2000
DOI: 10.1080/09557570008400339
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Greek‐Turkish rapprochement:The impact of disaster diplomacy'?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
2
32
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Trust built up through this shared response to the earthquakes generated popular legitimacy for quiet diplomacy that had been in place several months earlier, culminating in Greek support for Turkish candidacy to the EU. Popular legitimacy for bilateral negotiations provided impetus for rapprochement, but without the solid base of diplomacy preceding the earthquake gains are unlikely to have withstood EU membership candidacy negotiations, hung as they were on long-standing tensions surrounding Cyprus (Ker-Lindsay, 2000). Specifi c rights reforms came with the subsequent acceptance by Turkey of nine harmonization conditions required for EU membership.…”
Section: Tipping Points and Change In Turkey Following The Marmaramentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Trust built up through this shared response to the earthquakes generated popular legitimacy for quiet diplomacy that had been in place several months earlier, culminating in Greek support for Turkish candidacy to the EU. Popular legitimacy for bilateral negotiations provided impetus for rapprochement, but without the solid base of diplomacy preceding the earthquake gains are unlikely to have withstood EU membership candidacy negotiations, hung as they were on long-standing tensions surrounding Cyprus (Ker-Lindsay, 2000). Specifi c rights reforms came with the subsequent acceptance by Turkey of nine harmonization conditions required for EU membership.…”
Section: Tipping Points and Change In Turkey Following The Marmaramentioning
confidence: 98%
“…For Ethiopia-Eritrea's drought diplomacy and Cuba-U.S.A.'s wide-reaching disaster diplomacy (Glantz, 2000;Kelman, 2012), political prominence did not yield either disaster-related or diplomatic-related success. For the earthquakes in Greece and Turkey, heightened prominence led to a backlash against the diplomacy (Ker-Lindsay, 2000. Conversely, for drought in southern African, the prominence of the diplomacy proceeding irrespective of the drought supported the drought diplomacy and successful disaster risk reduction (Holloway, 2000).…”
Section: Health Interventions As Foreign Policymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Turkish response to the disaster was analogous to the support received after the Izmit earthquake by Greece, which was celebrated in the media as an instance of “disaster diplomacy” (Kelman, ). Despite the simplifications that such a discussion entails about the actual impact of the earthquakes on diplomatic relations (Ker‐Lindsay, ), it is within this discourse that the Izmit earthquake was remembered by the research participants.
Dimitra: What has stuck with me from that event, besides the Richters and stuff, is that we were constantly talking about the relationship between Greece and Turkey, that Greece had helped a lot.(Female, 54, middle‐class, FG5)
…”
Section: Cosmopolitan Memory: Incorporating the “Other” In Collectivementioning
confidence: 99%