Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-vt8vv Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-08-20T09:25:34.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The privatization of security in Turkey: Reconsidering the state, the concept of “governmentality” and Neoliberalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Sibel Yardımcı  and
Zeynep Alemdar
Sibel Yardımcı
Affiliation:
Mimar Sinan University of Fine Arts, Department of Sociology, Çırağan Cad. Çiğdem Sok. No. ı, Beşiktaş 34349, İstanbul, sibelyardimci@gmail.com.
Zeynep Alemdar
Affiliation:
Okan University, Department of International Relations, Tuzla Kampüsü Formula 1 Yanı, Tuzla 34959, İstanbul, zeynep.alemdar@okan.edu.tr.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The privatization of security services, which implies the dispersal of the legitimate right to use force, has been traditionally understood as operating at the expense of state sovereignty. The increasing privatization of security services around the world and the substantial growth of the private security sector in Turkey create the need to reassess the nature of this privatization. Drawing upon the work of Michel Foucault and other scholars of governmentality, as well as our own field research, we try to make such an assessment, without falling back on the traditional state-market (state-society) duality. Research shows that the Turkish private security sector, reported as being tied to both the exigencies of the state and the rules of the market, has an amorphic nature marked by intricate relationships, formal and informal, with public law enforcement agencies. We argue that the sector's privatization, although defended by some as a way to grant accountability and transparency to security services, is neither a remedy for those gaps, nor does it imply a straightforward decline of the state; rather, it is proof that the idea of an autonomous, unitary “state” should be revised and a sign that a different and intricate network of state apparatus and private experts continue to govern our lives in ways unique to neoliberalism.

Keywords

Neoliberalism (advanced liberal rule)private security in Turkeythe stategovernmentalitystate-market dualitystate-society duality
Type
Research Article
Information
New Perspectives on Turkey , Volume 43 , Fall 2010 , pp. 33 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © New Perspectives on Turkey 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

“5188 Sayılı Özel Güvenlik Hizmetleri Kanunu Çerçevesinde Yürütülen Faaliyetler İle İlgili istatistik Tablosu.” Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü Özel Güvenlik Dairesi Başkanlığı, http://www.ozelguvenlik.pol.tr/teskilatistatistik.asp.Google Scholar
“Cevahir'de Zorbalık.” Radikal, December 19, 2006.Google Scholar
“En Çok “Özel” Korunma Talebi, Alışveriş Merkezlerinden….” Cumhuriyet Pazar, October 8, 2006.Google Scholar
Hukuk Forumları, http://www.hukuki.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=200.Google Scholar
“özel Güvenlik Sektörü Patladı.” Güvenlik (special supplement to daily newspaper Hürriyet), March 28, 2007.Google Scholar
“Özel Güvenlikle Kuşatılmış Bir Ülke.” Birgün, January 27, 2007.Google Scholar
“Özel Güvenlikte Derin ilişkiler.” Evrensel, January 26, 2008.Google Scholar
“Sauna Çetesi’ne Asker El Koydu.” Sabah, February 22, 2006.Google Scholar
“Tekirdağ Milletvekili Tevfik Ziyaeddin Akbulut ve Yalova Milletvekili Şükrü Önder'in; Özel Güvenlik Hizmetlerine Dair Kanun Teklifi ile Bazı Kurum ve Kuruluşların Korunması ve Güvenliklerinin Sağlanması Hakkında Kanunda Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun Tasarısı ve içişleri Komisyonu Raporu.” In B.02.0.KKG.0.10/101-666/454, edited by Kanunlar, Başbakanlık ve Kararlar Genel, Müdürlüğü, 2004.Google Scholar
“Tuhaf Bir 'iş Ortaklığı’.” Milliyet, August 8, 2008.Google Scholar
Abrahamsen, Rita, and Williams, Michael C.. “Security Beyond the State: Global Security Assemblages in International Politics.” International Political Sociology, no. 3 (2009): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrams, Philip. “Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State (1977).” Journal of Historical Sociology 1, no. 1 (1988): 58–89.Google Scholar
Atılgan, Mehmet. “Geç Modern Dönemde Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Güvenliğin Özel Tedariki: Alternatif Bir Bakış.” Unpublished MA Thesis, İstanbul Bilgi University, 2007.Google Scholar
Barkey, Henri J. “Under the Gun: Turkish Foreign Policy and the Kurdish Question.” In The Kurdish Nationalist Movement in the 1990s: Its Impact on Turkey and the Middle East, edited by Olson, Robert, 65–83. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1996.Google Scholar
Bartu-Candan, Ayfer, and Kolluoğlu, Biray. “Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism? A Gated Town and a Public Housing Project in İstanbul.” New Perspectives on Turkey 39 (2008): 5–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, Angharad E. “Understanding Social Movements: Theorising the Disability Movement in Conditions of Late Modernity.” The Sociologicol Review 54, no. 4 (2006): 734-52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedirhanoğlu, Pınar. “Türkiye'de Neoliberal Otoriter Devletin AKP’li Yüzü.” In AKP Kitabı: Bir Dönüşümün Bilançosu, edited by Uzgel, İlhan and Duru, Bülent, 39–64. Ankara: Phoenix, 2009.Google Scholar
Blaikie, Norman. Approaches to Social Enquiry. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Bora, Tanıl. “Garibana ‘Eınniyet’, Kibar Muhitlere ‘Özel Güvenlik’.” İstanbul, no. 59 (2007): 58–61.Google Scholar
Button, Mark. Security Officers and Policing: Powers, Culture and Control in the Governance of Private Space. London: Ashgate Publishing, 2007.Google Scholar
Cerrah, ıbrahim, “ıç Güvenlik Sektörünün ‘Zihinsel Modernizasyonu’: ıç Güvenlik Tehdit Algılamasının ‘Meşruiyeti’ ve Sektörün ‘Demokratik Gözetimi’.” Paper presented at the Güvenlik Sektöründe Demokratik Açılımlar: Türkiye’de ve Dünyada Eğilimler, Konular ve Sorunlar Konferansı, Hacettepe University, Ankara, 3 February 2005.Google Scholar
Çalış, Kadir. “Federasyon Yoklama Yaptı… 13 Dernekten 8'i Yok.” (2008), http://www.spntr.net/content/view/6630.Google Scholar
Danzelot, Jacques. “Michel Foucault and Liberal Intelligence.” Economy and Society 37, no. 1 (2008): 115-34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Mike. City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. New York: Vintage Books, 1992.Google Scholar
Eick, Volker. “New Strategies of Policing the Poor: Berlin's Neo-Liberal Security System.” Policing and Society 18, no. 4 (2003): 365–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. The Birth of Biopolitics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: Birth of the Prison. New York: Random House, 1995 [1978].Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. London: Tavistock Publications, 1987 [1967].Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. Security, Territory, Population. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. The Will to Knowledge. Vol. 1, The History of Sexuality. London: Penguin, 1998.Google Scholar
Gambetti, Zeynep. “Linç Girişimleri, Neo-Liberalizm ve Güvenlik Devleti.” Toplum ve Bilim, no. 109 (2007): 7–34.Google Scholar
Gülcü, Mustafa. “Özel Güvenliğin Felsefesi.” Polis Dergisi, no. 31, http://www.emniyet.gov.tr/egitim/dergi/eskisayi/31/yeni/web/Mustafa_GULCU.htm.Google Scholar
Hardt, Michael, and Negri, Antonio. Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire. New York: The Penguin Press, 2004.Google Scholar
Haspolat, Evren. “Devlet-Güvenlik ılişkisinin Değişen ıçeriği: Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Özel Güvenlik.” Eğitim, Bilim, Toplum, no. 4 (2005/2006): 60–79.Google Scholar
Kubuş, Nihat. “Türkiye'nin ‘Özel’ Güvenliği.” İstanbul, no. 59 (2007): 90–91.Google Scholar
Lemke, Thomas. “The Birth of ‘Bio-Polities’: Michel Foucault's Lecture at the Collège de France on Neoliberal Governmentality.” Economy and Society 3, no. 2 (2001): 190–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linklater, Andrew. Critical Theory and World Politics: Citizenship, Sovereignty and Humanity. New York: Routledge, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Low, Setha. Behind the Gates: Life, Security, and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America. New York: Routledge, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. “The Limits of the State: Beyond Statist Approaches and Their Critiques.” The American Political Science Review 85, no. 1 (1999): 77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özkazanç, Alev. “Biyo-Politik Çağda Suç ve Cezalandırma.” Toplum ve Bilim, no. 108 (2007): 15–51.Google Scholar
Paker, Evren Balta. “Bildiğimiz Anlamda Devletin Sonu Mu? ımparatorluk ve Özel Ordular.” Birikim, no. 178 (2004): 11–19.Google Scholar
Rose, Nikolas. “Government and Control.” British Journal of Criminology, no. 40 (2000): 321-39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Nikolas. “Government, Authority and Expertise in Advanced Liberalism.” Economy and Society 22, no. 3 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Nikolas, and Miller, Peter. “Political Power Beyond the State: Problematics of Government.” The British Journal of Sociology 43, no. 2 (1992): 173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanchez, R. Magaly, and AAPSS Annals, 1606. “Insecurity and Violence as a New Power Relation in Latin America.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, no. 606 (2006): 178-95.Google Scholar
Şenoğul, Mehmet. “Güvenliğin Yetki Devri ve Özelleştirılmesi.” http://www.spntr.net/content/view/6617/80/.Google Scholar
Uçar, Tayfun, and Şenay, Uçar. Özel Güvenlik Metodolojisi, İstanbul: Papatya Yayıncılık, 2005.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. Economy and Society. Edited by Roth, Guenther and Wittich, Claus. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Yardımcı, Sibel. “Kuşatma Altında Gündelik Hayat: Özel Güvenlik, Kent Yaşamı ve Yönetimsellik.” Toplum ve Bilim, no. 115 (2009): 226-60.Google Scholar
Zedner, Lucia. “The Concept of Security: An Agenda for Comparative Analysis.” Legal Studies 23, no. 1 (2003): 153-76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar