[NEOSTORY] The Past is now – Politics of Denial and Dealing with the Past in the Western Balkans (Perspectives No. 10, May 2023)

Perspectives Southeastern Europe is a publication series of the Southeastern Europe offices of the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung. The focus is on Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the foundation has established offices. The new volume titeld "The Past is now – Politics of Denial and Dealing with the Past in the Western Balkans" was just published and...

[Articles] Autokratisches Lernen Parallelen des russischen und türkischen Neopopulismus (Südosteuropa Mitteilungen 5-6/2022)

Mein jüngster Artikel ist im Dezember 2022 im Open Access-Format in den Südosteuropa Mitteilungen der Südosteuropa-Gesellschaft erschienen. Darin untersuche ich Parallelen in der Entwicklung autokratischer Herrschaft in Russland und der Türkei. Anhand der Aktivitäten beider Regime auf dem Westlichen Balkan werden einige der wichtigsten Herausforderungen für die liberale Demokratie aufgezeigt, wobei drei Hauptthesen verfolgt werden: Erstens sind revisionistische, neopopulistische Regime mit den genuinen Interessen der liberalen Demokratie unvereinbar und stellen eine Herausforderung für die Forderung nach einer werteorientierten Außenpolitik dar, wie sie z.B. von Deutschland vertreten wird. Zweitens gibt es einen Kipppunkt in der autokratischen Entwicklung populistischer Regime, der übersehen werden kann - was funktionierende Partnerschaften zwischen beiden Regimen unmöglich und eine Rückkehr auf den Pfad der Demokratie unwahrscheinlich macht. Drittens dient das revisionistische Sendungsbewusstsein neopopulistischer Akteure sowohl in Russland als auch in der Türkei der Herrschaftssicherung, indem sie die öffentliche Zustimmung im In- und Ausland manipulieren. Der Beitrag schließt mit einem Plädoyer dafür, den revisionistischen Neopopulismus als solchen ernst zu nehmen, und plädiert für ein strategisches Umdenken in der Außenpolitik gegenüber neopopulistischen Regimen.

[Public Diplomacy] Conclusion: Turkish-Bosnian sibling cities and cross-border neo-populism (Part 9)

On this series: This blog post belongs to a series under the title and leading question „Can networks of local governments challenge the rise of cross-border neo-populism?“. The complete series are my contribution to an edited volume by Dr. Agata Rogoś, postdoctoral research fellow at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. Agata’s Edited volume’s working title is „Permeability...

[Public Diplomacy] Tribute to the sultan: the disinvitation of Orhan Pamuk by Sarajevo (Part 8.1/8)

On this series: This blog post belongs to a series under the title and leading question "Can networks of local governments challenge the rise of cross-border neo-populism?". The complete series are my contribution to an edited volume by Dr. Agata Rogoś, postdoctoral research fellow at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. Agata's Edited volume's working title is "Permeability...

[Öffentliche Diplomatie] Die territorial-administrative Struktur der Türkei (Teil 3/8)

Vorbemerkung: Dieser Blogbeitrag gehört zu einer Serie unter dem Titel und der Leitfrage “Können Netzwerke von Kommunalverwaltungen den Aufstieg des grenzüberschreitenden Neopopulismus herausfordern?” Die komplette Serie ist mein Beitrag zu einem Sammelband von Dr. Agata Rogoś, Postdoc-Stipendiatin an der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. Der Arbeitstitel des von Agata herausgegebenen, englischsprachigen Bandes lautet “Permeability of dispossession /...

[Öffentliche Diplomatie] Türkisch-bosnische Geschwisterstädte und ein semantisches Problem mit ‚Populismus‘ (Teil 2/8)

Im Gegensatz zur Fülle von Studien zur Öffentlichen Diplomatie und zu Populismus im Allgemeinen gibt es bisher keine Studien zum Neopopulismus im bosniakisch-türkischen Kontext, wie er hier verstanden wird: Neopopulismus ist ein grenzüberschreitendes Phänomen, das mehr als eine nationale Öffentlichkeit anspricht. Um die relative Abwesenheit von Literatur zu diesem Thema zu erklären, sollte eine Sichtung ausgewählter Arbeiten zum Populismus hilfreich sein. Dabei behalte ich zwei Grundannahmen im Blick: Erstens kann (und sollte) der türkisch-bosniakische Neopopulismus, wie jede andere Form des zeitgenössischen Populismus, in einen viel breiteren, europäischen und sogar globalen Kontext des Aufstiegs illiberaler, populistischer Bewegungen eingeordnet werden. Dies ergibt sich allein schon aus der Tatsache, dass die medialisierte Öffentlichkeit in einem vorher nie da gewesenen Maß entgrenzt und kosmopolitisiert ist. Zweitens, und trotz der allgemeinen Probleme der Vagheit und des Dissenzes in den häufigsten Definitionen des Populismus (Vgl. Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser 2017; Rosanvallon 2020), sollen die am häufigsten angenommenen Kernelemente des Populismus (Volk, Elite, Vox Populi, etc.) hervorgehoben werden, weil die Betrachtung dieser Begriffe helfen können, zu verstehen, warum das Konzept des Populismus sowohl eine passende, als auch problematische Kategorie in dem gegebenen, grenzüberschreitenden Kontext der Türkei und Bosnien ist -- und weshalb besser von Neopopulismus die Rede sein sollte, wenn beschrieben wird, was sich in diesem zunehmend entgrenzten Zwischenraum entfaltet.

[Öffentliche Diplomatie] Mit Städtediplomatie gegen den Neopopulismus? (Teil 1/8)

In diesem Beitrag werde ich die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von Städtepartnerschaften, Städtediplomatie, Koalitionen von Gemeinden und zivilgesellschaftlicher Akteure als mögliche Lösungen für den globalen Aufstieg von Populismus und Neopopulismus diskutieren. Ich werde mich auf den Fall der türkisch-bosnischen (bosniakischen) Städte- und Gemeindepartnerschaften konzentrieren, die im gesamten Text als „Geschwisterstädte“ bezeichnet werden: Diese Metapher wird dem türkischen Begriff 'kardeş şehir', dem bosnischen Begriff 'pobratimlja' und der asymmetrischen, hierarchischen Beziehung dieser Arrangements besser gerecht. Diese neueren Formen von Städte- und Gemeindepartnerschaften weichen von vielen anderen, bekannten Beispielen ab – vor allem, weil sie von autoritären, rechten und neopopulistischen Akteuren dominiert werden.

[Public Diplomacy] ‚Hemşehrilik‘ (fellow-townsmenship) and the venture of Bosnian-Turkish sibling cities (Part 5/8)

As this example shows, being different from the others -- as Muhacir -- does not mean being other than Turkish: it rather means that there are one or more deep societal conflicts about the understanding how to be Turkish, and/or who determines what Turkish and Turkish culture would possibly be. I was told in practically every single interview with Bosniak Muhacirs (and their offspring) in Turkey what they perceive of as the most fundamental difference between themselves and 'the others': they would never -- down "to the seventh or ninth generation" -- ever marry their akraba (= relatives). Cousin marriage -- in the Arabic speaking Middle East described as bint 'amm marriage by anthropologists -- is in Turkey known as akraba evliliği. It is considered to be an eastern practice by Bosniak Muhacir people in Turkey, which corresponds to the fact that in the Balkans, cousin marriage is practically taboo and considered incestuous. Hence, the reactions of many Bosniak Muhacir people to the fact that some of their Anatolian compatriots practice it, often were expressed in extreme disgust. "Bunlar kültürsüz" -- they have no culture -- was often added as an explanatory comment. The importance of this societal conflict, where representatives of both sides can claim their own establishedness and the other side's outsiderness, should not be underestimated in the way how figurative kinship is established through sibling cities (kardeş şehir), either by representatives of the ruling party, or by Muhacir groups: even though representatives of both groups use the same kinship metaphores (like sibling / kardeş) and speak about culture (kültür), they may fundamentally disagree over the meaning and the role of their agnatic or figurative akraba (kinship) -- as the example of akraba evliliği shows. In the same vein, there are fundamental disagreements over the notion of culture, and the way how culture is brokered by official Turkish cultural centers and initiatives on the market of public opinions in the Balkans.

[Public Diplomacy] The illiberal framework for Turkish municipalities‘ scope of action abroad (Part 4/8)

The long shadow of all these conflicts resonates in the hierarchical interrelationship of Turkey's territorial-administrative structures – and also in the way how relations are established to municipalities in the Balkans. In this regard, one territorial-administrative feature of Turkey is crucial: the institution of the district governorate (kaymakamlık) and/or the governorate (valilik), whose main administrator, the governor, is called kaymakam or vali. The vali is widely regarded as the state’s extended arm into the city – and in fact, it can be seen as a parallel administration to the elected mayors' offices. The vali is directly bound to the centralized government in Ankara, and as such, it can bypass the electoral process, especially the local elections (Mahallî İdareler Genel Seçimleri). In this way, many local governments and municipal leaders who had been elected in the 2019 local elections were, in the meantime, forcibly dismissed and replaced by governors (vali / kaymakam).

[Public Diplomacy] The territorial-administrative structure of Turkey (Part 3/8)

Although the exact number of Istanbulites is subject to discussions, official figures assume that approximately 16 million out of 84.711.239 million inhabitants of Turkey live in Istanbul, which makes up to 20 % of the total population. Together with 29 other Turkish cities (şehir), Istanbul is attributed the status of a metropolis (büyükşehir, literally: big city). As Istanbul comprises 39 districts (ilçe) with their own, respective municipal sub-governments (belediye), each presided by a mayor (belediyebaşkanı), the metropolitan government (büyükşehir belediyesi) of the whole metropolis is represented by the metropolitan mayor (büyükşehir belediyebaşkanı). Currently (January 2021), this position is filled by Ekrem İmamoğlu from the oppositional CHP (as initially mentioned).

[Public Diplomacy] Turkish-Bosnian sibling cities and a semantic problem with ‚populism'(Part 2/8)

The stress of the Ottoman past in the official Turkish actors' cultural initiatives is the reason why their activities have been classified cultural diplomacy from the very beginning of their visibility in the Balkans. The year 2009, when the first branch of the Yunus-Emre-Cultural Centers opened its doors in the Bosnian capital Sarajevo, can be seen as a first significant benchmark. However, Turkish culture and cultural diplomacy are not only promoted in direct and subtle ways by offical representatives of the Turkish state: from the point of view of soft power – which according to Joseph Nye needs to work subtly in order to be successful – the popularity of Turkish TV-series was (and still is) of enormous relevance. Especially the latter aspect implies that an understanding of the appeal of “Turkish culture” in the Balkans cannot solely be explained by studying the ruling regime's activities: much broader strata of the involved societies (e.g. TV consumers/prosumers in Bosnia and Turkey) and their various discoursive contexts are, as informal actors, involved in the process of cultural diplomacy.

[Public Diplomacy] Can networks of local governments challenge the rise of cross-border neo-populism? (Part 1/8)

In this contribution, I will discuss the possibilities and limits of town twinnings, city diplomacy and coalitions of mayors as possible solutions to the global rise of populism and neo-populism. I will focus the case of Turkish-Bosnian (Bosniak) town twinnings, which will be called sibling cities throughout the text: this metaphore better responds to the Turkish notion of kardeş şehir, the Bosnian notion pobratimlja, and the asymmetrical relationship of these arrangements. These recent forms of town twinnings are deviant from many other, well-known examples -- mainly for being dominated by authoritarian, right-wing and neo-populist actors. Populism, despite being a global trend, is often perceived as a phenomenon that occurs inside a given nation-state. However, cross-border coalitions of municipalities between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Turkey together form a polity beyond the level of national governments; at once, they remain being heavily shaped by the latter. Alongside with this phenomenon, a new form of cross-border neo-populism is emerging: unlike „classical“ populism, neo-populism addresses more than one populus (people).

[Migration] Refugees and the public opinion

On Tuesday, 3. March 2020, thousands of demonstrators gathered in Berlin under the motto "Open the borders! Save lives! Fight fascism!"1 Obviously, the demonstration was a spontaneous and direct response to the developments at the Turkish-Greek border, and especially on the Aegean islands of Lesbos and Chios. There, refugees live in slum-like camps (Moria, e.g.)....

[Public Diplomacy] The neo-right wing trend across Europe and Turkey: can coalitions of municipal leaders challenge populism?

In this contribution, I will discuss if political coalitions of liberal-minded local governments can challenge the rise of neo-right wing populism at the state level. I was intrigued and motivated by Sezin Öney's article from 24.12.2019, published in English on Gazete Duvar. [1] In her article, Öney comments on the recent alliance of metropolitan mayors...

[Öffentliche Meinungen] Ein Erfolg für Wikipedia? Zensur und OSN in der Türkei

Nach 990 Tagen Zensur ist die Wikipedia wieder ohne VPN-Client in der Türkei zugänglich - was mich als Wikipedianer natürlich freut, aber besonders freut es mich für türkische Userinnen, die das als Teilerfolg gegen das nervöse Regime verbuchen. Die Wikipedia ist ein höchst „gefährliches“ Instrument, vor dem sich sich Regime fürchten, die ihre Wirklichkeiten lieber...