenin kurulmasını ve Avrupa pazarına daha
kolay ulaşmak istiyor. Kısaca serbest ticaretin önündeki engellerin kaldırılmasını
istiyor.)
 Greater Access to markets around the world fair trading order.
* most resilient (esnek) legacy of colonialism  artifical drawing of African
boundaries 1884. (Colonial Interests and Trade Flows major factors in
delimiting (sınırları kaldırmak) the boundaries.
 In Africa people claiming to hold a common identity were dispersed
(dağıtmak) across various states.  high heterogenity in each state with people
of various tribal, religious, linguistic, regional, racial identities being lumped up
(hoşlanmamak) together  questioning of boundaries attempts to from break-
away states the legitimacy of boundaries being contested. (sınırlar bölgeye
yönelik dinamiklere göre çizilmemiş yani bu sınırlar meşru değildir diyorlar).
 Challenges to African boundaries and states  1960 on-ongoing  parous
(ihlal) boundaries. (sınırlar ihlal edilebilir).
* African Political System
1) “Failed state” and “State failure”  recent literature.
- States that cannot deliver services and goods.
fail to control their borders
fail to provide for security
come under challenge within their boundaries and from
neighboring states.
- State Failure Indexes  African states are predominantly topping the list.
* Presidentialism in Africa  3rd term debate  presidential tennure (görev
süresi) period in Office.
- Prior to 1990s  unlimited tennure with many presidents serving for ndecades.
- 1990s-2000 on  term limits have been incorporated into constitutions upper
limits as to for how many times the same individual can surve as the president.
- 1990s on  a growing number of African states instituted 2-term limit fort he
individual in presidency.
* Term limit  to prevent the personalization (main risk) of power /
presidency.
and the same individual could no longer reside in presidency for decades.
 a thied of the countries which recently erected term limits  erased it an
allowed the president in Office to serve for a 3rd term and beyond.
 in lesser number of states, presidents tried but failed in delating the term
limit.

The Middle East :

* MENA  Middle East and North Africa.
- Life expectancy  60s
- GNI per capital  mostly in thousands range is widened ($1000 to 38000)
- Main Export Commondities  petroleum, oil, minerals, agricultural products.
* Failure in diversifying the economic base of production and export.
- Diversification does not rest on extraction and export of a single commodity.
* Africa and Middle East  many economies heavily rely on production and
sale of a particular commodity.
* non-diversification  risk
1) depletion
2) global market fluctuations.

24/03/2011
* MENA  Middle East and North Africa.
- The reliance (güven) of the region’s economies on primary commodities raw
materials.
- Rentier economies “Rentier State”  rest on reliance an oil revenue.
1) boosts the role of the state in the economy.
2) the state control reserves, exports, states.
3) centralization in control and how resources.
4) tribes have particularly proven resilient (esnek) in rentier economies.
5) claims / criticisms of crony (kafadar) capitalism
crony (kafadar)  regimes favored certain groups in the society in Access to
wealth.
* Young Population  median age (belli bir yaş grubunun, toplam nüfusun
yarısına eşit durumu =/= 17-30 years.
- Young people  unemployment, little Access to employment opportunities.
 explains part of the popular disconsent (memnuniyetsizlik).

* States For Mention :

a) Sub-state (ulus altı)
- Nation pressures ; sects (meshep), tribes, religions, ethnic groups
b) Supra-state (ulus üstü / devlet üstü).
- National ; Pan-Arabism (1950s-60s) (Arab Birliği)
- Islamism (1970s on)  foemed the strongest political opposition (karşıt)
groups.
* Two Rival Models of State For Mention.
a) Revolutionary Republics
b) Monarchies.

a) Revolutionary Republics ;
- 1950s and 60s, of the “revolutionary” breaks with the past  overthrow of
monarchies or previous leaders with coups.
- Presidents with executive powers. (criticism over time  hereditary (ardıl)
elements have been integrated to succession process
Not; bu ülkelerde cumhuriyetin idaresi babadan oğla geçmeye başladı.
- Presidents ruled with technocrats, bureaucrats, military and security forces.
- Party of the leader / president charismatic leadership and personal appeal of the
leader.  legitimacy hence established. ; Irag / Suria  Ba’th Party, Libya 
Qadhafi, Egypt  Nasser
* Pan-Arabist ideas  Arab nationalism.
- Cold Wars : sought technology and political aid assistance from the Eastern
Bloc.
- Initially  ISI later decades  shift to gether economic liberalizations and
state role in economy.
- Land reform  redistributionnof land only wave of redistribution.
b) Monarchies ;

MENA  State Formation  2 Models

* Republics ”revolutionary” diye kendilerini tanımlıyorlar. They falled down
previous regimes (monarchies or else).
- President : chief executive authority rather political party competition foe the
executive ; technocrats, bureaucrats, military and security forces assisted the
president ; charismatic leadership through a party  established the legitimacy
of presidents.
- Sought (aranır olmak) the assistance of Eastern Bloc (financial, technological
transfer, political support)
- Pan-Arabist Ideas acquired prominence (elde edilmiş ün)  Arab
Nationalism : major force.
- Economic Protectionism ISI model of economic development  inital model.
- In later decades  econ-liberalization and openning.
 Land Reform : the inital and only re-distribution land was re-distributed to
the masses  oligarchic control of the land (control of the land by the few
influential people) was ended  tried to ensure greater social upward mobility
for masses.
- Scarce Resources  limited rent from oil or natural gas not generously re-
distributive.
- Foreign Aid  workers’ remittances (yurt dışından gelen işçi havaleleri)
major sources of revenues.
- Tribes  were not considered to be the building blocs of the “revolutionary”
society and political system.  new national identity that would bring tribes
together.
- “Corporatist” rather than tribal in interest representation  different classe
and their interests had characterized the “revolutionary era”  Professional
alliances or organizations voicing (boşaltma) their interests.
- Middle class  on the rise
- the military  middle class officers  influential in bringing about the
revolution.
- no legitimacy sought through references to religion  fabrication of national
identity excluded the emphasis on religious identity  religiously motivated
parties, movements, groups were excluded (hariç) by the regime.

* Monarchies :
- Ruling families holding executive authority  a hereditary pattern of
succession  power staying in the family  traditional outhorities ; king,
sultan, sheik, emir hold the executive power.
- Rentier economy  reliance (dayanılan şey) oil resources  hosted foreign
workers clientelistic policies Exchange of favors for political support. (amaçları
petrol kaynaklarını kullanmak).
- Continuous Re-distribution was obtained  extensive welfare and support
policies financed by the rent generated by oil.
- Communual Identities  kingship, tribal  attached prominence (önem,
göze çarpan).
- Small Armies  appointed (atanmış) from royal families or their tribes.
- Class  nationalist revival (uyanış) of classes or Professional groups 
excluded !. No corporatist arrangements.
- strong alliances with the west during the bi-polar era assistance from western
bloc. Cauntion has been displayed at times to exclude criticism of being “pro-
western” governments.
* Monarchies  felt the threat of the spread of revolution.  republicanism
- 1967 war and 1973 oil crisis = the threat facing the monarchies was eased /
declined.
- 1967  undermined (ayağını kaydırmak) the legitimacy and succes of Arab
Nationalist rhetoric (cevabı içinde saklı soru) of republics.
- 1973  oil crisis boom for rentier economies welfare monarchies increase.
- 1990s  a wave of political reform  “political liberalization” 
democratization not used !.
- Elections  competitive, multi-party, periodically recurring (tekrar eden)
minimal procedural component of a “democracy”.
- No consolidation (birleşme), or institutionalization of this procedural
requirement in MENA countries as of 1990s.
- Elections might be  noncompetitive (bonds and disqualifications for many
opposition parties or candidates).
 not periodically recurring  delays suspensions.
- Political Liberalization fell short of institutionalizing competitive multi-party
representatives elections  stil signs of political reform and openning.
1) Formation of consultativelizing (istişare komiteleri) councils (konsey) and
assemblies.
2) women’s participation in politic.
3) media freedom release of political prisoners formation of political parties.

- MENA Political Systems

* 1990 a wave of reform
- Consultative Councils /Assemblies  Oman, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia.
* Limitations Election ;
1) At best only portially  half of members were directly popularly elected.
- The rest of members were appointed by the King.
- Main executive actor was very influential in determining membership in
consul councils / assemblies.
2) Merely consultative organs.
- Expressed their opinion on issues for the king, emir, sultan to hear.
- Lacked genuinely law making or legislative powers  reforms did not change
the executive dominance over lagislative activity.
* Women Rights and Political Participation ;
- demands for women’s voting in elections and standing as candidates. 
increasingly voiced.
- well into 2000s  denial of the right to vote and compete for women.  2005
Kuwait lifted the ban.
(Kadınların siyasetle ne kadar, nasıl bir şekilde mücadele etmesi tartışmaları
yeni bir olaydır)
* Competitive Elections in MENA
- Elections have been organized in Lebanan, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Jordan,
Kuwait  criticism of “controlled elections”.
-- Lebanan  competitive elections distrupted with civil war.
* Instrument of Control  through disqualification of some contenders
(mücadeleci)
* ENNAHDA  banned for 2 decades.
* MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD  (Egypt) tried to by-pass the ban by fielding
independent candidates.
* Islamıc Action Front  Jordan
* 1991  FIS, Algeria  opposition discontent and claim of exclusion.
- Many of opposition parties were considered to be “adicals” by the regimes 
tried to redefine relations btw the state and the religion.
- the “threat of radicals taking over” + “threat of the escalation of Arab – Israel
conflict”  references made to these 2 factors when accounting for the
controlled nature of experiments with elections.
- religious (sectarians = hizipsel) identities influential in politics.
- Lebanon  National Pact of 1940s  founding consensus or agreement of the
state  sharing of power and offices btw Muslims and Christians.

* 6/5 ratio (Christ/Muslim) in allocation of Legislative Seats and Publi Offices.

- President  Maronite Community
- Primeminister  Suni
- Speaker of Parliamaent  Shia
* Census (nüfus sayımı) of Early 1930s.
- By 1970s  with major democraphic shifts, new demands of political
participation and representation  particularly by the Shia.
* Taef (Taif) Accords  to end the civil war (89 – 90)  (Bu 6 ya 5 lik sistemin
yerine eşitliği öngördü ve iç barışı sağladı (6/6).
Not : Hizbullah siyasi bir partidir  Sii nufusta desteği çok fazla.

* Lebanon
- Fixed Proportional Sectarian Political Design
-- Fixed ; based on the demographic variables of the 1930s census.
-- Proportional ; representation in proportion to a community’s share of the
total population.
-- Sectarian ; based on communities communal representation.
* Iraq
- 2005 vote on the new constitution  a federal state  Shii under formation 
based communities
- 1990s political reform, openning.
- mid 2000s  3 elections in a year  Iraq (2005)  Legislative elections,
Transitional Assembly elections, referendum on constitution.
- 2009  provincial elections.
- 2010  Legislative elections.
* 1st Competitive Presidential Elections (2004) Egypt.
- Prior to 2004  Presidential elections  non competitive, Party Legislature
 Confirming President Mubarek’s Candidacy (adaylık).
- Popular vote on whether President Mubarek shall be re elected.
- 2004  fort he first time, the then President Mubarek contested against rivals.
Claims of exclusion disqualification of opposition and vote rigging (donanım)
* 2005  Saudi Arabia
- Municipal / Local elections for councillor.
-- Half of councillors were popularly elected for 1st time.
-- 2010 and 2011  wave of protests.
* The pressure on governments in the MENA countries come from protestors in
squares.
* Various political groups took part in demonsrations and protests.
* TUNISIA  1st wave of protests.
- President Ben Ali resigned and fled.
- The initial P.M appointment
- Also protested
- A cabinet with many figures not associated with previous regime. 
technocratic – led transitional government.
- Elections are to be organized.
* EGYPT  President Mübarek was forced to depart  Military – led
transitional era.
- Referendum ;
- 4 years tenure for President (önceden görev süresi 6 yıldı).
- Limits on re-electability for President a deputy has to be appointed for a
President.
- Presidential Legislature Elections are in order.
* YEMEN  President Saleh announced he will not run in coming Presidential
elections  Announced his son will not seek Office transition to Parliamentary
System.
- Presidency  Legislature.  Pledged (tahüt etmek) decentralization reforms.
* SYRIA  Commission to study whether emergency rule can be lifted  PM
resigned (istifa ettirildi).  President appointed a new PM.
* BAHRAIN  A cabinet reshuffle (reorganized) yeniden düzenlendi.  The
PM kept (alıkonulmak) Office  Protests continued due the PM’s keeping
Office.
* JORDAN  King (invited)  a change in government  a commission to
study on political reform.
* SAUDI ARABIA  King announced a package of reforms (social and
economic).
- Health, Public Job creation, housing, university, education, minumum wage,
unemployment benefits increase.

* ASIA  South Asia and Asia Pasific

- India (1947) and Sri Lanka (1948)  Multi-party competitive elections in
place since independence  (only very brief delays) (geleneklerinden taviz
vermediler).
Not : Hidistan da örgütlenmedeki temel farklılık dilden (linguistic) kaynaklanır.
Kongre partisi en köklü partidir. Zaman zaman milliyetci partileride iktidarda
görebiliyoruz. Bir çok Başkan suikaste uğramıştır. 90 lı yıllarda Tamil
kabilesiyle yaşanan çatışma çok büyük etki yaratmıştır. “Tamil Tigers”.
- Elsewhere  Competitive elections  rather recently experimented with
1990s and 2000 on  competitive elections.
* Communist Rule  PRC, Laos, Vietnam, North Korea.
* Monarchist Rule  Nepal (mode a recent transition to republican structure),
Brunei, Bhutan, Cambodia, Thailand.
* Military Rule or Influence  Burma (Myammar), Pakistan, Thailand (2006
Askeri darbe), Indonessia.
- People Power  Popular Protests  1986 Philippines ((Marcos Government
Toppled (devrildi)), 1998 Indonessia – Suhar to Administration Toppled.
* GNI per Capital
* Life Expectancy  60s – 70s.
* Main Export Commodities  Industrialized and diversitied economics.
- Non – industrial countries (South Asia).

ASIA : State-led centralist industrialization efforts 1970s, 80s, 90s high levels of
econ-growth  come with strong centralizing leaderships.
* 1990s Litrature “Asian Values”
- Communual rather than individual interest
- Economic and social wellbeing having priority.
Not : Bu gelişmelerin arkasında devletin güçlü (merkeziyetci) liderleri var.
Toplum bireyin üzerinde görülür, toplumun refahı daha önemli.

Good Luck !