The European Union Agenda in Erdogan’s Argumentative Discourse: An Analysis of the Ideational Sources and Interactive Functions of Political Reasoning

Canveren Ö., Kaiser A.

JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY EUROPEAN STUDIES, cilt.2024, sa.latest articles, ss.1-17, 2024 (SSCI)

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 2024 Sayı: latest articles
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1080/14782804.2024.2420958
  • Dergi Adı: JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY EUROPEAN STUDIES
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, IBZ Online, International Bibliography of Social Sciences, Business Source Elite, Business Source Premier, Historical Abstracts, Humanities Abstracts, Linguistics & Language Behavior Abstracts, MLA - Modern Language Association Database, Political Science Complete, Public Affairs Index, Sociological abstracts, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1-17
  • Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

This article presents the findings of an in-depth analysis of TurkishPresident Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s position and argumentation regardingthe European Union (EU). The study explores the ideational sources(cognitive and normative) and interactive functions (communicative andcoordinative) of his foreign policy discourse. We argue that Erdoganinstrumentalises and politicises foreign policy discourse for the coordina-tive function of political mobilisation. First, Erdogan’s dual approach isshaped by his leadership roles (president versus party chairperson), histarget audience (national versus international), and timing (election ver-sus non-election periods), with Euroscepticism and antagonistic argumen-tation featuring prominently in his discourse. Second, as partychairperson, Erdogan employs nationalist chauvinism, a normative sourceshared by relevant institutional actors, to fulfil a coordinative function.Third, cognitive dissonance stemming from his positional dichotomy,alongside misrepresenting actors and processes, allows him a blamestrategy, framed by accusations of 1) double standards, 2) the EU’s mis-calculation, 3) pacta sunt servanda, and 4) the actions of ‘certain’ memberstates.