抄録
Exceptional voting behavior observed in eastern Turkey has caused a controversy between the "modernization school" and the "school of ethnicity." In the 1970s, Hale, Ozbudun, and Sayari argued that socioeconomic development would resolve this tendency. After 1990, the influence of ethnic minorities on this tendency has been argued by Natsume, Hazama, and Carkoglu. In this article, I reexamined the cause of the exceptional voting behavior in controversy, using quantitative analysis and focusing on the elections of the 1990s and 2002 in southeastern Anatolia. The number of votes obtained by the pro-Kurdish party obtained only in urban areas where speakers of Kurdish are in a majority, and a pro-Kurdish party was negative to blocked voting. This means that differences of ethnicity have substantial influence only in cities. On the other hand, independent candidates were often elected and blocked voting happened frequently in eastern Turkey after 1991. This means there was mobilized voting behavior after 1991 in spite of development by the Southeastern Anatolia Project and participation of the pro-Kurdish party. Because of mobilized voting behavior and a political party based on ethnicity, fragmentation of the political party system in Turkey will continue.
