Search results

It is a very challenging attempt to illuminate the structures and processes of the difference between civil and military attitudes in Turkey. The Turkish case is unique in many aspects because while Turkey is a Muslim country, which was founded on the historical tradition of Ottoman Empire, it has been also a secular country with a modern parliamentary system. On the one hand, Turkey had struggled to settle pluralism with the establishment of the Turkish Republic in 1923. Also, the military as an actor has always had a significant and active role in shaping the political culture in Turkey (Cizre, 1997). This study aims to understand the level of current gap between the civil–military cultures in Turkey. The main source of data for this study has been the data of European Research Group on Military and Society (ERGOMAS) project called “Cultural Dimensions of Civil–Military Relations in Democratic Societies” which was conducted on both the future elites consisting of civil and military college/university students and interviews from current elites. Turkish part of the data was conducted by the present team using questions from the ERGOMAS Project.

In this paper we present the findings of a study on the differences or the harmony of Turkish military vs. Turkish national culture. We approached this issue by using work-related value orientations. Hofstede's research provided an organisation-based look into national cultural differences and we used his work to evaluate the Turkish national culture and its compatibility with the Turkish military culture. The data about the characteristics of the Turkish military culture are based on observations.

A few of the variables of the postmodern framework that we have used are the definition of major mission and public attitudes towards the military. Defining the mission of the Turkish Armed Forces can broadly be compared to that of many other countries. In addition to preparing its forces for in-country counter-terrorism operations, gendarmerie missions and peacekeeping operations abroad, it also acts as a ‘finishing school’ for young Turkish males. This includes a wide range of areas such as literacy skills and sex education. As regards the public attitudes towards the military which offer another possible research area it may be said that the Turkish military is seen as a rite of passage for young men. This can be witnessed at any bus terminal when young soldiers are sent-away for service. The commotion created by this is unparalleled to any other social event in Turkey. These are only a few of the variables of the postmodern framework, but they show the abundance of research questions related to the Turkish Armed Forces. It is believed that the Turkish Armed Forces present a ripe and unique opportunity for military sociological research.

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the impact of asymmetric warfare on the military profession within the context of the Ottoman period. These effects are categorized with strategic, structural, and behavioral dimensions. The Ottoman military had been a part of many unconventional/asymmetric conflicts during the Ottoman era. These experiences are showing clearly that classical officer training system is not providing necessary knowledge to command units under this type of atmosphere.

The historical event analysis is used for the methodological purpose.

First finding is that asymmetry of method, technology; morale, norms, and organization were observable during the Ottoman collapse period. Second, the reactions to the asymmetric threats were conventional at first sight. Third, the solutions were found by the officers individually not through systemic attempts and they were the results of lessons learned from personal faults. In this chapter, the Ottoman period and military was considered with the viewpoints of recent definitions of asymmetric warfare.

This study aims to develop an influence perspective for managerial intervention in subordinates conflicts, which helps to represent various strategies identified in the literature in a single model. Managers' power base was then related to their intervention strategies. Drawing upon Social Judgment Theory, anchoring of subordinates positions is studied as a moderating variable.

Thirty nine supervisors and their 165 subordinates from several organizations in Turkey filled out a questionnaire reporting power base of supervisor and their intervention strategy utilizing the critical incident technique.

Referent power of superior led to mediation in subordinates' conflicts. However, mediation decreased while restructuring, arbitration, and educative strategies increased with increased anchoring of subordinates' positions. These latter strategies mostly relied on reward power of manager. Subordinate satisfaction was highest with mediation and lowest when supervisors distanced themselves from the conflict.

The present study could only test the moderating effect of escalation as an anchoring variable. Future studies may look at the anchoring effect of whether the dispute is handled in public or in private, and whether the parties have a competing versus collaborative or compromising styles.

Training of managers in mediation may be essential in cultures where they play a focal role in handling subordinates conflicts. Such training may have to take into account their broader influence strategies and use of power.

An influence perspective is useful in integrating the vast array of managerial intervention strategies in the literature. Furthermore, the anchoring effect provides a theoretical explanation for managers' use of more forceful intervention with less cooperative subordinates.

Bahattin Akşit, BA (1968), METU; MA (1971) and PhD (1975) University of Chicago. Dr. Akşit, Professor in the Department of Sociology, Middle East Technical University, conducts research in the following areas: Psycho-social aspects of disaster management; Community participation and volunteer associations; Rural structural transformations, Social change and cleavage in towns and cities; Sociology of religion and secularism; Sociology of Middle East and Central Asia; Army and conflict resolution. Recent publications are: (1) Karanci, N., Akşit, B. and Dirik, G. (2005). Impact of a community disaster awareness training program in Turkey, Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 33(3); (2) Akşit, B., Karanci, N. and Gunduz-Hosgör, A. (2001), Turkey, working street children in three metropolitan cities, International Labour Organization; (3) Akşit, B. (1993). Studies in rural transformation in Turkey. In: P. Stirling (Ed.), Culture and the economy: Changes in Turkish villages. Cambridgeshire: The Eothen Press; (4) Akşit, B. (1991). Islamic education in Turkey: Medrese reform in late Ottoman times and Imam-hatip schools. In: R. Tapper (Ed.), Islam in modern Turkey: Religion politics and literature in a secular state. London: I B Tauris and University of London.

This first part of the book is devoted to the forms of conflict that are characteristic of the start of the twenty-first century. As I document in the first essay, the newest and most significant form of struggle of our times is asymmetric warfare, which has had an enormous development as shown also by the great number of studies dedicated to it (see the bibliographies of the chapters focussed on this form of conflict).