https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3467-9173
![Sample our Global Development journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5929/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Global-Development.jpg"})
Abstract
The relationship between states and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) is the subject of differing interpretations. Many observers of transnational civil society have pointed out a closing of civic space, including humanitarian space. Accordingly, many have focused on conflict and cooperation as main modes of interaction between states and NGOs. In this article we argue that a more in-depth look at state–NGO relations in Turkey shows that this binary framework is not sufficient. Relying on a framework that delineates conflict, cooperation, competition and co-optation as the four main patterns of interaction between states and NGOs, we look at the case of humanitarian NGOs based in Turkey. While aspects of state–NGO relations in Turkey indicate a co-opted humanitarian space, based on interviews with humanitarian NGOs in Turkey and secondary sources, we show that relations between the state and civil society actors are much more complex and evade simple categorisation. This underscores that ideological proximity does not always bring about smooth cooperation, and co-optation does not prevent NGOs from acting contrary to the wishes of the government. Humanitarian NGOs are also able to exert autonomous influence on governments.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 Keck and Sikkink, Activists beyond Borders; Price, “Reversing the Gun Sights”; Rutherford, “Evolving Arms Control Agenda.”
2 Joachim, Nijhuis, and Schneiker, “NGOs and Post-Positivism.”
3 Stroup, “NGOs’ Interactions with States,” 32.
4 A. M. Clark, “Non-Governmental Organizations and Their Influence on International Society”; Edwards, “Introduction”; Josselin and Wallace, “Non-State Actors in World Politics.”
5 Nienaber, “EU Must Diversify Trade Ties.”
6 Lewis, “Civil Society and the Authoritarian State.”
7 Risse-Kappen, Bringing Transnational Relations Back in.
8 Krasner, “Sovereignty.”
9 Zihnioğlu, EU–Turkey Relations, 94; ICNL, “Turkey.”
10 Atalay, “Civil Society as Soft Power.”
11 Stroup, “NGOs’ Interactions with States.”
12 Stroup and Wong, “Agency and Authority of International NGOs.”
13 Keck and Sikkink, Activists beyond Borders, 1.
14 Mathews, “Power Shift,” 53.
15 Khagram, Riker, and Sikkink, “From Santiago to Seattle,” 3.
16 Stroup and Wong, “Agency and Authority of International NGOs.”
17 Cooper and Hocking, “Governments, Non-Governmental Organisations and the Re-Calibration of Diplomacy,” 364.
18 Coston, “A Model and Typology of Government–NGO Relationships.”
19 Ibid., 360.
20 Cooper and Hocking, “Governments, Non-Governmental Organisations and the Re-Calibration of Diplomacy,” 370.
21 J. Clark, “The State, Popular Participation, and the Voluntary Sector,” 593.
22 Young, “Alternative Models of Government-Nonprofit Sector Relations,” 150.
23 Stroup, “NGOs’ Interactions with States.” For a similar view see Najam, “Four C’s of Third Sector–Government Relations.”
24 Coston, “A Model and Typology of Government–NGO Relationships.”
25 Cooper and Hocking, “Governments, Non-Governmental Organisations and the Re-Calibration of Diplomacy.”
26 J. Clark, “The State, Popular Participation, and the Voluntary Sector.”
27 Young, “Alternative Models of Government-Nonprofit Sector Relations.”
28 Barnett, “Evolution without Progress? Humanitarianism in a World of Hurt.”
29 Stroup, “NGOs’ Interactions with States.”
30 Ibid., 36–8.
31 Ibid., 34.
32 cf. Najam, “Four C’s of Third Sector–Government Relations.”
33 Bano, “Co-Producing with FBOs,” 1273.
34 Najam, “Four C’s of Third Sector–Government Relations.”
35 Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks; Petras, “NGOs: In the Service of Imperialism.”
36 Hasmath, Hildebrandt, and Hsu, “Conceptualizing Government-Organized Non-Governmental Organizations.”
37 Greenstein and Mosley, “When Talk Isn’t Cheap.”
38 Blaikie, Designing Social Research, 176.
39 Battaglia, “Purposive Sample.”
40 Tashakkori and Teddlie, “Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Research,” 291.
41 Turhan and Bahçecik, “Agency of Faith-Based NGOs,” 142.
42 The terms waqf and foundation are used interchangeably.
43 Serdar, “Impact of Waqfs on Economic Development,” 31.
44 Bulut and Korkut, “Osmanlı Para Vakıfları,” 23.
45 Zaim, “Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları,” 298. According to Sabahattin Zaim, nearly 12% of the total income of the Ottoman Empire’s state budget went to waqfs.
46 Zencirci, “Civil Society’s History.”
47 Çaha, “Cumhuriyet Türkiye’sinin İlk Yıllarında Sivil Toplum,” 103.
48 Arslan, “Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Sivil Toplum,” 67.
49 Aydin, “İkinci Dünya Savaşından Sonra Türkiye’nin”; Tinal, “Türkiye’de Bir Sivil Toplum Örgütü.”
50 Turhan, “Sivil Toplum Kuruluşlarının Dijital Dönüşümü,” 280.
51 Tocci, “Europeanization in Turkey.”
52 Doyle, “Government Co-Option of Civil Society”; Nimer, “Transforming State–Civil Society Relations”; Sarkissian and Özler, “Democratization and the Politicization of Religious Civil Society”; Aras and Akpinar, “Role of Humanitarian NGOs in Turkey’s Peacebuilding”; Çelik and İşeri, “Islamically Oriented Humanitarian NGOs in Turkey.” For a different interpretation see Turhan and Bahçecik, “Agency of Faith-Based NGOs.”
53 Stroup, “NGOs’ Interactions with States.”
54 Akgün, Senyücel Gündoğar, and Görgülü, Politics in Troubled Times, 6.
55 BBC News Türkçe, “Erdoğan’dan İHH’ya.”
56 Interviewee 2 at IHH, 19 September 2018, İstanbul.
57 Oğuz Gök, “‘Humanitarianism’ Transformed?”
58 Ibid.
59 Ibid.
60 The head of the Turkey Youth Foundation, Enes Eminoğlu, spoke at the rally. The Turkey Youth Foundation (TÜGVA) is known as an NGO very close to the government. Erdoğan’s son, Bilal Erdoğan, sits on the High Advisory Board. See İHH, “Doğu Türkistan için Sessiz Çığlık!”
61 Reuters, “Turkish Leader Calls Xinjiang Killings ‘Genocide.’”
62 Najam, “Four C’s of Third Sector–Government Relations,” 379.
63 İHH İnsani Yardım Vakfı, “İHH’nın Moro Barış Sürecindeki Görevi”; T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı , “Türkiye–Filipinler İlişkileri.”
64 Aras, “Turkey’s Mediation and Friends of Mediation Initiative,” 3.
65 “Cansuyu Tamamen Bağımsız Bir Kuruluştur.”
66 Interviewee 1 from the Cansuyu Association, 13 September 2018, Ankara.
67 Interviewee 1 at AFAD, 27 September 2018, Ankara.
68 Interviewee 3 at TİKA, 27 September 2018, Ankara.
69 İHH İnsani Yardım Vakfı, “Suriyeli yetimler için Türkiye’de dev yaşam merkezi.”
70 The arrangement is based on a protocol between the Maarif Foundation, founded by the government, and the Deniz Feneri Association signed on 12 January 2018. Interviewee 1 at the Deniz Feneri Association, 12 September 2018, Ankara.
71 Interviewee 1 at the Deniz Feneri Association, 12 September 2018, Ankara.
72 Bilefsky and Arsu, “Sponsor of Flotilla Tied to Elite.”
73 Interviewee 2 at İHH, 19 September 2018, Istanbul.
74 Danış and Nazlı, “Faithful Alliance Between the Civil Society and the State.”
75 Mr Yetiş is a medical doctor with extensive civil society experience. He was a Member of Parliament from the ruling party between 2011 and 2015.
76 In one of the speeches by Murtaza Yetiş on the issue of the Syrian case, he says, “Today [August 2015], together with the public and NGOs, we have discussed this issue [Syria] at length. The province of Hatay reflects an ancient culture where it is now hosting thousands of Syrians. Thanks to the contribution of public institutions, our government, and NGOs, the problems have been minimised.” http://www.milliyet.com.tr/basbakanlik-basdanismani-yetis-goc-akinlarini-hatay-yerelhaber-944395/ (accessed November 2, 2018).
77 Interview with Fehmi Bülent Yıldırım, cited in Sabancı, “Türkiye–Afrika İlişkilerinde Sivil Toplum,” 80.
78 Kayaoglu, Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
79 The Coordination of Public Diplomacy Unit was established with Circular No. 2010/3 of the Official Gazette no. 27478, dated 30 January 2010.
80 Interviewee 1, at the İHH, 19 September 2018, İstanbul.
81 Interviewee 2, at the İHH, 19 September 2018, İstanbul.
82 Mehmetcik, “Humanitarian NGOs,” 267.
83 Kalaycioglu, “Civil Society in Turkey: Continuity or Change?”
84 Keyman and Icduygu, “Globalization, Civil Society and Citizenship in Turkey.”
85 Davison and Parla, Corporatist Ideology In Kemalist Turkey.
86 Civicus, “Civicus Monitor,” https://monitor.civicus.org/
87 Stroup, “NGOs’ Interactions with States.”
88 Diner, “Gender Politics and GONGOs in Turkey”; Doyle, “Government Co-Option of Civil Society.”
89 Boztaş, “Shrinking Humanitarian Space in Turkey.”
90 Mitchell, “Limits of the State”; Navaro-Yashin, Faces of the State.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Şerif Onur Bahçecik
Şerif Onur Bahçecik is Associate Professor in the Department of International Relations at Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey. His current research focuses on international organisations, international development and human rights in global politics. He has previously published in Ortadogu Etudleri, New Perspectives on Turkey, Third World Quarterly and Global Policy.
Yunus Turhan
Yunus Turhan’s research covers Turkey–Africa relations, politics of non-state actors, state–NGO relations, peace and conflict studies. During his PhD at Middle East Technical University, he was also affiliated with Oxford University’s Department of International Development as a visiting fellow researcher from 2017 to 2018 where he was involved in Changing Structures of Islamic Authority and Consequences for Social Change: A Transnational Review (CSIA), a five-year research project funded by the European Research Council (ERC). He has previously published in All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, Turkish Studies, Journal of Asian and African Studies, African Security Review, Development Policy Review and Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies.