Transnational securitization and violence: the discursive mechanism behind the pro-AKP diaspora’s repression of the dissident diaspora groups in the West

ABSTRACT

Authoritarian regimes do not only target and oppress their opponents at home, they also try to repress dissident diaspora members abroad. The literature on transnational (extraterritorial) repression has shown that authoritarian regimes normally use transnational organs of the state such as intelligence services as part of their usual transnational repression activities. However, since they do not have sovereignty in the countries, their transnational repression has limits. This article argues that loyal diaspora supporters help these regimes as additional repression and violence apparatuses by trying to repress diaspora members from the same country of origin. However, the discursive mechanism behind this phenomenon has not been studied. This study aims to address this gap. Based on the competitive authoritarian Turkish case, it introduces the concept of “transnational securitization” to securitization theory. The article argues that what makes this type of securitization different is that the audience (pro-government Turkish and non-Turkish Muslim diaspora groups) is not only convinced by the securitization narrative that legitimates the use of extraordinary means that are normally undertaken by the state, but takes it upon themselves to carry on the anti-dissident repressive and violent actions. The article contributes to both transnational repression and securitization literatures.

KEYWORDS:

• Authoritarianism
• government and opposition
• securitization
• violence
• transnationalism
• transnational repression
• diasporas
• Turkey
• AKP
• Erdogan

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Pedroza and Palop-Garcia, “Diaspora Policies in Comparison”; Gamlen, Cummings, and Vaaler, “Explaining the Rise of Diaspora Institutions.”

2 Biswas, “Globalization and the Nation Beyond,” 43.

3 Keane, “Democracy, Diaspora and the Territorial Mentality.”

4 Cooley and Heathershaw, Dictators Without Borders; Glasius, “Extraterritorial Authoritarian Practices”; Dalmasso, “Participation Without Representation”; Baser and Ozturk, “Turkey’s Diaspora Governance Policies.”

5 Tsourapas, “Global Autocracies”; Schenkkan et al., “Perspectives on ‘Everyday’ Transnational Repression.”

6 Yilmaz and Erturk, “Populism, Violence.”

7 See in detail, Shipoli, International Securitization; Shipoli, Islam, Securitization.

8 Moss, “Transnational Repression”; Adamson, “Sending States.”

9 Grossman, “Toward a Definition of Diaspora,” 1267.

10 Cohen, Global Diasporas.

11 Healey, Race, Ethnicity, Gender.

12 Mügge, “Ideologies of Nationhood in Sending-State Transnationalism.”

13 Levitsky and Way, “Elections without Democracy,” 52; Levitsky and Way, Competitive Authoritarianism, 5–7.

14 Esen and Gumuscu, “Why Did Turkish Democracy Collapse?,” 1075.

15 Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2022.

16 Buzan and Waever, Regions and Powers.

17 Buzan and Hansen, The Evolution of International Security Studies.

18 Shipoli, International Securitization; Shipoli, Islam, Securitization.

19 Balzacq, Léonard, and Ruzicka, “‘Securitization’ Revisited.”

20 Adamides, “Protracted Conflicts.”

21 Floyd, “Securitisation and the Function of Functional Actors.”

22 Ibid., 7–12.

23 Baysal, “20 Years of Securitization.”

24 Huysmans, “What’s in an Act?”; Roe, “Is Securitization a ‘Negative’ Concept?”

25 Floyd, “Extraordinary or Ordinary Emergency Measures,” 1.

26 Leonard and Kaunert, “Reconceptualizing the Audience,” 67.

27 Balzacq, “Securitization Theory.”

28 Buzan, Waever, and de Wilde, Security: A New Framework, 29–30.

29 Waever, “Securitization and Desecuritization,” 55.

30 Buzan, Weaver, and de Wilde, Security: A New Framework, 27.

31 Ibid., 36.

32 Ibid.

33 Derdzinski, “Internal Security Services,” 17.

34 Philipsen, “Performative Securitization.”

35 Floyd, “Extraordinary or Ordinary Emergency Measures.”

36 Buzan and Waever, “Macrosecuritisation.”

37 Balzacq, “Enquiries into Methods.”

38 Adamides, “Protracted Conflicts.”

39 Özpek, “The State’s Changing Role”; Özkut and Aşçı, “Long-Lasting State of Emergency”; Yilmaz and Barry, “The AKP’s De-Securitization and Re-Securitization” Yilmaz, Shipoli, and Demir, “Authoritarian Resilience through Securitisation” Yilmaz, Demir, and Shipoli, “Securitisation via Functional Actors.”

40 Özturk and Tas, “The Repertoire of Extraterritorial Repression.”

41 Taş, “The Chronopolitics of National Populism,” 3; Yilmaz, Creating the Desired Citizen.

42 Yilmaz and Shipoli, “Use of Past Collective Traumas.”

43 Çapan and Zarakol, “Turkey’s Ambivalent Self.”

44 Yilmaz, Caman, and Bashirov, “How an Islamist party managed to legitimate,” 2020.

45 Lancaster, “The Iron Law of Erdogan,” 1684.

46 Adar and Yenigun, “A Muslim Counter-Hegemony?”

47 Yilmaz and Shipoli, “Use of Past Collective Traumas.”

48 Yilmaz, Creating the Desired Citizen; Yilmaz; Shipoli, “Use of Past Collective Traumas.”

49 Kendal-Taylor, Frantz, and Wright, Digital Repression, 288.

50 Ibid.

51 Yilmaz and Shipoli, “Use of Past Collective Traumas.”

52 Elger and Hering, “Wie Erdogan-Fans deutsche.”

53 Ibid.

54 Sterkenburg, “Is de arm von Erdogan.”

55 Akçapar and Aksel, “Public Diplomacy through Diaspora,” 138.

56 Sozcu, “Erdoğan: Batı dünyası.”

57 Taş, “The Chronopolitics of National Populism.”

58 VOA, “Erdoğan’dan Merkel’e.”

59 Adar, “Rethinking Political Attitudes.”

60 Adar and Yenigun, “A Muslim Counter-Hegemony?”

61 Rikar, “How Turkey’s Erdogan.”

62 Bayraklı, Basri Yalçın, and Yeşiltaş, Avrupa’da PKK.

63 Adar, “Rethinking Political Attitudes.”

64 Brand, Citizens Abroad, 111.

65 Yaldız, “A Critical Approach.”

66 Baser and Ozturk, “Turkey’s Diaspora Governance.”

67 Adar, “Rethinking Political Attitudes.”

68 Arkilic, “How Turkey’s Outreach”; Adar, “Rethinking Political Attitudes”; Sterkenburg, “Is de arm von Erdogan.”

69 Sozcu, “Erdoğan: Batı dünyası.”

70 Erdogan, “We Should Build a Brighter Turkey.”

71 Bayraklı, Basri Yalçın, and Yeşiltaş, Avrupa’da PKK.

72 Frantzman, “Turkey Accused of Widespread Attempt.”

73 Perry et al., “Planting Hate Speech.”

74 The Guardian, “Danish Turks Withdraw.”

75 Wohl-Immel, “Wie Erdogan Einfluss.”

76 Haberler, “Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan.”

77 New York Times, “Erdogan Security Forces”; Castaldo, “Pro-Erdogan Muscle Against D.C. Protesters.”

78 Cavusoglu, “Washington’da yargılanması.”

79 Euronews, “Suikast iddiasıyla gündeme.”

80 Deutsche Welle, “Aslan: Avrupa’daki muhalefeti susturmaya.”

81 Knack, “Man opgepakt voor bedreiging.”

82 TR7/24, “Hollanda Mahkemesi.”

83 CPJ, “Exiled Turkish Journalist.”

84 Deutsche Welle, “Exiled Turkish Journalist.”

85 Dündar, “Direct Message to Germany from Erdoğan.”

86 Cumhuriyet, “AKP’nin ‘Etik Kurulu’.”

87 New York Times, “Erdogan Security Forces”; Castaldo, “Pro-Erdogan Muscle Against D.C. Protesters.”

88 Duvar, “Muhalif boksör ikinci kez saldırıya.”

89 Ibid.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council (ARC) under Grant [DP220100829 Religious Populism, Emotions and Political Mobilisation].

Notes on contributors

Ihsan Yilmaz

Professor Ihsan Yilmaz is research professor of political science and international relations at Deakin University’s Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalization. Previously, he worked at the Universities of Oxford and London. At Deakin, his projects have been funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC), Department of Veteran Affairs, Victorian Government and Gerda Henkel Foundation. He has been working on authoritarianism, populism, transnationalism, religion and politics, soft power, digital technologies and politics, and sharp power, with special emphasis on Turkey, Indonesia and Pakistan. He is also a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at Oxford University’s Regent College and Brussels-based think tank, the European Center for Populism Studies (ECPS).

Erdoan Shipoli

Dr. Erdoan Shipoli is a visiting professor at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service. He has extensively published on the securitization theory, Islam and the United States. He is the author of Islam, Securitization, and US Foreign Policy (Palgrave Macmillan, 2018).

Ahmet Dogru

Dr. Ahmet Dogru is a visiting scholar at Magdeburg University, Germany. He has been working on authoritarianism, transnationalism, Turkish politics, Turkish diasporas, and Kurdish politics.