Securitization politics and conflict resolution diplomacy (KRG and Armenia in post-2002 Turkish foreign policy)

The main objective of this study is to create an analytical framework, considering the existence of conceptual link between securitization/desecuritization theories and the discipline of conflict resolution. Then, this framework is applied to analyze Turkey's relations with the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and Armenia in the post-2002 period. The need to create an analytical framework to bridge securitization/desecuritization politics and conflict resolution diplomacy was the problematic of the thesis. While the securitization/desecuritization approach strives to solve problems through perceptions; it mostly ignores the real situations, whereas the conflict resolution approach deals with the existing circumstances, not the perceptions. Therefore, this study, which argues that perceptions alone are not sufficient, aims to provide a theoretical contribution to the development of desecuritization approach, which has not been studied enough theoretically. By building a bridge between securitization/desecuritization theories and conflict resolution diplomacy the study makes a theoretical contribution, and by analyzing this framework on the case of Turkey's relations with KRG and Armenia it makes en empirical contribution. For this purpose, possible answers to the following theoretical question are sought: "Can conflict resolutions make a theoretical contribution to the inadequate theorized nature of the Copenhagen School, which focuses on perceptions and is therefore insufficient for a consistent analysis?" In addition to the theoretical question, the study aims to provide a more detailed explanation of the subject by seeking answers to two empirical questions: "Is the decline of reference objects a reason or consequence of desecuritization?" and "Why in one problem that Turkey is trying to desecuritize, although conflict resolution methods are used, it is moving away from desecuritization, while in another problem, although conflict resolution methods are being applied less, desecuritization can be relatively successful?" In the study, discourse analysis, theory application and case analysis methods are used, it is suggested that there are mutually feeding elements between securitization/desecuritization theories and the discipline of conflict resolution. In particular, it is concluded that the application of conflict resolution techniques "as it should be" is very important for the stability of a given desecuritization process. Emphasizing that only discourse and perceptions are insufficient, the study argues that a desecuritization effort supported by both context and conflict resolution mechanisms (especially problem identification) will be more stable. In this aspect, it is suggested that conflict resolution techniques will contribute to the insufficiently theorized structure of the desecuritization approach.