Pub Date : 2022-09-29DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1177305
Mustafa Serdar Palabıyık
Since the first translation of the concept of civilization into Turkish as “medeniyet” in 1837 by Sadık Rıfat Pasha, the then Ottoman Ambassador to Vienna, this coinage has turned out to be an essential component of Turkish modernization. This paper aims to establish a genealogy of the concept of “medeniyet” to demonstrate the divergences of Ottoman perceptions in different periods throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It argues that civilization was first perceived by a group of Ottoman intellectuals as a tool to reach an ideal state of being (c. 1840-1860). The next generation of Ottoman intellectuals (c. 1860-1890) defined civilization as “the” ideal state of being, yet they had different views on the concept, particularly concerning the distinction between material and moral elements of civilization. Finally, the third generation of Ottoman intellectuals (c. 1890-1920), whose thoughts were more or less crystallized under three broad political currents labeled as Westernism, Islamism, and Turkism, had different and sometimes contradicting perceptions of civilization based on their political outlooks. By referring to the writings of these intellectuals, the paper will discuss central debates on civilization in the late Ottoman Empire, such as the singularity/plurality of civilization(s), the existence of Islamic civilization as an alternative to European civilization, the degree of importing from European civilization, and the distinction between culture and civilization. Moreover, it argues that the Turkish perception of “medeniyet” is different from the European perception of “civilization”; in other words, while the Ottoman perception of the concept of civilization is not homeborn, it is homegrown. Accordingly, Ottoman intellectuals not only divided the material and moral elements of civilization and opted for importing the former, but they also questioned the singularity and supremacy of European civilization by referring to “Islamic civilization” either as an extinct yet once-present form of civilization or as a potential rival to European civilization.
{"title":"A Genealogy of the Concept of Civilization (Medeniyet) in Ottoman Political Thought: A Homegrown Perception?","authors":"Mustafa Serdar Palabıyık","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1177305","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1177305","url":null,"abstract":"Since the first translation of the concept of civilization into Turkish as “medeniyet” in 1837 by Sadık Rıfat Pasha, the then Ottoman Ambassador to Vienna, this coinage has turned out to be an essential component of Turkish modernization. This paper aims to establish a genealogy of the concept of “medeniyet” to demonstrate the divergences of Ottoman perceptions in different periods throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It argues that civilization was first perceived by a group of Ottoman intellectuals as a tool to reach an ideal state of being (c. 1840-1860). The next generation of Ottoman intellectuals (c. 1860-1890) defined civilization as “the” ideal state of being, yet they had different views on the concept, particularly concerning the distinction between material and moral elements of civilization. Finally, the third generation of Ottoman intellectuals (c. 1890-1920), whose thoughts were more or less crystallized under three broad political currents labeled as Westernism, Islamism, and Turkism, had different and sometimes contradicting perceptions of civilization based on their political outlooks. By referring to the writings of these intellectuals, the paper will discuss central debates on civilization in the late Ottoman Empire, such as the singularity/plurality of civilization(s), the existence of Islamic civilization as an alternative to European civilization, the degree of importing from European civilization, and the distinction between culture and civilization. Moreover, it argues that the Turkish perception of “medeniyet” is different from the European perception of “civilization”; in other words, while the Ottoman perception of the concept of civilization is not homeborn, it is homegrown. Accordingly, Ottoman intellectuals not only divided the material and moral elements of civilization and opted for importing the former, but they also questioned the singularity and supremacy of European civilization by referring to “Islamic civilization” either as an extinct yet once-present form of civilization or as a potential rival to European civilization.","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84914740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-30DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1150300
L. Chin, G. Govindasamy, M. Akhir
{"title":"Japanese Non-State Actors’ Under-Recognised Contributions to the International Anti-Nuclear Weapons Movement","authors":"L. Chin, G. Govindasamy, M. Akhir","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1150300","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1150300","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p xml:lang=\"tr\" />","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90641795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-30DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1150360
Ali Bakir, Eyüp Ersoy
Asymmetry of knowledge production in global international relations manifests itself in a variety of forms. Concept cultivation is a foundational form that conditions the epistemic hierarchies prevalent in scholarly encounters, exchanges, and productions. The core represents the seemingly natural ecology of concept cultivation, while the periphery appropriates the cultivated concepts, relinquishing any claim of authenticity and indigeneity in the process. Nonetheless, there have been cases of intellectual undertakings in the periphery to conceive, formulate, and articulate conceptual frames of knowledge production. This paper, first, discusses the fluctuating fortunes of homegrown concepts in the peripheral epistemic ecologies. Second, it introduces the concept of ‘strategic depth’ as articulated by the Turkish scholar Ahmet Davutoğlu and reviews its significance for the formulation and implementation of recent Turkish foreign policy. Third, it examines the causes of its recognition and acclaim in the local and global IR communities subsequent to its inception. The paper contends that there have been three fundamental sets of causes for the initial ascendancy of the concept. These are categorized as contemplative causes, implementative causes, and evaluative causes. Fourth, it traces the sources of its fall from scholarly grace. The paper further asserts that the three fundamental sets of causes were also operational in the eventual conceptual insolvency of strategic depth. The paper concludes by addressing remedial measures to vivify concept cultivation in the periphery and to conserve the cultivated concepts.
{"title":"The Rise and Fall of Homegrown Concepts in Global IR: The Anatomy of ‘Strategic Depth’ in Turkish IR","authors":"Ali Bakir, Eyüp Ersoy","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1150360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1150360","url":null,"abstract":"Asymmetry of knowledge production in global international relations manifests\u0000itself in a variety of forms. Concept cultivation is a foundational form that\u0000conditions the epistemic hierarchies prevalent in scholarly encounters,\u0000exchanges, and productions. The core represents the seemingly natural ecology\u0000of concept cultivation, while the periphery appropriates the cultivated concepts,\u0000relinquishing any claim of authenticity and indigeneity in the process. Nonetheless,\u0000there have been cases of intellectual undertakings in the periphery to conceive,\u0000formulate, and articulate conceptual frames of knowledge production. This paper,\u0000first, discusses the fluctuating fortunes of homegrown concepts in the peripheral\u0000epistemic ecologies. Second, it introduces the concept of ‘strategic depth’ as\u0000articulated by the Turkish scholar Ahmet Davutoğlu and reviews its significance\u0000for the formulation and implementation of recent Turkish foreign policy. Third,\u0000it examines the causes of its recognition and acclaim in the local and global IR\u0000communities subsequent to its inception. The paper contends that there have been\u0000three fundamental sets of causes for the initial ascendancy of the concept. These\u0000are categorized as contemplative causes, implementative causes, and evaluative\u0000causes. Fourth, it traces the sources of its fall from scholarly grace. The paper\u0000further asserts that the three fundamental sets of causes were also operational in\u0000the eventual conceptual insolvency of strategic depth. The paper concludes by\u0000addressing remedial measures to vivify concept cultivation in the periphery and\u0000to conserve the cultivated concepts.","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"69 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89348015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-30DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1150303
A. Dolatabadi
This article attempts to answer the question of why Iran is reluctant to discuss its missile program. Unlike other studies that focus on the importance of Iran’s missile program in providing deterrence for the country and establishing a balance of military power in the region, or that view the missile program as one of dozens of post-revolutionary contentious issues between Iran and the United States, this article looks into Iran’s ontological security. The paper primarily argues that the missile program has become a source of pride for Iranians, inextricably linked to their identity. As a result, the Iranian authorities face two challenges when it comes to sitting at the negotiation table with their Western counterparts: deep mistrust of the West, and the ensuing sense of shame over any deal on the missile issue. Thus, Iranian officials opted to preserve the identity components of the program, return to normal and daily routines of life, insist on the missile program’s continuation despite sanctions and threats, and emphasize the dignity and honor of having a missile program. The article empirically demonstrates how states can overcome feelings of shame and mistrust. It also theoretically proves that when physical security conflicts with ontological security, governments prefer the former over the latter, based on the history of Iran’s nuclear negotiations. They appeal to create new narratives to justify changing their previous policies.
{"title":"Ontological Security and Iran’s Missile Program","authors":"A. Dolatabadi","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1150303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1150303","url":null,"abstract":"This article attempts to answer the question of why Iran is reluctant to discuss its\u0000missile program. Unlike other studies that focus on the importance of Iran’s missile\u0000program in providing deterrence for the country and establishing a balance of\u0000military power in the region, or that view the missile program as one of dozens\u0000of post-revolutionary contentious issues between Iran and the United States, this\u0000article looks into Iran’s ontological security. The paper primarily argues that the\u0000missile program has become a source of pride for Iranians, inextricably linked\u0000to their identity. As a result, the Iranian authorities face two challenges when it\u0000comes to sitting at the negotiation table with their Western counterparts: deep\u0000mistrust of the West, and the ensuing sense of shame over any deal on the missile\u0000issue. Thus, Iranian officials opted to preserve the identity components of the\u0000program, return to normal and daily routines of life, insist on the missile program’s\u0000continuation despite sanctions and threats, and emphasize the dignity and honor\u0000of having a missile program. The article empirically demonstrates how states\u0000can overcome feelings of shame and mistrust. It also theoretically proves that\u0000when physical security conflicts with ontological security, governments prefer the\u0000former over the latter, based on the history of Iran’s nuclear negotiations. They\u0000appeal to create new narratives to justify changing their previous policies.","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85098168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-15DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1096556
G. Scott-Smith
{"title":"Beyond the ‘Tissue of Clichés’?: The Purposes of the Fulbright Programme and New Pathways of Analysis","authors":"G. Scott-Smith","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1096556","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1096556","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83694636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-31DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1089411
J. M. Scott, Charles M. Rowling, T. M. Jones
{"title":"U.S. Democracy Aid and the Conditional Effects of Donor Interests, Media Attention and Democratic Change, 1975-2010","authors":"J. M. Scott, Charles M. Rowling, T. M. Jones","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1089411","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1089411","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88564166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-31DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1034358
Wiebke Wemheuer-Vogelaar, Peter Marcus Kristensen, Mathis Lohaus
{"title":"The Global Division of Labor in a Not So Global Discipline","authors":"Wiebke Wemheuer-Vogelaar, Peter Marcus Kristensen, Mathis Lohaus","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1034358","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1034358","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76905853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-17DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1032115
İ. Sula
{"title":"‘Global’ IR and Self-Reflections in Turkey: Methodology, Data Collection, and Data Repository","authors":"İ. Sula","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1032115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1032115","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74460726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-03DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1024925
Yong-Soo Eun
{"title":"Reflexive Solidarity: Toward a Broadening of What It Means to be “Scientific” in Global IR Knowledge","authors":"Yong-Soo Eun","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1024925","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1024925","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85022217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-26DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1020713
Filippo Costa Buranelli, S. Taeuber
{"title":"The English School and Global IR – A Research Agenda","authors":"Filippo Costa Buranelli, S. Taeuber","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.1020713","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1020713","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"126 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85704810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：