Mohammed Sultan - محمد سلطان
Another reason behind the successful governance of Germany is the rule of law. In that aspect, I mean that the rule of law is not just a matter of transparency or applying the law literally, but rather I mean it has become an essential pillar of governance in the country where it is intertwined and empowered by the society and the culture. For analyzing this dimension, I found that the Selectorate theory emphasizing on the winning coalition participation is the most relevant explanation. The theory states that in the democratic regimes the winning coalition does include the vast majority of the society because their power of voting and their positivity of being involved in every democratic race or election is like a limitation on the regime that hinders it from corruption or deviation(Smith, A& Bueno, M,2012). Applying that on Germany, Germany under the military rule during one party system was an example of the small winning coalition that led Germany to dark events of the 1940s. However, it is very implying to notice that the path of incorporating the citizens in the decision-making processes became a predominant figure of Germany that let it survive me obstacles. For example, Schroeder, who was the chancellor in 2000, survived a vote of confidence regarding deploying 4000 German troops to Afghanistan (BBC, 2000). The moral behind that is not how the chancellor was successful to survive the event, but to what extent the masses are involved even in the most sensitive decision like deploying or summoning the soldiers.
The impact of such inclusive participation became even clearer in 2006 when the parliament approved making changes in the way of governance to speed up the decision-making. It is very obvious that the parliament- the representative of the peoples' will- is main reference for any issuing or cancelation of laws or political changes. Based on what have been said, investing in the human prosperity reached it is peak in 2014 when Germany for the first time adopted a minimum wage, 8.50 euros per hour (BBC, 2014). And that leads to the last and most important aspect of the way of governing Germany in my perspective which is the role of Germany on the European Union (EU). Since the formation of European community (EC) with the Inner Six countries, it was very clear that Germany is adopting a new strategy based upon playing the role of the big brother trying to unify and strengthen the house members. After almost 50 years, the EC yielded the EU, and Germany finally revived its role as the big brother over the 28 European countries. In fact, it was more obvious that Germany adopted the approach of earning the friendship of everybody. An example of that was the historical visit of Angela Merkel to the Knesset in the occupied lands of Palestine with a friendly speech highlighting the cooperation between Germany and Israel (The New York Times, 2008). In my perspective, the formation of the EU was one of the major reasons why Germany became that successful in governance. As for the domestic problems, the EU was very helpful concerning the economic side, and internationally it delivered the message that Germany is an example of advancement and good governance when it is compared to the old enemies, the Allies.
Analyzing Turkey, after carefully reading the history of the country, I found that the Turkish history concerning the low scores of the World Bank data is directly related to various events that have its roots back even before the formation of the new Turkish republic in1925. Another notice is that the performance of turkey all over the 18 years is characterized by having relatively high scores in 1998 and then tends to a significant drop then begins to better off in the early 2000s. Turkey on the other side of the spectrum, the one criterion that turkey aced is the Government Effectiveness (GE) that shows dramatic improvements of the public services (Index, graph 4). Therefore, I will not emphasize on the GE to give more space to discuss the rest of the criteria that are in a very bad condition (Index, Graph2).
The first difference I see between turkey and Germany concerning the political governance, taking into consideration that both are parliamentary systems, is what I would call 'the political immaturity'. Since the formation of turkey all the governments were coalition governments that most probably were backed by the military. One of the obvious examples about is this tedious process is that from 1991 till 1997 Turkey has been under 7 coalition governments and one military coup (Turkish Parliament website). It was even clearer how the governments do not abide by one plan considering the country's interest as the top priority, but each government comes with its political and economic plans that do not add to what has been done, but rather starts from the scratch again. Accordingly, in 1996 one major failure in the economic arena was the outcome of such tendency under the reign of Tansu Chiller, the first woman in the Turkish history to win the parliament presidency in 1993 under the wing of the True Path Party. To build on that about the economic dimension, Turkey has been always trying to join the EU in order to boost its economy. In 1992, the council of the economic cooperation for the black sea countries was initiated by Turkey as a trial to imitate the EU agenda (Oktem, 2011 & Ozer, 2016). Such trials were not sufficient enough to be pressure on the old dream of joining the EU, and according to the EU website, in 1997 Turkey was rejected to be a candidate for joining the EU. However, In the10th of December 1999, the European union declared that Turkey will be considered as a candidate as equal as other candidates.
){kind=link}
0 تعليقات