Globalization is no longer a phenomenon; it is a reality that everyone on the globe must struggle with. It has infiltrated our way of thinking, culture, politics, religion, and most of all business. The increasing globalization effects became painfully obvious with the recent financial tragedy that has shaken the US and continues to be effective in every economy in the world. No country is safe from its effects.
However, globalization also presents an opportunity to cooperate and produce new and beneficial paradigms in all areas of life. The positive is both large and covers a wide sphere of life. The role of this reality, globalization, in Turkey has been much discussed and as pointed out, has brought great benefit to the Turkish community as a whole. In fact, according to the Global Magazine (2008), a survey carried out in Turkey showed that a near majority of the population supports this phenomenon, with an overwhelming majority agreeing that globalization will bring with it increased economic growth and opportunity as noted by Tausch (2003).
Effect of globalization on the economy
Globalization, as stated earlier, has involvement in every sphere of life of this society. The effects of globalization started to take effects on the general society particularly in the early 1980s under the influence of the IMF conditionality. According to Arin (2), the intervention of the IMF in a then sickly Turkish economy was pegged to the implementation of liberalization reforms. These reforms saw the decontrol of interest rates in 1981, liberalization of foreign trade in 1984, and the reopening of the Istanbul Stock Exchange in 1986. The central bank started open market operations in 1987. Thereafter, the Turkish currency was made convertible making the economy fully financially open (Arin).
This kind of openness allowed the Turkish economy to gain investment from foreign sources. It also allowed the country to participate and gain from the international financial markets through foreign exchange trading and the stock market.
A more recent concern is the joining of Turkey to the EU. The joining process has a lot of financial advantages for the country (Tausch, 2003). For example, the EU will enable the economy to boost its allocation efficiency, benefit from EU structural funding and increase infrastructural investment. The infrastructural investment will help Turkey not only develop its infrastructure but also industries that are somewhat correlated to infrastructure. On the other hand, the funding can be used for other areas which are determined by the EU.
This however has a negative side as the fate of Turkey may be shaped by the EU. In other words, the EU would prefer not to develop Turkey in some areas which can be a threat to Europe in terms of being competitive in the world market. The other aspect of the funding is that the funding will make Turkey much more dependent on the European countries and as a result, Turkey won’t have a competitive edge with other European countries, as mercantilist view said. (PLEASE PUT THE REFERENCE).
Apart from this, the increased mobility of labor will allow Turkish workers to seek work elsewhere in the EU. As a result of this, the unemployment rate will decrease in Turkey including unskilled and skilled workers. In addition, the skilled workers who are educated and have developed themselves in European companies can play an important role in the implementation of Europe’s business and industry system in Turkey. So, there are many benefits which Turkey stands to gain in the event they join the EU.
The effects of globalization have already started to manifest themselves in the economy, over 20 years later. Turkey had previously, during the last decade, experienced extreme political and social unrest with the military taking over severally to establish order (Stein, 120). This also was coupled with a severe control of self-interest individuals who were unqualified to run the country. Their control over the resources of the country ensured that the country ran counter to progress (Ozturk, 2008). Globalization has had a positive impact from the political perspective which is related to the development of democracy, which had been damaged by these military interventions. It is also understood that the establishment of dictatorship will not help Turkey and will not help avoid the impacts of globalization on Turkey.
The international community through the IMF and EU stepped in to help Turkey restructure itself after the economic crisis of 2001, forcing the implementation of several highly unpopular yet necessary reforms (Leich, 2001). The result has been the phenomenal growth of the economy. As recorded by Ozturk (2008), Turkey’s GDP has almost tripled within the period from 2002 to 2008 from $200 billion to $650 billion.
The economy has also recorded a drop in inflation and a resultant increase in the per capita GDP from $3000 to $9000 within the same period. These apparent increases are drawn from the participation of the IMF and the continuous pursuit of reform by the EU. This reform has seen the economy become one of the most open economies among the emerging markets; and has earned it the title of an “open and working economy” by the EU for the first time since 2004 (Ozturk, 2008). The IMF and EU have helped Turkey to develop in terms of economic and political perspectives.
With this increased economic performance and globalization, there has been an increased paradigm shift in the production and consumption culture of the Turkish community. A more elitist brand of international production for both export and local consumption has arisen. This was inevitably shown by the purchase of Godiva by the Ulker Group, a Turkish food manufacturer in late 2008.
This group outbid international brands such as Starbucks to claim this premium chocolate producer (Cowles, 2008). The consumption trend in this country is catching on. Svenneby (2008) notes that while the levels are still lower than most of the wealthier countries found in the EU, the consumption levels are on the increase. This is usually a sign of economic growth stimulated by an increase in aggregate demand in the economy.
Effect on social and political sectors
Other reform sectors, as shown, include the social and political sectors. With globalization, Turkey has been able to settle down politically and has achieved relative stability in terms of politics. The previous trend of continual military take-over has not characterized the last few years of this country (Ozturk, 2008). With the country lining up to join the EU, it has settled down both economically and politically to achieve the requirements stated by the EU (Stein, 121).
So, it can be said that the requirements are necessary not just to join the EU but also for Turkey itself. There can be a possibility that Turkey cannot join the EU, although the Copenhagen criteria are satisfied it is not possible to claim that those requirements will not give an advantage to Turkey in the global world.
Furthermore, even within the educational sector, globalization has played a role with the teaching methods changing to suit the global environment. Teacher training has evolved and been set to become more relevant to the current world standards (Guven, 2008). Indeed, teaching methods in somewhat have been developing in all countries with the development of the Internet, communication, and others. However, Turkey’s teacher training has evolved and become more relevant to the current world standards with the help of the Internet, integration with the west, and the establishment of more likely American universities such as Sabancı, Koc, Bogazici, and so on. In addition, recent year’s exchange programs with Europe cause some improvements in the educational sector.
Negatives effects of globalization
On the other hand, Turkey as a developing country having some considerable problems. Critics state that the globalization that has characterized Turkey even since the 80s has not led to social equity. According to Arin (1998), the financial deregulation and de-linking of monetary and real accumulation increase the private wealth while, on the other hand, increases public poverty and debt.
This is a view echoed by Ozturk (2009) who states that there is an increase in the total wealth of the economy but a corresponding increase in the economic disparity of the classes. It is known that the neoliberal perspective would claim that the win-win can be the result of the neoliberal perspective but the distribution of gain cannot be fair. So, this is not just from the global perspective but it is also from the local perspective that the distribution of wealth may not be the same in the society but every individuals’ wealth should be an increase somewhat. On the other hand, it can be also seen that poverty increases in Turkey and this shows the structuralist view. As the structuralist view claims, the economic disparity of the classes will increase and a huge amount of wealth will be obtained by the small bourgeois.
So, it can be said that the globalization progress in Turkey and many other countries demonstrate some realities of both liberalism and structuralism. Moreover, one of the warnings given earlier on by Tausch (2003) on the effects of globalization on the local economy was the effect of global competition on the labor and manufacture markets. He states that an alliance with the EU would lead to the skilled workers earning more while the lower class would earn less.
This would ultimately result in a greater separation of the classes, resulting in social unrest. This is already happening even before the alliance is complete. There is a general sense of discontentment within the society as small businesses grapple with international competition (Ozturk, 2009). Also, with the increased openness of the economy came reliance on export trade. This has led to the worsening of the current account.
Even socially, there have been conflicts related to globalization. The religious and tribal differences have seemingly been awakened by the EU conditions. Stein points out that interestingly the recognition of the minority Kurds by the EU in a bid to improve the human rights position of Turkey has polarized the majority of Turks in the country. The ruling party AKP, having failed to pass several laws that are Islam oriented, has gone on to even favor certain Islamist-run businesses over secular ones (Cowles, 2008).
This has resulted in a disgruntled feeling that the government has “an ulterior Islamic agenda”. This polarization based on religion has been even extended to the academic circles, with Islamic academicians getting outraged over the delay of Turkey’s ascension to the EU. They see this as a sign that the system views them as inferior due to their religious beliefs (Stein, 120).
These negative side effects, however, seem to be caused by static friction in my opinion. The financial strains that have been cited stem from the fact that the capacity of Turkey to produce is limited and therefore feels the pressure when exposed to the rest of the world market. The production should be increased by the elitist groups in Turkey. In other words, the powerful Turkish companies may not only be implementation-oriented but also be more production-oriented and as a result, innovative products and industry can be developed.
Furthermore, the FDI should be encouraged by the government with some tax regulations and facilities to those foreign companies. In addition to this, the instability problem of Turkey in terms of economic and political should be minimized, since it will have a direct impact on the FDI. The protectionist approaches will not be beneficial in the process of globalization for Turkey and it is said that economic freedom has been increased after the 80s and it is a much more beneficial approach for Turkey.
On the other hand, the protectionist approach can be followed with the joining of regional blocks such as the EU. I can say that the neoliberals perspective is the most applicable perspective to Turkey, however, the regional blocks avoid economic- freedom in terms of taxes and business law regulations. So, Turkey should be mercantilist in joining the regional blocks. As a result, the competitive and comparative advantage of Turkey will increase in the world market.
Furthermore, by effectively taking advantage of access to EU funding, the country can build its physical and human resources to become globally effective. Society also must be able to find the right balance between being globally accepting and remaining true to their traditional and religious beliefs. In my opinion, globalization causes change in societies and this is inventible. Nevertheless, the change should not be so fast and it should not reject the traditions, customs, values, and others.
The reason behind that Turkey is not a Western, Middle Eastern, or Asian country. So, Turkish individuals have different ways of life, beliefs, and norms. This phenomenon shows the identity of the Turkish people and this cannot be changed with the speed of globalization. As long as it is tried, Turkey will not only lose their own identity but also have problems embracing other dominant global cultures. Indeed they must retain their identity but they must also accept change.
In conclusion, globalization is inevitable. The benefits that Turkey stands to gain are many, and can effectively turn it into a model Islamic-oriented state. However, much more needs to be done on the economic and especially social reconstruction to build a nation that has embraced change yet still remains true to its culture and traditions. This is where the solution lies.