|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910483845403321 |
|
|
Autore |
Sengupta Anita |
|
|
Titolo |
Myth and Rhetoric of the Turkish Model [[electronic resource] ] : Exploring Developmental Alternatives / / by Anita Sengupta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
New Delhi : , : Springer India : , : Imprint : Springer, , 2014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edizione |
[1st ed. 2014.] |
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (173 p.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
International relations |
European Economic Community literature |
Political philosophy |
International Relations |
European Integration |
Political Philosophy |
Turkey History 1960- |
Turkey Social conditions 1960- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Note generali |
|
Description based upon print version of record. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di bibliografia |
|
Includes bibliographical references. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
Preface -- Chapter 1. Political Dynamics in Eurasia: Background and Context of the Turkish Model -- Chapter 2. What is the “Turkish Model”? -- Chapter 3. Confronting the Past: Reclaiming Ottoman-Russian connections and the Ottoman legacy -- Chapter 4. Eurasianism or Neo-Ottomanism? The Neighborhood in Turkish Foreign Policy -- Chapter 5. The Central Asian Response to Models -- Chapter 6. The Turkish Model at Crossroads: A Conclusion -- Bibliography. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
The volume discusses what the Turkish Model, or Turkish Development Alternative, was and why it was promoted in the Central Asian republics immediately following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. It argues that the Turkish Model was a myth that transferred the ideal of a ''secular, democratic, liberal society'' as a model for the post Soviet Turkic world and in the process encouraged a ''Turkic" rhetoric that emphasized connection between the two regions based on a common ancestry. The volume begins with an understanding of the reality of the Model from a Turkish perspective and then goes on to examine whether the Turkic |
|
|
|
|