Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey

Shaul Michael Gabbay

doi:doi:10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey

Shaul Michael Gabbay^*

Published in Humanities and Social Sciences (Volume 14, Issue 5)

Received: 25 September 2026 Accepted: 5 October 2026 Published: 23 October 2026

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The transformation of Turkish politics during more than two decades of Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule has generated a substantial literature on democratic backsliding, presidentialism, populism, clientelism, political Islam, and competitive authoritarianism. These perspectives have considerably advanced understanding of Turkey's changing political order, but they tend to privilege either formal institutions or regime-level characteristics. This article develops a complementary relational explanation. It argues that political power in contemporary Turkey is produced through the interaction of formal institutions with networks connecting political parties, state bureaucracies, municipalities, businesses, religious communities, civil society organizations, families, local intermediaries, and individual citizens. Formal institutions establish authoritative positions and control important resources, but networks shape access to those positions and influence how resources, information, opportunities, protection, and political influence circulate. Drawing on the literature on embeddedness, social capital, brokerage, clientelism, business-state relations, local government, digital surveillance, religious organization, and Kurdish politics, the article traces the historical foundations of relational politics in Turkey and examines their transformation during the AKP era. It develops the concepts of social liability and network revaluation to explain why connections that provide resources under one configuration of political power may generate dependency, exclusion, suspicion, or exposure when that configuration changes. The Turkish case demonstrates that political transformation involves more than institutional change. It entails the construction, displacement, fragmentation, and revaluation of networks. Contemporary Turkey is therefore best understood as a networked political order in which formal authority and relational power are mutually constitutive.

Published in	Humanities and Social Sciences (Volume 14, Issue 5)
DOI	10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16
Page(s)	428-439
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2026. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Turkey, Informal Networks, Political Order, Patronage, Clientelism, Brokerage, AKP, Municipalities, Gulen Movement, Kurdish Politics, Social Liability

References

[1]	Arbatli, E., & Arbatli, C. E. (2025). Proliferation of religious associations and local incumbency advantage: Evidence from municipal elections in Turkey. Democratization, 32(4), 963–992. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2024.2428277
[2]	Ark-Yıldırım, C. (2017). Political parties and grassroots clientelist strategies in urban Turkey: One neighbourhood at a time. South European Society and Politics, 22(4), 473-490. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2017.1406431
[3]	Aslan, M., & Yilmaz, G. (2024). Diffusion of digital authoritarianism? Censorship, surveillance and beyond in Türkiye. Third World Quarterly, 45(10), 1663-1681. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2024.2363895
[4]	Bektas, E. (2025). Neopatrimonial rule through formal institutions: The case of Turkey. Government and Opposition, 60(3), 850-871. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2024.36
[5]	Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 345-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(00)22009-1
[6]	Çeviker Gürakar, E. (2016). Politics of favoritism in public procurement in Turkey: Reconfigurations of dependency networks in the AKP era. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59185-2
[7]	Çeviker Gürakar, E., & Bircan, T. (2019). Political connections and public procurement in Turkey: Evidence from construction work contracts. In I. Diwan, A. Malik, & I. Atiyas (Eds.), Crony capitalism in the Middle East: Business and politics from liberalization to the Arab Spring (pp. 236-262). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198799870.003.0009
[8]	Cora, Y. T. (2020). Institutionalized migrant solidarity in the late Ottoman Empire: Armenian homeland associations (1800s-1920s). New Perspectives on Turkey, 63, 55-79. https://doi.org/10.1017/npt.2020.16
[9]	Gabbay, S. M. (2014). State borders vs. cultural, historical, and religious social networks: The case of Turkish Kurds, Kurds in Iraq - and their struggle for self determination. European Scientific Journal, 10(29).
[10]	Gabbay, S. M. (2019). Turkey's human rights abuses derail candidacy to become a member of the European Union. International Journal of Novel Research in Humanity and Social Sciences, 6(4), 1-7.
[11]	Gabbay, S. M. (2024). The pendulum of power: Tracing Turkey's democratic evolution and authoritarian drift. European Journal of Applied Sciences, 12(2), 271-278.
[12]	Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510. https://doi.org/10.1086/228311
[13]	Kıroğlu, S., & Koytak, H. Z. (2024). Mapping solidarity: Organizational density of hometown associations in Istanbul. Turkish Studies, 25(4), 652-672. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2024.2340497
[14]	Kıroğlu, S., & Koytak, H. Z. (2026). Rural notables, professionals, and ideologues: The social bases of AKP local power. European Politics and Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2026.2620579
[15]	Kuran, İ. (2024). The AKP's clientelist-machine politics and the role of Kurdish brokers: The case of Bağcılar. New Perspectives on Turkey, 71, 121-142. https://doi.org/10.1017/npt.2023.32
[16]	Martin, N. (2022). Allies and enemies: The Gülen movement and the AKP. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 35(1), 110-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2020.1798874
[17]	Öz, M., & Yanık, A. (2024). Fear of surveillance: Examining Turkish social media users' perception of surveillance and willingness to express opinions on social media. Mediterranean Politics, 29(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2022.2046911
[18]	Öztan, G. G., & Özdemir, G. (2026). Being a servant to the sacred nation: Centre-right politics, patronage and clientelism in Turkey, from the 1950s to the 2000s. Middle Eastern Studies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/00263206.2026.2725815
[19]	Podolny, J. M., & Page, K. L. (1998). Network forms of organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.57
[20]	Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1
[21]	Sayarı, S. (2014). Interdisciplinary approaches to political clientelism and patronage in Turkey. Turkish Studies, 15(4), 655–670. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2014.985809
[22]	Taş, H. (2018). A history of Turkey's AKP-Gülen conflict. Mediterranean Politics, 23(3), 395-402. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2017.1328766
[23]	Tan, E., & Özer, I. (2026). The politics of recentralisation: Local governance under Türkiye's illiberal turn. Urban Research & Practice, 19(3), 384-414. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2025.2571856
[24]	Tutkal, S. (2022). Trustees instead of elected mayors: Authoritarian neoliberalism and the removal of Kurdish mayors in Turkey. Nationalities Papers, 50(6), 1164-1186. https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2021.42
[25]	Whiting, M., & Kaya, Z. N. (2021). Autocratization, permanent emergency rule and local politics: Lessons from the Kurds in Turkey. Democratization, 28(4), 821-839. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2021.1871602
[26]	Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: Implications for development theory, research, and policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225-249. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/15.2.225
[27]	Yeşil, B., & Sözeri, E. K. (2017). Online surveillance in Turkey: Legislation, technology and citizen involvement. Surveillance & Society, 15(3/4), 543–549. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v15i3/4.6637
[28]	Yörük, E. (2020). The politics of welfare in Turkey. In G. M. Tezcür (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Turkish politics (pp. 187-204). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190064891.013.18

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Gabbay, S. M. (2026). Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey. Humanities and Social Sciences, 14(5), 428-439. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Gabbay, S. M. Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2026, 14(5), 428-439. doi: 10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Gabbay SM. Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey. Humanit Soc Sci. 2026;14(5):428-439. doi: 10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16,
  author = {Shaul Michael Gabbay},
  title = {Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey},
  journal = {Humanities and Social Sciences},
  volume = {14},
  number = {5},
  pages = {428-439},
  doi = {10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.hss.20261405.16},
  abstract = {The transformation of Turkish politics during more than two decades of Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule has generated a substantial literature on democratic backsliding, presidentialism, populism, clientelism, political Islam, and competitive authoritarianism. These perspectives have considerably advanced understanding of Turkey's changing political order, but they tend to privilege either formal institutions or regime-level characteristics. This article develops a complementary relational explanation. It argues that political power in contemporary Turkey is produced through the interaction of formal institutions with networks connecting political parties, state bureaucracies, municipalities, businesses, religious communities, civil society organizations, families, local intermediaries, and individual citizens. Formal institutions establish authoritative positions and control important resources, but networks shape access to those positions and influence how resources, information, opportunities, protection, and political influence circulate. Drawing on the literature on embeddedness, social capital, brokerage, clientelism, business-state relations, local government, digital surveillance, religious organization, and Kurdish politics, the article traces the historical foundations of relational politics in Turkey and examines their transformation during the AKP era. It develops the concepts of social liability and network revaluation to explain why connections that provide resources under one configuration of political power may generate dependency, exclusion, suspicion, or exposure when that configuration changes. The Turkish case demonstrates that political transformation involves more than institutional change. It entails the construction, displacement, fragmentation, and revaluation of networks. Contemporary Turkey is therefore best understood as a networked political order in which formal authority and relational power are mutually constitutive.},
 year = {2026}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey
AU  - Shaul Michael Gabbay
Y1  - 2026/10/23
PY  - 2026
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16
DO  - 10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16
T2  - Humanities and Social Sciences
JF  - Humanities and Social Sciences
JO  - Humanities and Social Sciences
SP  - 428
EP  - 439
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8184
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16
AB  - The transformation of Turkish politics during more than two decades of Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule has generated a substantial literature on democratic backsliding, presidentialism, populism, clientelism, political Islam, and competitive authoritarianism. These perspectives have considerably advanced understanding of Turkey's changing political order, but they tend to privilege either formal institutions or regime-level characteristics. This article develops a complementary relational explanation. It argues that political power in contemporary Turkey is produced through the interaction of formal institutions with networks connecting political parties, state bureaucracies, municipalities, businesses, religious communities, civil society organizations, families, local intermediaries, and individual citizens. Formal institutions establish authoritative positions and control important resources, but networks shape access to those positions and influence how resources, information, opportunities, protection, and political influence circulate. Drawing on the literature on embeddedness, social capital, brokerage, clientelism, business-state relations, local government, digital surveillance, religious organization, and Kurdish politics, the article traces the historical foundations of relational politics in Turkey and examines their transformation during the AKP era. It develops the concepts of social liability and network revaluation to explain why connections that provide resources under one configuration of political power may generate dependency, exclusion, suspicion, or exposure when that configuration changes. The Turkish case demonstrates that political transformation involves more than institutional change. It entails the construction, displacement, fragmentation, and revaluation of networks. Contemporary Turkey is therefore best understood as a networked political order in which formal authority and relational power are mutually constitutive.
VL  - 14
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Shaul Michael Gabbay

Global Research Institute, Denver, United States

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0003-5297-5838

Download PDF

Submit an Article

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Gabbay, S. M. (2026). Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey. Humanities and Social Sciences, 14(5), 428-439. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Gabbay, S. M. Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2026, 14(5), 428-439. doi: 10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Gabbay SM. Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey. Humanit Soc Sci. 2026;14(5):428-439. doi: 10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16,
  author = {Shaul Michael Gabbay},
  title = {Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey},
  journal = {Humanities and Social Sciences},
  volume = {14},
  number = {5},
  pages = {428-439},
  doi = {10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.hss.20261405.16},
  abstract = {The transformation of Turkish politics during more than two decades of Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule has generated a substantial literature on democratic backsliding, presidentialism, populism, clientelism, political Islam, and competitive authoritarianism. These perspectives have considerably advanced understanding of Turkey's changing political order, but they tend to privilege either formal institutions or regime-level characteristics. This article develops a complementary relational explanation. It argues that political power in contemporary Turkey is produced through the interaction of formal institutions with networks connecting political parties, state bureaucracies, municipalities, businesses, religious communities, civil society organizations, families, local intermediaries, and individual citizens. Formal institutions establish authoritative positions and control important resources, but networks shape access to those positions and influence how resources, information, opportunities, protection, and political influence circulate. Drawing on the literature on embeddedness, social capital, brokerage, clientelism, business-state relations, local government, digital surveillance, religious organization, and Kurdish politics, the article traces the historical foundations of relational politics in Turkey and examines their transformation during the AKP era. It develops the concepts of social liability and network revaluation to explain why connections that provide resources under one configuration of political power may generate dependency, exclusion, suspicion, or exposure when that configuration changes. The Turkish case demonstrates that political transformation involves more than institutional change. It entails the construction, displacement, fragmentation, and revaluation of networks. Contemporary Turkey is therefore best understood as a networked political order in which formal authority and relational power are mutually constitutive.},
 year = {2026}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Networks of Power and Political Order in Contemporary Turkey
AU  - Shaul Michael Gabbay
Y1  - 2026/10/23
PY  - 2026
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16
DO  - 10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16
T2  - Humanities and Social Sciences
JF  - Humanities and Social Sciences
JO  - Humanities and Social Sciences
SP  - 428
EP  - 439
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8184
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20261405.16
AB  - The transformation of Turkish politics during more than two decades of Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule has generated a substantial literature on democratic backsliding, presidentialism, populism, clientelism, political Islam, and competitive authoritarianism. These perspectives have considerably advanced understanding of Turkey's changing political order, but they tend to privilege either formal institutions or regime-level characteristics. This article develops a complementary relational explanation. It argues that political power in contemporary Turkey is produced through the interaction of formal institutions with networks connecting political parties, state bureaucracies, municipalities, businesses, religious communities, civil society organizations, families, local intermediaries, and individual citizens. Formal institutions establish authoritative positions and control important resources, but networks shape access to those positions and influence how resources, information, opportunities, protection, and political influence circulate. Drawing on the literature on embeddedness, social capital, brokerage, clientelism, business-state relations, local government, digital surveillance, religious organization, and Kurdish politics, the article traces the historical foundations of relational politics in Turkey and examines their transformation during the AKP era. It develops the concepts of social liability and network revaluation to explain why connections that provide resources under one configuration of political power may generate dependency, exclusion, suspicion, or exposure when that configuration changes. The Turkish case demonstrates that political transformation involves more than institutional change. It entails the construction, displacement, fragmentation, and revaluation of networks. Contemporary Turkey is therefore best understood as a networked political order in which formal authority and relational power are mutually constitutive.
VL  - 14
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download