Over recent years, there has been an intense and polarised debate about the extent of democratisation in Turkey, although this has tended to be defined in institutional terms (for example, in the supposed reduction in military tutelage of the political system and the institutional recognition of minority rights). This study seeks to widen the terms of reference by examining the current challenges confronted by the Turkish media within the media-democracy relationship and, using the Kurdish question as a case study, examines the extent to which mainstream Turkish Media are contributing to deliberative democracy. It also seeks to identify where the Turkish media should be most appropriately located within competing models of media and democracy. This analysis of the challenges confronted in achieving and protecting media freedoms in Turkey is based on three empirical exercises. Semi-structured elite interviews were conducted with representatives from most of the mainstream media organisations in the country. Interviews were also conducted with political party representatives, NGO members and academics to ascertain their opinions of the media s democratic performance and credentials and also explore the extent to which they engage with journalists and news organisations routinely in their work. Finally, a content analysis of the coverage/content of two specific events related to the Kurdish Issue (the launch of the Kurdish language TV Channel TRT6 and Uludere Airstrike) in five mainstream Turkish newspapers was conducted. The interviews reveal sharply contrasting views about the extent to which democratisation processes are progressing in Turkey, and identify a range of barriers that continue to inhibit the democratic performance of the mainstream media (e.g. commercialization, state censorship, and other forms of political pressure). The detrimental impact of these factors is to a large degree confirmed by the content analysis of coverage of the Kurdish issue, but the analysis also shows that news output does contain a degree of diversity and difference. For this reason, it is not appropriate to conceive of the Turkish media as acting entirely as a closed message system for political elites.

The left-wing Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) began its violent insurgency campaign against the Turkish state in 1984, claiming that an independent Kurdistan should exist. However, the origins of this conflict can be traced back even further – to the inception of the Turkish Republic in 1923. This thesis begins by investigating the history of how the conflict between the Kurdish and Turkish political frameworks escalated, exploring the concept of “Turkishness” as an element of a homogeneous nation-state. The paper then assesses the effects of a range of exclusionary measures adopted by the Turkish state (beyond punitive military responses in southeastern Turkey and cultural discrimination policies). Ultimately, I argue that the ruling Justice and Development Party’s recent push for a more authoritarian style of leadership under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has ostracized the Kurdish population and has created a climate for Kurdish terrorist organizations, such as the PKK and TAK, to prosper and expand recruitment.

The aim of this study is to analyze the transformation of the official discourse and perception of the Kurdish issue and Kurds through its representations in Turkish media since 1990. Ottoman period and the Republican period till 1990s are studied in the first phase, in order to provide the historical backgroud of the Kurdish question and state&rsquo / s perception of the issue. In the second phase, representations of state&rsquo / s perception of the Kurdish issue in H&uuml / rriyet and Cumhuriyet newspapers are analyzed by using Critical Discourse Analysis techniques. The transformation of the official discourse of the Kurdish issue is examined through eight cases: the Gulf War I in 1991, events occurred during the Parliamentary Oath Ceremony in 1991, Nevruz of 1992, HADEP congress in 1996, capture of Semdin Sakik in 1998 and Abdullah &Ouml / calan in 1999, the Gulf War II in 2003, Nevruz of 2005, Semdinli incident and debates on identity in 2005 and 2006. In this study, it is claimed that state&rsquo / s perception and discourse of the Kurdish issue has transformed since 1990s without a total detachment from its traditional perception and discourse of the issue.

For most of their histories, Turkey and Iran have had a friendly but competitive relationship in ideological and geopolitical venues. When this competition reached its peak in the 1990s, conventional wisdom foresaw prospects for cooperation between Turkey and Iran would gradually decrease. Instead, bilateral relations began to be enhanced in the early 2000s, which is commonly labeled as rapprochement. This rapprochement spread to the political, economic and security arenas, and has accelerated during AKP (Justice and Development Party) rule in Turkey, especially after the Iraqi War of 2003. However, the rapprochement process in bilateral relations lost its momentum in 2010. This thesis examines the reasons and extent of the rapprochement process in Turkish-Iranian relations in the first decade of 2000s, attempting to answer the following research questions: &bdquo / How can the rapprochement process in bilateral relations be defined?

Dans cette recherche, on analyse la question à savoir « comment les trois principaux types de groupes kurdes -nationale, religieuse et économique- coopèrent pour établir un consensus sur un objectif commun : une région politique kurde en Turquie ». En suivant la théorie du constructivisme, le modèle des Trois I, la sociologie de l'organisation et de la sociologie de l'action collective sont articulé pour examiner l'action collective kurde, qui est constamment reconstruite dans un contexte historiquement construit, qui est aussi constamment reconstruit par les dynamiques aux niveaux nationaux, transnationaux (géopolitiques), européens et mondiaux. Quant à la tâche empirique, on examine les conflits, les négociations, la coopération et le consensus de ces trois groupes kurdes sur la question kurde et l'influence des cinq dynamiques structurants mentionnés ci-dessus. La principale méthode utilisée dans ma recherche est l'analyse qualitative des entretiens en profondeur. Au niveau conclusion théorique, la recherche fait remarquable contribution aux théories et approches concernant les identités collectives et les groupes (étant groupe) collectives, l'État, le modèle des « Trois I », la dépendance au sentier, la géopolitique de la question kurde et l'européanisation. Au niveau empirique, la principale conclusion de l'étude est le fait que les groupes kurdes n’ont pas atteint de construire une organisation commune et des règles collectivement acceptées jusqu'ici. Les idées, les intérêts et les institutions des groupes ne sont pas équivalents ; et les intérêts particuliers des groupes ont pesé sur l'action collective dans la région kurde. / In this research, I analyzed the question of “the three main types of Kurdish groups -national, religious and economic- cooperate to establish a consensus on a common purpose: a Kurdish political region in Turkey.” Following the theory of constructivism, the Three I model, the sociology of organization and the sociology of collective action are articulated to examine the Kurdish collective action, which the is constantly re-constructed in historically constructed context, which is also constantly re-constructed by dynamics at national, trans-national (geopolitical), European and global levels. As to the empirical task, I examined the conflicts, negotiations, cooperation and consensus of these three Kurdish groups regarding the Kurdish issue(s) and the influence of the above-mentioned five structuring dynamics. The principal method used in my research is the qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews. At the level of theoretical conclusion, the research makes remarkable contribution to the theories and approaches concerning the collective identities and groups(ness), the state, the “Three I” model, path dependency, the geopolitics of the Kurdish issue, and Europeanization. At the empirical level, the main conclusion of the research is the fact that the Kurdish groups have not achieved to build a common organization and accepted rules so far. The groups’ ideas, interests and institutions are not equivalent and the groups’ distinctive interests have weighed on the collective action in the Kurdish region.

Ev tez li ser teknîka desthilatdariya dewleta Tirk a kolonyalîst li Bakurê Kurdistanê ye. Herêmên kurdî yên li welêt bi dehsalan di bin ala ewlekariya dewletê de rastî rewşa awarte ya demdirêj tên. Li ser pêkanînên wekî çêkirina bendavên hîdroelektrîkê (HES), şewatên daristana yên sîstematîk ên bi piştgiriya dewletê û avakirina baregehên leşkerî /nûqteyên kontrolê yên bi ewlekariya bilind (Kalekol), ez nîşan didim ku mînaka taybet a kolonyalîzmê li Bakurê Kurdistanê çawa nijadperestiya sazûmanî, kontrolkirina nifûsê û wêrankirina ekolojîk bi awayên tevlihev bi kar tîne. Ji ber vê yekê, ev lêkolîn bi giranî li ser pêvajoya kolonîzekirina mekan a li erdnîgariya Kurd disekine. / Diese Dissertation befasst sich mit den türkischen Kolonialtechniken der Gouvernementalität in und über Nordkurdistan. Unter dem Deckmantel der Staatssicherheit sind die kurdischen Gebiete des Landes seit Jahrzehnten einer ausgeweiteten Notstandsregelung ausgesetzt. Anhand von Praktiken wie dem Bau von Wasserkraftwerken (HPP), systematischen und staatlich geförderten Waldbränden und dem Bau von militärischen Hochsicherheitshauptquartieren/Kontrollpunkten (Kalekol) zeige ich auf, wie spezifischen Beispiele der Kolonialität in Nordkurdistan auf komplexe Weise institutionellen Rassismus, Bevölkerungskontrolle und ökologische Zerstörung miteinander verbinden. Daher konzentriert sich diese Studie hauptsächlich auf den räumlichen Kolonisierungsprozess in der kurdischen Geografie. / This dissertation concerns Turkish colonial techniques of governmentality in and over northern Kurdistan. Under the banner of state security, Kurdish areas in the country have been subjected to extended emergency rule for decades. Drawing on practices such as the construction of hydroelectric dams (HPP), systematic state sponsored wildfires and the building of high security military checkpoints (Kalekol), I show how the specific examples of coloniality in northern Kurdistan harness in intricate ways institutional racism, population control and ecological destruction. Therefore, this study mainly focuses on the spatial colonization process of Kurdish geography.