Understanding the nuclear energy debate in Turkey : internal and external contexts

Nuclear energy generation in Turkey has sparked debates on its relevance and necessity for energy security policy. As a developing country, Turkey chose nuclear energy to address both to sustainability and development needs. The decision is challenged on the basis of “threats” to life, environment and security. The arguments and prescriptions of the contending sides render two meanings for nuclear energy: “asset” and “threat.” This dissertation looks into the construction of these two meanings that prescribe nuclear energy either as the appropriate policy choice or an imminent threat to human life and environment. The respective arguments are shaped by the international norms on nuclear nonproliferation, environmentalism and antinuclearism. This study analyzes the contending discourses in order to find how the opposing meanings of nuclear energy are produced and sustained. It finds that the former meaning and policy prescription is formed with reference to the Realist conception of state power and security. It is Critical Theory, Marxism and Green Political Theory which account for the second meaning of nuclear energy. The “conflict” is not only at the practical but also at the theoretical level. The dissertation argues that this conflict can be addressed through a critical engagement of the parties concerned. It seeks to find common grounds on which the parties can talk. The analysis of the discourses reveals these common grounds where the two sides can find points of reconciliation and formulate a sound energy security policy