Periodic Reporting for period 1 - Realist (Why do We Need a Realist Constitutional Theory to Study the Politics of Constitutional Change in the Middle East?)
Período documentado: 2017-08-01 hasta 2019-07-31
In this project, I proposed a realist interpretation of constitutional theory by focusing on constitutional politics in Turkey and the Arab Spring constitutional revolutions. Much ink has been spilled on both cases in both popular media and scholarly publications. Most of the publications written about political and legal reforms undertaken by the Justice and Development Party during the 2000s and in the wake of the Arab spring celebrated as the dawn of a new era. In Turkey, Egypt and Tunisia, in common, after the abrupt end of military tutelage or autocratic regimes, a process of new institutional and constitutional design toward a liberal democracy was on the table. For many social scientists, constitutional scholars and external Western actors, the main issue at stake in these countries was the transition from autocracy to liberal democracy. In contrast to widespread optimism about possible regime changes and social transformation in these countries, constitutional politics in Turkey and the uprisings of 2011 had unanticipated consequences: authoritarianism proved to be resilient or more intensified (in Turkey and in Egypt), the old power compact was rejuvenated (in Egypt and in part in Tunisia) or a new power compact replaced the old establishment (in Turkey), and social and economic inequalities persisted (in common). In its attempt to explain these constitution-making attempts, the constitutional theory has been largely shaped by liberal political theory and legal constitutionalism. However, this analytical and theoretical framework is grounded in legalism and moralism, and such legal moralism precludes constitutional studies from grasping the real forces that affect constitutional revolutions. Realist political theory has recently posed a challenge to liberalism. However, despite the magnitude of the impact of the theory on political theory, its influence on constitutional studies has been minimal. Realism provides an alternative theoretical perspective to that of liberalism in evaluating and examining constitutional changes and transformations on least four grounds: it focuses on the autonomy of politics, it allows for the abandoning of communitarianism and cultural relativism as alternatives to liberal theory, it requires theorizing in context, and it enables empirical studies of constitutional change that are critical.
In sum, REALIST involves two main objectives.
- To propose and apply constitutional transformations in the Middle East by a realist approach
- To analyze and evaluate the failure of political Islam in leading a constitutional transformation on grounds of a realist political theory
In sum, REALIST involves two main objectives.
- To propose and apply constitutional transformations in the Middle East by a realist approach
- To analyze and evaluate the failure of political Islam in leading a constitutional transformation on grounds of a realist political theory
Under WP1, which aims at offering a realist approach to constitutional thought, I performed the following tasks:
1) Conducting a comprehensive critical review on the existing theoretical perspectives on constitutional theory and constitutional changes in order to address the reasons why they fail in grappling with political Islam-led constitutional transformations
2) Aiming to establish a dialogue between realist approaches in political and legal theories so as to highlight the added value of this theory.
Under WP2, which examines the reasons for the failure of political Islam in guiding constitutional transformation, I pushed the realist approach in political theory to founding moment and constitutional change. This has been done so in the following way:
1) Examining the secondary sources concerning the historical context in three countries (Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia)
2) Examining the way in which Islamic political thought/local thinkers/political actors define major constitutional concepts including the constituent power, sovereignty, collective identities, and polity.
3) Analyzing the failure of political Islam by combining both historical and ideational perspectives and do this so in a comparative fashion by taking the specific conditions of each country into account
This work resulted in three academic papers, which were presented in several conferences, seminars, and workshops.
The first peer-reviewed article from the project is appeared in “From Weimar to Ankara: Carl Schmitt, sovereignty and democracy” is now published in Volume 45, Issue 6 of Philosophy & Social Criticism. Three research articles are currently under review.
1) Conducting a comprehensive critical review on the existing theoretical perspectives on constitutional theory and constitutional changes in order to address the reasons why they fail in grappling with political Islam-led constitutional transformations
2) Aiming to establish a dialogue between realist approaches in political and legal theories so as to highlight the added value of this theory.
Under WP2, which examines the reasons for the failure of political Islam in guiding constitutional transformation, I pushed the realist approach in political theory to founding moment and constitutional change. This has been done so in the following way:
1) Examining the secondary sources concerning the historical context in three countries (Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia)
2) Examining the way in which Islamic political thought/local thinkers/political actors define major constitutional concepts including the constituent power, sovereignty, collective identities, and polity.
3) Analyzing the failure of political Islam by combining both historical and ideational perspectives and do this so in a comparative fashion by taking the specific conditions of each country into account
This work resulted in three academic papers, which were presented in several conferences, seminars, and workshops.
The first peer-reviewed article from the project is appeared in “From Weimar to Ankara: Carl Schmitt, sovereignty and democracy” is now published in Volume 45, Issue 6 of Philosophy & Social Criticism. Three research articles are currently under review.
Research findings contribute to the literature in two ways. First, instead of testing the contemporary constitutional and political transformation in the Middle East against the liberal constitutional blueprint, I proposed a realist theory to espouse the uneasy connection among liberalism (e.g. neutrality, autonomy), moral principles (e.g. toleration, pluralism), legitimation, and power relations. Thus, if a realist route of theoretical reflection is followed, that is, if it is not moral ideals and principles that guide and restrict political action, then one may argue that a syncretic dialog between liberalism and Islamic philosophy is ineffective, perhaps even unnecessary. Such attempts focus on reconciling Islam and liberalism at an abstract level, though the establishment of political and legal orders are a response to real forces shaping society. From a realist account, constitutional moments are embedded within the conflictual nature of politics and must be most productively viewed as potentially the ultimate battlegrounds for conflicting identities and political projects in which it is always possible that clashes could emerge over foundational norms and values concerning collective identity (e.g. constituent power) and the nature of the regime (constituted form). The second contribution involves applying a realist interpretation of constitutional founding and comparative constitutional analysis with a particular focus on the Arab Spring. Realism provides an alternative theoretical perspective to that of liberalism in evaluating and examining constitutional changes and transformations on least four grounds: it focuses on the autonomy of politics, it allows for the abandoning of communitarianism and cultural relativism as alternatives to liberal theory, it requires theorizing in context, and it enables empirical studies of constitutional change that are critical. I examine these aspects by offering analyses from the case of the Arab Spring. Furthermore, in order to interpret and make sense of the historical contestation over the constitution values and foundations in Turkey, I drew on Carl Schmitt’s political and constitutional thought in order to reflect on the political struggle over the foundational norms and values of a constitutional settlement in modern Turkey. This analysis, which focuses on the relationship between democracy and sovereign decision in Schmitt’s thought, extends the implications of his writings beyond the Weimar Republic. I argue that the political movement of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) successfully identified itself with two distinct (yet partly overlapping) narratives in order to establish a truer democracy than the old regime, which was guarded by the military and the bureaucracy. The first narrative concerns the subordination of the will of the people to the guardianship model of the old regime. The second narrative involves negating the political decision of the Kemalist elites on the grounds of identity, in particular, the dissonance between the Kemalist ruling class and the Muslim majority of the society.