How Ethnic Lobbies Influence Policy: The Case of Armenian Genocide Recognition in The United States

• Název práce v češtině: Jak etnická lobby ovlivňují politiku: případ uznání arménské genocidy ve Spojených státech
• Název v anglickém jazyce: How Ethnic Lobbies Influence Policy: The Case of Armenian Genocide Recognition in The United States
• Klíčová slova anglicky: Ethnic interest groups, American foreign policy, Turkish Lobby, Armenian Genocide Resolutions, National Interest
• Akademický rok vypsání: 2016/2017
• Typ práce: diplomová práce
• Jazyk práce: angličtina
• Ústav: Katedra politologie (23-KP)
• Vedoucí / školitel: prof. PhDr. Emil Aslan, Ph.D.
• Řešitel: skrytý - zadáno vedoucím/školitelem
• Datum přihlášení: 29.06.2017
• Datum zadání: 29.06.2017
• Datum a čas obhajoby: 20.06.2019 00:00
• Místo konání obhajoby: Jinonice
• Datum odevzdání elektronické podoby: 09.05.2019
• Datum proběhlé obhajoby: 20.06.2019
• Oponenti: Mgr. et Mgr. Tomáš Kučera, Ph.D.

Seznam odborné literatury

Akçam Taner. From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide. Zed Books, 2004.
Ambrosio, Thomas. 2002. Ethnic Identity Groups And U.S. Foreign Policy. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.
Bali, Rıfat N., and Paul Bessemer. Model Citizens of the State: the Jews of Turkey during the Multi-Party Period. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2014.
Burchill, Scott. The National Interest in International Relations Theory. London: Palgrave Macmillan Limited, 2005. Accessed October 30, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central.
Cigler, Allan J., Burdett A. Loomis, and Anthony J. Nownes. 2016. Interest group politics.
Clough, Michael. 1994. "Grass-Roots Policymaking: Say Good-Bye To The �Wise Men�". Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/1994-01-01/grass-roots-policymaking-say-good-bye-wise-men.
Davidson, Lawrence. Foreign Policy, Inc : Privatizing America's National Interest. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2009. Accessed October 30, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central.
Gable, Richard W. 1958. "Interest Groups As Policy Shapers". The ANNALS Of The American Academy Of Political And Social Science 319 (1): 84-93. doi:10.1177/000271625831900110
Garrett, Stephen A. 1978. "Eastern European Ethnic Groups And American Foreign Policy". Political Science Quarterly 93 (2): 301. doi:10.2307/2148611.
Göçek, Fatma Müge. 2011. The Transformation Of Turkey: Redefining State And Society From The Ottoman Empire To The Modern Era (Library Of Modern Middle East Studies). I.B. Tauris.
Gregg, Heather S. "Divided They Conquer: The Success of Armenian Ethnic Lobbies in the United States." Thesis. Tufts University. 2002. 1 Jan. 2002.
Haney, Patrick J., and Walt Vanderbush. 1999. "The Role Of Ethnic Interest Groups In U.S. Foreign Policy: The Case Of The Cuban American National Foundation". International Studies Quarterly 43 (2): 341-361. doi:10.1111/0020-8833.00123.
Hojnacki, Marie, and David C. Kimball. 1999. "The Who And How Of Organizations' Lobbying Strategies In Committee". The Journal Of Politics 61 (4): 999-1024. doi:10.2307/2647551.
Holyoke, Thomas T.. Interest Groups and Lobbying : Pursuing Political Interests in America. Boulder: Routledge, 2018. Accessed October 30, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central.
Huntington, Samuel P. “The Erosion of American National Interests.” Foreign Affairs, 28 Jan. 2009, www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1997-09-01/erosion-american-national-interests
King, David, and Miles Pomper. "The U.S. Congress and the Contingent Influence of Diaspora Lobbies: Lessons from U.S. Policy Toward Armenia and
Azerbaijan." Journal of Armenian Studies Summer 8:1 (2004): 1-26.
Laguerre, Michel S. The Multisite Nation: Crossborder Organizations, Transfrontier Infrastructure, and Global Digital Public Sphere.
Lindsay, James M. “Getting Uncle Sam's Ear: Will Ethnic Lobbies Cramp America's Foreign Policy Style.” Brookings, Brookings, 28 July 2016, www.brookings.edu/articles/getting-uncle-sams-ear-will-ethnic-lobbies-cramp-americas-foreign-policy-style/
Mearsheimer, J. J. and Walt, S. M. (2006), The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Middle East Policy, 13: 29–87. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4967.2006.00260.x
Marinova, Nadejda K. 2017. Ask what you can do for your (new) country: how host states use diasporas.
Newhouse, John. 2009. "Diplomacy, Inc.". Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2009-05-01/diplomacy-inc.
Rubenzer, Trevor, and Steven B. Redd. “Ethnic Minority Groups and US Foreign Policy: Examining Congressional Decision Making and Economic Sanctions.” International Studies Quarterly, vol. 54, no. 3, 2010, pp. 755–777. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40931135.
Rytz, H. 2016. Ethnic Interest Groups In Us Foreign Policy-Making:vPalgrave Macmillan.
Shain, Yossi. Kinship and Diasporas in International Affairs. University of Michigan Press, 2008.
Wilson, Ernest J., III, ed. Diversity and U. S. Foreign Policy : A Reader. New York: Routledge, 2004. Accessed October 30, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central.

Předběžná náplň práce v anglickém jazyce

Topic Characteristics:
My thesis will focus on the methods The Turkish Lobby in The United States utilizes in order to influence policy, using its efforts against Armenian Genocide Recognition as a case study. This thesis will examine two cases in which the Turkish Lobby worked to block the passage of Non-binding House Resolutions that would formally recognize the Armenian Genocide: House Resolution 106, in 2007, and House Resolution 252, in 2010.

Efforts for recognition of the Armenian Genocide in The United States have been ongoing since the 1970s, and have yet to succeed. The Executive Branch has consistently opposed formal recognition on the grounds that the United States cannot afford to offend Turkey, a valuable NATO ally with a geographically strategic location. In the Legislative Branch, while some resolutions have passed in The House Committee on Foreign Affairs, they have never been brought to a full House vote due to concerns about offending Turkey.

The Armenian Lobby has often been referred to as one of the most powerful ethnic interest groups in the United States, however it has yet to achieve its primary goal of Genocide Recognition. No in-depth studies on The Turkish Lobby, which was partly created particularly to foil to the Armenian Lobby, have been conducted. This thesis will utilize the case studies to explore Turkish-American organizations, their strengths and weaknesses according to indicators of effective ethnic group lobbying, and the strategies both Turkish-American organizations and professional lobbying firms employed by the Turkish government have enacted in order to oppose Genocide recognition.

Research Questions:
Q1: Using indicators of effective ethnic group lobbying, what are the strengths and weaknesses of Turkish-American interest groups?
Q2: What are the primary strategies the Turkish Lobby has utilized in order to oppose recognition of the Armenian Genocide?

Methodology:
Case studies of Turkish Lobby’s efforts against two non-binding resolutions to recognize the Armenian Genocide
I.Why House Resolution 106 (2007) is appropriate to address research question
a.Perhaps the most high-profile Genocide Recognition attempt which had potential to further disrupt already damaged Turkey-United States relations.
b.Many sources available to analyze characteristics of Turkish-American organizations and criteria for effective lobbying
c.News reports, Justice Department (FARA) records available to evaluate strategies employed by professional lobbying firms

II.Why House Resolution 252 (2010) is appropriate to address research question
a. Another high-profile Genocide Recognition attempt, which many believed would pass and which the Turkish Lobby was particularly fearful of that possibility.
b. Many sources available to analyze characteristics of Turkish-American organizations and criteria for effective lobbying
c. News reports, Justice Department (FARA) records available to evaluate strategies employed by professional lobbying firms

Outline:

I. Introduction

II. Literature Review
A. Literature on origins, advantages and disadvantages of ethnic lobbies in the United States
B. Literature on factors that contribute to success of ethnic organizations, interest groups
C. Literature on strategies utilized by ethnic lobbies

III. Formation of Turkish Lobby in the United States
A. In the 1970s, Turkey recognized need for own lobby to counter Armenian and Greek Lobbies
B. The Jewish Lobby as a model and ally
a.How Turkey cooperated with Jewish-American organizations in order to form own organizations
b.How and why Jewish-American organizations supported Turkish organizations
C. Establishment of primary Turkish-American organizations and characteristics
a.Federation of Turkish American Associations (FTAA)
b.Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA)
c.Turkish Coalition of America (TCA)
D. Professional lobbying firms employed by Turkish Government
a.Role of former Congressmen in these firms
b.What can these firms do that Turkish-American organizations cannot?
E. Establishment of Turkish Caucus in Congress
F. Brief summary of Turkey’s relationship with the United States from the 1970s – present

IV. Application of Indicators of Effective Ethnic Interest Group Lobbying to Turkish-American Groups
A. Size of group and geographic concentration
B. Level of political activism and participation of group members ; issue salience
C. Resources (money, voters, activists)
D. Organizational structure and strength
E. Changing or preserving the status quo
F. Political and social context/ international developments
G. How positions reconcile with American national interest

V. Lobbying Strategies Utilized to Block Armenian Genocide Resolutions
A. Case 1: House Resolution 106 (2007)
a.Significance of case
i.Troubled Relations with Turkey under Bush Administration
ii.Potential of Resolution to hinder U.S. war efforts in Middle East
iii.Intertwining of Resolution with American National Security
b.Details of case
c.What strategies did The Turkish Lobby use to oppose resolution?
i.Turkish-American organizations
1.Direct
2.Indirect
a. Use of alliances with other lobbies, groups
ii.Professional Lobbying/PR Firms
1.Direct
d.How do findings relate to literature on ethnic lobbies, Turkey-US relations?
e.Alternative explanation of the findings
i.Involvement of Executive Branch
B.Case 2: House Resolution 252 (2010)
a.Significance of case
i.Obama’s and administration’s previous record on Genocide claims (Turkey particularly fearful that resolution could pass under his administration)
ii.Intertwining of Resolution with Armenia-Turkey normalization protocols
iii.Fallout between Israel and Turkey, negatively affecting relations between Jewish Lobby and Turkish Lobby
b.Details of case
c.What strategies did The Turkish Lobby use to oppose resolution?
i.Turkish-American organizations
1.Direct
2.Indirect
a.Use of alliances with other lobbies, groups
ii.Professional Lobbying/PR Firms
1.Direct
d.How do findings relate to literature on ethnic lobbies, Turkey-US relations?
e.Alternative explanation of the findings
i. Involvement of Executive Branch
C.Limitations of case studies and areas for further research

VI. Conclusions
A. How findings differ from or support prior research and why
B. Recommendations for further research