Türkiye'de siyasi uzlaşma ve koalisyonlar: Milli Görüş örneği

Democracy, which has become the unique source of legitimacy for governments, needs infrastructure elements as well as its formal institutions. Political culture is regarded as the critical element of this infrastructure. Similarly, "Political compromise" is a crucial element of the political culture that is "favourable for democracy." The assumption that "Turkey has a weak culture of political compromise" is prevalent. According to this view, it has a confrontational and polarized culture resulting from ideological, ethnic, and religious distinctions. Turkey's democracy, until a few years ago, has implemented a parliamentary system that tends to produce coalitions. Since compromise lies at the heart of coalitions, the study of coalitions is convenient for analysing the culture of political compromise. According to the general view, Turkey's coalition governments are like the mirror of said culture of conflict. The starting point of this study is the objection to this generalization. The study's central assumption is that Milli Görüş has a distinctive compromising character compared to other political actors and has revealed it in the coalitions it took part in. The study's research question was developed as "What are the indicators and reasons for Milli Görüş movement to have a distinctive compromising character? Around this pivotal problem, other questions arose from it are identified as sub-problems to be investigated: Why political compromise is significant for democracies; to what extent has the culture of political compromise developed in Turkey; what kind of characteristic/difference does the Milli Görüş movement have in this cultural environment; how this difference manifested itself in the four coalitions of Milli Görüş; and which factors may count for this distinctive compromising character? In this context, the analysis of Milli Görüş coalitions from the perspective of political compromise was determined as the study's focal point, whereas valid answers were tried to be obtained for other problem areas. The study consists of six chapters apart from the introduction and conclusion sections. The first of these chapters is devoted to the basic concepts on which the study is built; the second part to Milli Görüş; three, four, and fifth chapters to Milli Görüş coalitions; the last part to the question of how and why Milli Görüş is of compromising character. Thus, a conceptual framework has been created in the first chapter, while the basic data of the thesis have been presented in the following four chapters, and the analysis and evaluation of the data have been made in the last chapter. In the collection of study data, alongside the literature search, it has been benefited mainly from the minutes of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, the reports of the major media outlets, and interviews conducted with representatives of Milli Görüş. With these semi-structured interviews, the views and understanding of distinguished members of the movement who had served in various influential positions of the parties since the 1970s, including Chairman, minister, general secretary, deputy, were tried to be detected. The results obtained from the data presented in the study seem to be compatible with the basic assumption of the study. Coalitions in which Milli Görüş took part in (1974 CHP-MSP Coalition; 1975 AP-MSP-CGP-MHP Coalition; 1977 AP-MSP-MHP Coalition; 1996 RP-DYP Coalition) showed that this movement had a remarkable difference in terms of political compromise. Many events and developments in the process of establishment, functioning, and dissolution of these coalitions make it possible to see this compromising character. Meanwhile, one dimension of this compromising character is related to non-political actors, namely the military, and this dimension is mentioned as the occasion arose. As the factors that count for this compromising character, the temperament and upbringing milieu of the leader; the Islamic understanding of the movement; rational (realistic and pragmatic) strategy; and the understanding of nationalism with the sensitivity of national unity has been determined.