Suchergebnisse

Afghanistan is a deeply fragile and conflict affected state. It has been in almost constant conflict for over 35 years since the Soviet invasion of 1979. Today the country is at a crossroads in its development with economic growth down sharply and poverty incidence stubbornly high. Afghanistan faces tremendous development challenges. Gross domestic product (GDP) per-capita is among the lowest in the world, poverty is deep and widespread, and social indicators are still at very low levels. The new government has declared its commitment to address Afghanistan's development challenges, through its paper realizing self-reliance: commitments to reforms and renewed partnership presented at the London conference in December 2014. The purpose of this systematic country diagnostic (SCD) is to provide an evidence-based diagnostic within an objective framework to help in the identification of development priorities. Countries in conflict often face rapidly evolving circumstances and flexibility to adjust quickly is a necessity. The SCD is thus intended to set forth a broad and flexible framework for thinking about choices, prioritization, and sequencing.

The November 3rd election for governor in Virginia is making headlines, as Obama rallies for Democratic candidate Creigh Deeds at Old Dominion University this week, in a last- ditch effort to close the gap that separates him from Republican candidate Robert McDonnell.Taking place in an "off" year, this race is considered a harbinger of next year's mid-term legislative elections, which in turn are a referendum on the popularity of the President himself. That is why it is being closely monitored by both parties and the media. The so-called "Old Dominion" has occupied a central role in the political history of the country since its early beginnings, through the Civil war and the Civil Rights movement of the 60s. Its state government, with the country's oldest legislature, has consistently been ranked first in effectiveness among all 50 states. Virginians are politically savvy and their voting trends are considered of national significance. For example, in 1989 Virginia was the first state to elect an African-American as governor. In the last eight years, while still remaining a red state that voted Republican in national elections, it chose two consecutive Democratic governors. In the historical 2009 election, as a reflection of important demographic changes in the age and diversity of its voters, Virginia became a swing state: Barack Obama carried the state, and today Virginia's two Senate seats are occupied by Democrats. In spite of its importance as a bellwether of national politics, the contest for Governor this year has been a lackluster race, characterized by two candidates with little or no charisma, one of which had a clear advantage from the beginning. Indeed, for Republican Bob Mc Donnell the race has been easier from the start, since he faced no opposition during the primary season. He has therefore had enormous financial support from his party and has used the national debate on government spending to his advantage, capitalizing on public discontent with the lack of tangible results of Obama's economic rescue plan on Main Street America. McDonnell has assailed his opponent aggressively as a tax-and-spend Democrat who, if elected, would run the state finances to the ground regardless of the cost to Virginians. Thanks to his party's financial support he has been able to conduct an overwhelming TV advertising campaign focused on his own and his daughter's military career (a smart decision in a state with large military bases and an even larger defense establishment), his concern for job creation programs and support for small businesses.In contrast to his opponent, Democratic candidate Creigh Deeds had to face a tough three-way primary election this past summer, against Terry McAuliffe, a prominent party man who headed Hillary Clinton's campaign last year, and Brian Moran, a county prosecutor and Virginia House delegate. In spite of running a poor campaign with sparse staff and minimum resources, and of being outspent by at least one of his opponents (McAuliffe) two-to-one, Deeds, who had trailed in the polls for most of the race, finally won by a surprisingly wide margin (50%-26%-24%). The current governor race is a re-match of the Attorney General race of 2005, which was very close and McDonnell finally won by a mere 320 votes. Asked about it, Deeds says that he holds no grudge against his opponent. Deeds, a state senator from Bath County with a strong Southern rural accent, is an honest but rather bumbling character, with tousled hair, a disheveled appearance, and a tendency to give muddled answers to questions. In contrast, Mc Donnell, a fit- looking former Army officer and prosecutor with strong ties to the Christian Right leader Pat Robertson, has run an orderly campaign, focusing mainly on issues that affect Virginians such as transportation and taxes, but also on the spending habits of national figures such as House and Senate leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Indeed, Deeds has complained in interviews that his campaign has been negatively affected by the spending plans of the Democrats inside the Beltway.In contrast to McDonnell's more general approach at attacking everything Democratic, Deeds has based his advertising campaign on more personal attacks, mainly aimed at McDonnell's 1989 master thesis in which he expressed ultra-conservative views on women, homosexuals and abortion. This is a tactic that may backfire as people are tired of negative advertising.In later ads, Deeds has tried to portray his opponent as telling "untruths" and changing his policy position belatedly and dishonestly, only in pursuit of votes (the "flip-flop" strategy). Although still negative, these were more tailored to issues that matter to Virginians. For example, in arguably the most important policy issue the next Governor will face, namely, that of changing the redistricting state laws, McDonnell clearly changed his opinion once he decided to run for governor and now supports reform. 2010 is a Census year, and based on the Census results, state legislatures will engage in the decennial process of re-drawing political borders. In Virginia, the present system is skewed in favor of incumbents. There has been an important movement led by the League of Women Voters to reform the process so that redistricting is carried out by a bipartisan commission and not by the party in power. Deeds supports this reform, as do most Virginians, but McDonnell was against it until this year. Thus, the flip-flop allegation may prove to be a better angle of attack for Deeds than McDonnell's 20-year-old thesis on the role of women in society, although those negative ads have certainly gotten the attention of many young and professional women who will now come out and vote for Deeds.Nonetheless, Deeds faces an up-hill battle for several reasons. Besides the advantage of an early start in fund-raising and campaigning, the whole Republican Party has rallied around McDonnell, who is perceived as a strong candidate that could initiate a much needed turnaround in the fortunes of the party. He has campaigned with McCain and will campaign with Mitt Romney next week. He is more articulate, better organized and a smoother debater than his opponent, and has known how to capitalize on the public discontent with Washington. He has run on a basic platform of job creation and lower taxes to favor small businesses, and would subsidize the urgently needed transportation projects by the novel idea of selling off state-owned liquor stores to private owners. (In Virginia, one can only buy hard liquor and spirits at state-owned dispensers called ABC stores, which are closed on Sundays).In contrast, Deeds, a cerebral policy wonk who does not shy away from intricate ideas and well thought out plans, and who does not speak in sound bites or buzz words, appears less eloquent and not as good a communicator. Although neither is a brilliant debater, during the live debates McDonnell looked more competent, less flustered and less tentative in his responses. In addition, Deeds has not been able to unite the party behind him. Former Virginia Governor Douglass Wilder, the first African-American to occupy that office in the United States, has refused to endorse Deeds in spite of a plea from Obama to do so. The two men disagree on tax policy and gun control. The Democratic candidate has acknowledged he would raise taxes to pay for the transportation projects, while Wilder denounces his plan as reckless, given the state of the economy. On a totally different issue, they are also at odds. Deeds (perhaps because he represents Bath County, a rural district of Virginia) supports the repeal of a state gun-law that restricts the amounts of guns Virginians can purchase. Wilder, as do most Democrats, would like that law to stand. This kind of contradiction –in favor of higher taxes (a fiscally progressive stance) but against gun control (a conservative position) sums up of the kind of candidate Deeds is and explains why he has not gained the support of all Democrats. Ironically, the Republicans have been hailing Wilder's refusal to endorse Deeds on account of his stand on higher taxes, but they avoid mentioning the gun control issue, on which they would be obliged to concur with Deeds.On Tuesday October 27th, exactly one week before the election, President Obama held a rally with Deeds at the Constant Center at Old Dominion University, in front of a crowd of 6,000. This represented a last effort by Obama to rescue Deeds by persuading the youth and African Americans to vote next Tuesday. It was only the second time the President campaigned for Deeds: he had done so once at the beginning of the campaign, in Northern Virginia. Clearly, Obama understands the difficulties his party will face in the 2010 mid-term elections. The man earns his paycheck: this past week alone he has raised money for Democratic congressional candidates in Miami, New York, Massachusetts and Connecticut. He then rallied for incumbent Governor Corzine who faces a tough re-election battle in New Jersey and finally for Deeds in Southeastern Virginia. Some say that by spending so much time on the road doing the bidding for his party, the President loses credibility as an agent of change. But no one should underestimate Obama's capacity to handle many issues at the same time. As his meteoric rise in politics proves, he is methodical, disciplined and always focused on a long-term strategy.Obama is quite aware that if his party loses seats in the 2010 elections, his own agenda and indeed, his own chances at re-election in 2012 will be in jeopardy. And as an avid student of political history, he knows that since the 1930s there were only two cases in which the sitting President's party did not lose seats in a mid-term election, so the odds are unmistakably against the Democrats. In the case of Virginia's gubernatorial races, a similar phenomenon has been unfolding: in the last eight consecutive elections, governors have been elected from the party opposite to the one in the White House. To these historical precedents, one must add the state of the economy today, the fact that unemployment is running at 10% and that public opinion is showing high levels of discontent with political parties and politicians in general. (The president is still exempt from this malaise, at least for now, with last week's polls showing his support at 57%). Also, another factor that will weigh in on next year elections is that those independents in traditionally Republican-leaning districts who voted for Democratic candidates in 2006 and 2008 as a result of the anti-Bush backlash may very easily reverse that trend by voting Republican next year.Very mindful of these challenges, Obama is exerting himself to the utmost to reap at least some early wins that would give new direction to the public mood. In health care reform he seems to be very close to victory. A win in the gubernatorial races would certainly reinforce that trend and give some positive signals for 2010.In Virginia, this election will also test the depth of that transformation from red state to swing state. The main trial for Democrats is to get people energized enough to go to the polls next Tuesday. After eight years out of the Governor's mansion in Richmond, this time Republicans are much more attuned to the gubernatorial race than Democrats, and they are also much more enthusiastic about their candidate than Democrats are about Deeds. All eyes are therefore on Virginia. The last Rasmussen Reports taken a few hours after Obama's visit, found McDonnell at 54% to 41% for Deeds, with 4% undecided. Creigh Deeds has run as the underdog before and recovered in time to win. He may still surprise us again, but this time he needs a miracle.Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia

Nigeria's long-run growth performance has been extremely poor. Between 1960 and 2000, real income per capita grew at only 0.43 percent per year. The situation improved between 2001 and 2006 when real per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew at an average annual rate of 4.2 percent. This paper demonstrates that the superior growth performance during 2001-06 is largely attributable to the impact of better leadership and economic policy making. The improved performance of the economy after 2003 arose from implementing a comprehensive economic reform program focusing on four main areas: macroeconomic reform; structural reform; governance and institutional reform; and public sector reform. The reforms, backstopped by improved oil revenue management, monetary policy implementation, and debt management, improved overall macroeconomic policy making. This resulted in real GDP growth averaging 7.1 percent per year between 2003 and 2006, an inflation rate of 10 percent in 2006, foreign exchange reserves of US$45 billion in 2006, and total external debt of only US$5 billion in 2006. Clearly, between 1960 and 2000, Nigeria's policy choices were poor, and the reforms that sought to correct them were plagued by inconsistencies, policy reversals, and lack of coherence. In contrast, due to good leadership, the reforms adopted in 2003 were consistent and have been implemented in a coherent manner.

As President Obama's popularity numbers continue to drop, Republicans are still struggling to find the right candidate that can deliver the final blow to the incumbent and sweep the GOP back into the White House. Rick Perry was to be this man just three weeks ago, but after less than stellar performances in the last debates, and once his record had been scrutinized by his challengers and the press, he has fallen out of grace. The Texan governor was perceived as the man that could attract Tea Partiers and base primary voters, while at the same time satisfy deep-pocketed Republican donors with his solid conservative views on the economy and the role of government. However, the GOP establishment and its largest donors are uncomfortable with some of his public statements (for example, referring to Social Security as a Ponzi scheme, voicing his creationist and anti-science views, and his reactionary pro-gun position) which would make him less electable in the national race. Many of these rich donors and Wall Street executives are economic conservatives but quite liberal on social issues. Paradoxically, Mitt Romney, who is still first in all the polls, has the right mix for Wall Street, but his religious affiliation (Mormon), his lack of charisma and his "plastic" "salesman-like" persona raise questions about whether he can connect with the base and win the primary election.In this theater of the absurd that have been the candidate debates, Perry did well at first, but then stumbled last week in Florida, when confronted with his own record as governor of Texas. He has been severely criticized by Michelle Bachman for issuing an executive order to vaccinate middle school girls against HPPV in Texas, and in his second debate he was mobbed by his fellow candidates for allowing the children of undocumented immigrants to attend state universities paying the lower "in-state" tuition rate, just like any other Texan legal resident. Even though 70% of the national electorate supports Immigration Reform and the Dream Act (which includes a provision exactly like the one Perry took), and even though the Latino vote will be fundamental in the next election, he was pilloried over it. This is the kind of wedge issue that candidates on the Right can use successfully during the primary but will work against them in the national election.Perry's confidence seemed shaken for the rest of the debate: he dodged several questions, mumbled responses and looked down at his notes several times. In contrast, Romney, smooth, fresh- faced and articulate, seemed to be having a great time delivering sharp retorts that threw the Texan off balance. From Perry's demeanor one could tell he was unpleasantly surprised by the aggressive questioning of his policies and the mocking tone of his opponent. Clearly, he is a man of authority who is not used to having his decisions and beliefs openly criticized by others. He defended himself as best as he could, but the damage had been done. Consequently, Rick Perry, the GOP's "knight in shining armor" who was urged to run by the GOP establishment and was supposed to deliver the ultimate blow to Obama, lost his appeal overnight and is now struggling to keep his campaign alive. Aware of this great opportunity to win the White House, the GOP establishment continues second-guessing its own field, looking for perfect contender that can lead them into a new era. Romney, still the de facto front-runner, has become a much better candidate in the last four years, but his inner restraint, his lack of emotion, his failure to connect makes Republicans uneasy. He is a technocrat, the type of candidate the voters can't "fall in love with", and while he can take on Obama as an equal, it is not clear whether he can beat him. So the GOP moved ahead in its inexorable quest for the unbeatable candidate, all but destroying former favorites on its way. The new favorite last week was for a while Chris Christie, the first-term governor of New Jersey and a former state prosecutor. In deep contrast with Mitt Romney the "salesman", Chris Christie, the "Jersey big guy" had a certain quality of authenticity that heightened GOP expectations and made them dream of winning again. Some hefty figures in the party establishment (former statesman Henry Kissinger and conservative intellectual William Kristol among them) were putting enormous pressure on Christie to run. He quickly has become a favorite among conservatives because of his stunning achievements: a Republican governor in a "blue" state who managed to pass budget reform, take on the teachers' unions and reform the state pension system during his first two years in office. He is a big man who speaks bluntly, a terrific governor, a leader at a time when leadership is hard to find. But after ten days of high drama and speculation, Christie announced in a one-hour press conference last Friday that he was not running.There were three main reasons for his refusal to become a candidate for the highest office in the nation: First and foremost, his decision would have come too late. At the time, there were only ninety days until the first caucus in Iowa; Florida has set an earlier-than-expected date for its primary and with that, it has pushed back all other dates in the calendar so that voting may start even earlier than expected. The order of primaries is traditionally set and the privileged states (Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina) would be loath to change it. Governor Christie's campaign would have had to scramble to get his name on the ballot of all 50 states (each state has different procedures, from the very simple to the very complex). Most agreed that he would have been a very strong candidate, but such a late entry may have harmed future prospects for him. Second, Christie is still an unknown to most of the electorate, and probably would not have had the support of rural and Southern voters. Would the wealthy New Yorkers and party pundits who were promising him huge donations ultimately have delivered and stayed with Christie for the long-term if he lost some of the early caucuses and primaries? And finally, there was the question of whether he would ignite the primary base once some of his views became known. His record is clear on management of state finances and on standing up to public unions. But there has been scarcely any scrutiny about his views on immigration. Speaking to a Latino group in 2008, he said for example that undocumented immigrants should not be classified as "illegal" since: being in this country without proper documentation was not a crime." He is a moderate on abortion, he has banned drilling for oil off the coast of New Jersey, and his energy plan resembles Obama. These are all core concerns of the base which has been driven by mainly primordial instincts in the last four years. Would Christie's blunt leadership style and reform zeal, his sincerity about the depth of the challenges and the difficulties of the solutions have carried the day? Now, it seem we will never know, but it is the phenomenon itself that is worth pondering: the establishment is unhappy at the prospects of Perry in the national election, and worried about Romney's chances in the primary. In their quasi-irrational frenzy to find the perfect candidate they may be undermining their own chance to win.Republicans seem to be looking for the anti-Obama, and Chris Christie fitted the bill: he is a heavy, no nonsense guy (a lot has been said about his overweight condition, with one NBC journalist going as far as asking the question: "Should there be a weight limit for presidential candidates?") who speaks in a very direct way, does not shirk away from difficult decisions, is ready to take on opponents and do whatever is required to get the country's economy back on track. There is nothing Hamlet-like about him, except perhaps in his hesitancy about running for president. He is also a very bright policy wonk who completely "gets" New Jersey problems and knows what needs to be done to "fix" them. On the other hand, although flattered by all the attention and support for his candidacy, his decision was due to a sincere self-appraisal: he is not ready to be President of the United States in 2012, and prefers to wait until 2016 if his aura has not worn out by then.In the meantime, Obama is trying to persuade Congress to pass his jobs bill and to show that in spite of the seemingly insurmountable obstacles he has faced at every turn of the road, he has the strength to solve at least one problem, unemployment, and the courage to tax those that make over a million a year. His jobs bill includes many Republican ideas. It proposes a combination of shot-term tax cuts, investment incentives and job creation through infrastructure projects, with long-term strategy of tax reform including ending tax loopholes for corporations which would reduce the deficit by raising the government's revenue levels. He still strikes an optimistic note, but he has already recognized that, if the economy doesn't pick up by early next year, he will be running as the underdog. In other words, he has admitted that the solution is really out of his control and in the hands of what John M. Keynes called "animal spirits". Only by restoring confidence will investors start spending the 2 trillion dollars they are allegedly stashing away in wait of better times. But Obama has now a new challenge: the Occupy Wall Street protest movement that is expanding its base and spreading to other cities. It is the unemployed youth counterpart of the populist Tea Party on the right. Both are angry at Washington, but the reactionary Tea Party blames the government for everything gone wrong, while the radical OWS blames big banks and corporations, or said otherwise, it blames the 1% that have gotten richer even during the Recession, while the 99% got poorer. With its protest movement, the Young Left has declared its independence from the establishment Democratic Party. It is Obama's base delivering Obama himself an ultimatum to either take the side of the 99% or lose their support forever. Since Obama's dreams of bipartisanship are close to over, one hopes his campaign advisors will interpret the OWS movement as an opportunity to harness their energy towards support for real reform. But it is unclear whether OWS, a diverse, amorphous, leaderless movement, will allow itself to be organized by Washington insiders with clear policy goals.The GOP frustration must be disheartening. Its establishment saw the enormous potential of Governor Christie to win the center-right of the political spectrum and with it, the national election. His remarkable success at striking bipartisan deal to reform New Jersey's finances proves his bona fide credentials as a problem solver and a leader. His irreverent, unscripted yet incisive responses to the press and the public, his indubitable charisma and his authenticity all worked in his favor. However, his refusal to run is now a fact, and as the deadline looms nearer, the GOP will have to reconsider whether to anoint as its candidate Mitt Romney, the Mormon, affable yet one-dimensional former governor of Massachusetts, the most progressive state in the nation, or Rick Perry, the less articulate yet pragmatic and successful governor of Texas, the biggest and most conservative state. Of course, unexpected outcomes are always a possibility, as shown by Herman Cain's case. The African American candidate and former Godfather's Pizza executive who has never held public office, won the "straw" primary poll in Florida last week and saw his popularity soar in national polls after a very well-received debate performance in which he repeated over and over again his simplistic 9-9-9 tax reform program, his plan to privatize pension funds, and his anti-Washington mantra. "Salesmanship", then, is not a bad asset in politics, after all, unless you are also a Mormon millionaire.Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia

This paper studies the sharp increase in violence experienced in Mexico after 2006, known as The War on Drugs, and its effects on human capital accumulation. The upsurge in violence is expected to have direct effects on individuals schooling decisions, but not indirect effects, because there was no severe destruction of infrastructure. The fact that the marked increases in violence were concentrated in some municipalities (and not in others) allows for implementation of a fixed-effects methodology to study the effects of violence on educational outcomes. Different from several recent studies that have found significant negative effects of violence on economic outcomes in Mexico, the paper finds evidence that this is not the case, at least for human capital accumulation. The paper uses several sources of data on homicides and educational outcomes and shows that, at most, there are very small effects on total enrollment. These small effects may be driven by some students being displaced from high-violence municipalities to low-violence municipalities; but the education decisions of individuals do not seem to be highly impacted. The analysis discards the possibility that the effects on enrollment of young adults appear small because of a counteracting effect from ex-workers returning to school. The results stand in contrast with recent evidence of the negative effects of violence on short-term economic growth, since minimal to 0 effects on human capital accumulation today should have little to no adverse effects on long-term growth outcomes in Mexico.

ÖZET10 Kasım 1938 tarihinde Mustafa Kemal Atatürk'ün hayatını kaybetmesi ile bir-likte Cumhurbaşkanı olan İsmet İnönü ülke yönetiminde en yetkili kişi haline gelmiştir. İnönü'nün CHP ve ülke yönetimindeki adete tek kişilik hakimiyeti ( Milli Şef ) Celal Bayar başta olmak üzere dönemin CHP'li milletvekili ve yöneticilerinde tepkiye neden olmuştur. Bir şahsın parti ve ülke yönetimindeki hakimiyetine İkinci Dünya Savaşı'nın da etkisiyle halkın büyük çoğunluğunda oluşan ekonomik sıkıntının ve iktidarın halkın muhafazakarlığı ile çelişen eğitim ve sosyal alanlardaki uygulamaları CHP ve dışındaki siyasi çevrelerde ve halkın büyük bir bölümünde muhalif bir tutumun oluşmasına neden olmuştur. Bu süreç hükümetin birtakım radikal uygulamaları ile birlikte örgütlü bir mu-halif hareketin doğmasına neden olmuştur. Yukarıda belirtilen nedenlerden kaynaklanan ve açıktan açığa bir söylem ve ey-leme dönüşmeyen CHP milletvekillileri içindeki bireysel tavırlar ilk defa Çiftçiyi Top-raklandırma Kanunu teklifi sırasında ortaya çıkmıştır. CHP milletvekilleri Celal Bayar, Adnan Menderes, Fuat Köprülü ve Refik Koraltan, 14 Mayıs 1945 tarihinde bu kanun teklifinin TBMM'de görüşülmeye başlaması ile birlikte hükümetin bu uygulamasına karşı tavırlarını yaptıkları konuşmalar ile ortaya koymuşlardır. Fakat esasen bu kanun tasarısının TBMM'ye sunulmasından önce CHP içinde muhalif bir grubun oluşması Tevfik Rüştü Aras'ın evinde yapılan perşembe toplantılarıyla başlamıştır. 1945 yılının Nisan ayından itibaren Tevfik Rüştü Aras'ın evinde bir araya gelen Emin Sazak, Adnan Menderes ve Fuat köprülü CHP'nin, İsmet İnönü'nün otoritesi altında olduğunu ifade etmişler ve bu durumu değiştirmek gerektiği üzerinde durmuşlardır. İkinci defa bir ara-ya gelen Adnan Menderes ve Fuat Köprülü demokratik bir merkez oluşturma konusun-da görüş birliğine varmışlardır. Daha sonraki toplantılara Refik Koraltan da katılmıştır. Adnan Menderes, partide ve toplum içinde etkili olan Celal Bayar'ı bu gruba katmak gerektiğini açıklamıştır. Celal Bayar ile yapılan toplantı sonunda o da gruba dahil ol-muştur. Grup üyeleri 18 Mayıs 1945 tarihinde yapılan toplantıda CHP Meclis Grubuna vermeyi düşündükleri Dörtlü Takriri hazırlamışlardır.Takrir verilmeden önce TBMM'de 1945 yılı devlet bütçesinin oylamasına katı-lan üç yüz yetmiş üç milletvekilinden İzmir Milletvekili Celal Bayar, Aydın Milletve-kili Adnan Menderes, İçel Milletvekili Refik Koraltan, Kars Milletvekili Fuat Köprülü ve Eskişehir Milletvekili Emin Sazak bütçeye karşı aleyhte oy kullanmışlardır. Cumhu-riyet Dönemi'nde ilk defa bir bütçeye karşı aleyhte oy kullanılmıştır. Böylece muhalif tavırlarını ikinci defa ortaya koymuşlardır. Grup üyeleri 7 Haziran 1945 tarihinde Celal Bayar, Adnan Menderes, Fuat Köprülü ve Refik Koraltan'ın imzası ile Dörtlü Takrir'i CHP Meclis Grubu Başkanlığı-na vererek muhalif tutumlarını somutlaştırmışlardır. Takrirde CHP'nin işleyişinin de-mokratik ilkelere uygun hale getirilmesini ve TC. Anayasası'nda var olan vatandaş hak ve hürriyetlerinin tanınması talep etmişlerdir. Bu takrir 12 Haziran 1945 tarihinde CHP Meclis Grubu'nda görüşülmüş ve red-dedilmiştir. Takririn reddedilmesi ile birlikte devam eden süreçte bu kadronun CHP içinde siyaset yapma imkanı kalmadığı gibi takrirde talep edilen bir düzenin kurulma-sının CHP içinde mücadele edilerek olamayacağı ortaya çıkmıştır. Takririn, CHP Meclisi Grubuna verildiği günlerde Cumhurbaşkanı İsmet İnönü, Rauf Orbay ile görüşmüş yeni parti kurulması fikrini ona açmıştır. Bu görüşmeden, İnönü'nün yaptığı diğer konuşmalardan cesaret alan grup üyelerine karşı CHP'li yöne-tici ve milletvekillerinin olumsuz tavrı, partinin yayın organı Ulus gazetesindeki ağır sözlerle dolu yazılar grup üyelerinin CHP'den ayrılmalarına neden olmuştur. Zaten Adnan Menderes ve Fuat Köprülü Vatan gazetesinde yayınlanan yazıları nedeniyle CHP Divanı tarafından 25 Eylül 1945 tarihinde CHP'den ihraç edilmişlerdir. Diğer isimlerde istifa etmişlerdir. Partisiz kalan grup üyeleri parti kurma çalışmalarına başla-mışlar ve Demokrat Parti 7 Ocak 1946 tarihinde resmen kurulmuştur. Demokrat Parti, Dörtlü Takrir'in imzacıları: Celal Bayar, Adnan Menderes, Fuat Köprülü ve Refik Koraltan tarafından kurulmuştur. Demokrat Parti'nin simgesi "DP", genel merkezi ise Antalya Milletvekili Cemal Tunca'nın Ankara Sümer Sokaktaki sekiz numaralı binası olmuştur. Demokrat Parti'nin kuruluş gerekçesinde ve programında Türkiye'de demok-ratik bir rejimin kurulacağı, TC Anayasası'nda demokrasiye aykırı kanunların kaldırı-lacağı, vatandaşların hak ve hürriyetlerinin anayasal teminat altına alınacağı dile geti-rilmiştir. Muhalefet yıllarında ise CHP ve iktidar demokratik olmayan tutum ve davra-nışlar sergilemekle itham edilmiştir. Muhalefet yıllılarında iki parti arasında demokra-siye aykırı birçok olay yaşanmıştır. Hatta 7 Ocak 1947 tarihinde gerçekleşen Demokrat Parti Birinci Genel Kongresi'nde kabul edilen Hürriyet Misakı'nda TC Anayasası'na aykırı olan kanunların kaldırılması ve demokrasiye uygun kanunların yapılması talep edilmiştir. Bu istekler yerine getirilmez ise Demokrat Parti Genel Yönetim Kurulu'na sine-i millet kararı ( TBMM'den çekilme ) hakkı verilmiştir. Demokrat Parti yönetici-leri iktidara gelmeleri halinde vatandaşlara hak ve hürriyetlerinin tanınacağı, demokra-siye aykırı kanunların kaldırılacağı ve TC Anayasası'nın demokrasiye uyumlu hale ge-tirileceği sözlerini vermişlerdir. 14 Mayıs 1950 seçim faaliyetlerinde aynı vaatler tekrarlanmıştır. Hatta 2 Nisan 1950 tarihinde Kasımpaşa'da konuşan Demokrat Parti Genel Başkanı Celal Bayar, grev hakkının demokratik hak olduğunu ve demokrasinin olduğu ülkelerdeki gibi toplumsal düzene ve ekonomiye zarar vermeyecek biçimde işçilere grev hakkının verileceğini ifa-de etmiştir. Seçimleri kazanan Demokrat Parti adına Adnan Menderes 22 Mayıs 1950 tarihinde hükümeti kurmuş ve 29 Mayıs 1950 tarihinde hükümet programı TBMM'de onaylanmıştır.Hükümet programında partinin seçim beyannamesinde olduğu gibi iktidar deği-şikliğinin ülkede maddi ve manevi hiçbir sarsıntıya yol açmasına imkan tanınmayacağı ve özellikle devri sabık yaratılmayacağı vurgulanmıştır. Programda, TC Anayasası'nda vatandaş hak ve hürriyetlerine ve millet iradesine dayanan kararlı bir devlet düzeninin gerçekleşmesini sağlayacak düzenlemelerin yapılacağı ifade edilmiştir. Ayrıca CHP hükümetlerinden ( tek parti dönemi ) kalan, demokratik olmayan kanunların, alışkan-lıkların ve anlayışların değiştirileceği vurgulanmıştır. Programda, işçilere grev hakkının sosyal ve ekonomik düzeni bozmayacak şekilde tanınacağı açıklanmıştır. Demokrat Parti İktidarı Programı'nda sadece vatandaşlara tanınacak haklar yer almamıştır. Ayrıca o tarihlerde azınlıkta olsa da bazıları tarafından hak olarak görülen faaliyetlerin yasaklanacağı da yer almıştır. Cumhuriyet'in ve inkılapların korunması için aşırı sol akımlara ( komünizm ) izin verilmeyeceği ve bunlarla etkin bir biçimde müca-dele edileceği ifade edilmiştir. Bunlara karşı kanuni tedbirlerin alınacağı çünkü bu tür düşüncelerin günün şartlarında fikir ve vicdan hürriyeti olarak görülmediği vurgulan-mıştır. Bu fikir akımların hürriyet maskesi altında yayın yapmalarına izin verilmeyeceği çünkü bu düşünce akımlarının amacının özgürlükleri ortadan kaldırmak olduğu iddia edilmiştir. Komünizm fikir akımının yanı sıra irticai hareketlere de asla müsaade edil-meyeceği vurgulanmıştır. Demokrat Parti Dönemi'nde iktidarın sivil toplum kuruluşları ile ilişkilerine özetlemeden önce sivil toplumun örgütü tanımını yapmak yerinde olacaktır. Sivil top-lum kavramı farklı biçimlerde tanımlanan bir kavramdır. Özellikle devlet ile sivil top-lum arasındaki ilişki farklı tanımlamalara neden olmaktadır. Bu tanımlardan bazılarında sivil toplum, devletten tamamen bağımsız, devleti kontrol eden ve hatta devletin alter-natifi olan örgütlü bir güç olarak tarif edilmiştir. Diğer tanımlarda ise devlet ile sivil toplum arasında bu kadar keskin bir ayrılığın olmadığı, sivil toplumun devlete top-lumsal katılımı sağlama amacının var olduğu ileri sürülmüştür. Modern anlamda sivil toplum kavramı "Non Govern Mental Organizations" ( devletten bağımsız örgütlen-meler ) olarak tanımlamasının yanı sıra "gönüllü kuruluşlar", "kar amacı gütmeyen ku-ruluşlar" gibi ifadelerle de tanımlanmaktadır. Sivil toplum tanımını yaptıktan sonra Demokrat Parti iktidarları öncesi sivil toplum örgütlenmesine devletin müdahalesinin ne zaman kaldırıldığına kısaca yer verelim. Türkiye'de 28 Haziran 1938 tarihinde yürürlüğe giren 3512 sayılı Cemiyetler Kanunu ile Osmanlı Devleti döneminden kalma 1909 tarih ve 121 sayılı Cemiyetler Kanun'u ve bu kanunda yapılan 353 ve 387 sayılı kanunlar yürürlükten kalkmıştır. Bu kanunun dokuzuncu maddesinin h bendiyle "aile, sınıf, ırk, cins" esasına dayalı der-neklerin kurulması yasaklanmıştır. Bu madde ile sendika ve birçok derneğin kurulması yasaklanmıştır. Bu kanunun kabul gerekçesinde, o dönem de bazı ülkelerde var olan ko-münist ve faşist rejimlerin ülkenin yönetimin ele geçirmesini önlemek olduğu ileri sü-rülmüştür. İsmet İnönü'nün 10-11 Mayıs 1946 tarihinde CHP Kurultayı'nda yaptığı konuşmadan sonra 5 Haziran 1946 tarihinde 4919 sayılı Kanun ile dernek kurma işle-mindeki izin alma formalitesi kaldırılmıştır. Sınıf esasına dayalı dernek kurma yasağı da kalkmıştır. Bu kanunun kabulü sırasında Demokrat Parti adına bir konuşma yapan Adnan Menderes, kanunda yapılan değişikliği demokrasiye giden yolda önemli bir aşa-ma olarak adlandırmıştır. Sivil toplum örgütlenmesinin önündeki engeller Demokrat Parti İktidarı öncesinde kaldırılmıştır. Demokrat Parti İktidarı döneminde sivil toplum kuruluşları ile ilişkiler iki bölü-mde ele alınabilir. Birinci bölüm hükümetin sivil toplum alanında yaptığı düzenleme-lerden oluşur. İkinci bölüm ise iktidarın sivil toplum kuruluşlarına yaklaşımı yani onların faaliyetlerine karşı tutumu, ülke yönetimi ile ilgili alınan kararlara ilgili sivil toplum kuruluşlarının tepkileri ve sivil toplum kuruluşlarının kendi alanları ile ilgili alınan kararlarda bu kuruluşların isteklerinin ve itirazlarının dikkate alıp almamasından oluşur.Demokrat Parti İktidarı döneminde sivil toplum alanında birçok düzenleme yapılmıştır. Hükümetin yaptığı bu düzenlemelere günümüzün demokrasi düzeyi ile yaklaşmak zamanın koşullarını ve demokrasi kültürünün oluşum sürecini dikkate almamak anlamına gelir. Hükümetin sivil toplum alanında yaptığı ilk düzenleme 5680 sayılı Basın Kanunu'dur. Kanunun kabulü demokrasi ilkeleri ile bağdaşan bir uygulama olmuştur. Bu nedenle basın ve basın-yayın örgütleri bu yasayı doğru bir adım olarak görmüşlerdir. Hükümetin sivil toplum alanında yaptığı ikinci kanuni düzenleme 5844 sayılı Komünizm İle Mücadele Kanununu çıkarmasıdır. İktidarın programında komü-nizm fikir akımına ve komünist yayınlara karşı mücadele edileceği, bu fikir akımlarının faaliyetlerinin demokratik bir fikir ve vicdan hürriyeti olarak görülmediği aksine de-mokratik rejimi ortadan kaldırmaya yönelik bir tutum ve tavır olduğu vurgulanmıştır. Muhalefetin de bu konuda iktidarla aynı düşünceye sahip olması bu kanunun çıkarıl-masını kolaylaştırmıştır. Demokrat Parti İktidarı'nın bu tür düşünce akımlarına ve onların faaliyetlerine izin vermemesini değerlendirirken zamanın koşullarını ve demok-rasi kültürünün oluşum sürecini göz önünde tutmak yerinde olacaktır. İktidarın sivil toplum alanı ile ilgili yaptığı bir başka uygulama ise 5816 sayılı Atatürk Kanunu'nun çıkarılmasıdır. Atatürk'ün kişiliğine, ilke ve inkılaplarına saldırıların sonucunda kabul edilmiş olan bu kanun günümüzde de geçerlidir. Bu kanunun çıkarılmasına Atatürk'ün kurduğu parti olan CHP'li milletvekillerinin karşı çıkmış olmaları ise üzerinde durul-ması gereken önemli bir husustur. Hükümetin sivil toplum alanında gerçekleştirdiği bir başka düzenleme ise 6761 sayılı Vicdan ve Toplanma Hürriyetini Koruma Kanunu'nun kabul edilmesidir. Kanun, irticai hareketlerin artarak rejimi tehdit eder hale gelmesinin sonucu çıkarılmıştır. İrticai hareketlere izin verilmeyeceğini, demokratik rejimi koruya-cağını programında ilan eden hükümet bunun gereğini yerine getirmiştir. Dinin siyasi veya diğer çıkarlar için kullanılması ve bu tür örgütlenmelerin kurulmasını demokratik ilkelerle bağdaştırmak mümkün değildir. Hükümetin sivil toplum alanına bir başka müdahalesi Neşir Yolu ile veya Radyo ile İşlenecek Bazı Cürümler Hakkındaki Kanun'u çıkarması ile 6732 ve 6733 sayılı basın kanunlarının bazı maddelerini değiş-tirmesi ile olmuştur. Bu kanunlarda yer alan kişilerin şikayeti olmadan savcıların ya-yınlar ile ilgili kendiliğinden harekete geçebilmesi unsuru haber alma ve verme hür-riyetini engelleyen bir koşul oluşturmuştur. Yine gazetecilerin yaptıkları haberler ve köşe yazarlarının yazdıkları yazılar nedeniyle şikayet edilmeleri halinde kendilerini müdafaa edebilmeleri için ispat hakkının onlara verilmeyişi bazı konularda ( iktidar ve mülki amirler ile ilgili yolsuzluk vb) haber yapmalarına, yazı yazmalarına engel olacak ortamı oluşturmuştur. Ayrıca, halkın haber alma özgürlüğüne, gazetecilerin özgür ve bağımsız çalışmasına engel olmuştur. İspat hakkı verilmediği gibi bu tür yazı ve haberler için cezaların arttırılması basın hürriyetini ortadan kaldırmıştır. Bu nedenle bazı basın mensupları hareket içerikli haber ve yazıları nedeniyle ceza almış olsalar da hükümetin politikalarını eleştiren onlarca basın çalışanına hapis cezalarının verilmesi vatandaşlara hak ve hürriyetlerini vereceğini ve devri sabık yaratmayacağını söyleyen Demokrat Parti İktidarı'nın bu uygulamaları onun söylemleri ve adıyla çelişmesine ne-den olmuştur. Hükümetin sivil toplum alanında yaptığı bir başka kanuni düzenleme 6771 Sayılı Toplantılar ve Gösteri Yürüyüşleri Kanunu'nu çıkarmasıdır. Kanun, siyasi partilerin seçim varmış gibi çok fazla miting yaptığı ve bu mitinglerde konuşanların hükümeti ağır bir şekilde eleştirdiği ve hatta bazı hatiplerin hükümet üyelerine ağır sözler söylediği gerekçeleriyle kabul edilmiştir. Bu kanun ile partilerin miting ve kapalı alan toplantıları seçim zamanı ile sınırlandırılmıştır. Bu nedenle bu uygulama demokrasiye aykırı bir düzenleme olmuştur. Bir parti veya dernek kanunlara aykırı hareket etmediği sürece istediği zaman izin almak koşulu ile miting yapabilmelidir. Hükümetin sivil toplum kuruluşları ile ilişkilerine baktığımızda ise olumlu ve o-lumsuz tutum ve uygulamaların varlığından söz edebiliriz. İktidarın sivil toplum kuru-luşları ile ilişkileri dernekler, sendikalar ve basın teşkilatları ile olmak üzere üç ana bö-lüm halinde ele alınabilir. Derneklerle ilişkilere baktığımızda öğrenci dernekleri ile iliş-kilerin daha yoğun olduğunu söyleyebiliriz. Özellikle TMTF ve MTTB gibi öğrenci dernek federasyonları yönetimleri ile ilişkiler öğrenci dernekleri ile ilişkilerin en önemli bölümünü oluşturur. Bu konuda partilerin bugünde devam eden derneklerin yönetimle-rini elde etme isteği Demokrat Parti İktidarı'nın da faaliyetlerinden birisini oluşmuştur. Muhalif olan yönetimleri değiştirmek için çeşitli çalışmalar yapılmıştır. Bu doğrultuda Demokrat Partili dört milletvekili tarafından öğrenci derneklerine hükümetin verdiği ö-deneği dağıtma ve gençlik sorunlarını çözmek amacıyla kurulmuş olan Gençlik Bürosu' nun TMTF ve MTTB'nin yönetim kurulları seçimlerine müdahale etmesi ve sonrası yaşanan olaylar demokrasi ilkeleri ile bağdaşmamıştır. Ayrıca Türkiye Milli Gençlik Teşkilatı adında bir gençlik derneği varken Türk Milli Birliği'nin kurulması ve böylece geçliği farklı cephelerde örgütleme isteği gençliğin birbiri ile kavgalı hale gelmesine ne-den olmuştur. Radyo Dinlemeyenler Cemiyeti'nin İstanbul Valisi Ethem Yetkiner tara-fından kanunsuz bir biçimde kapatılması, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dekanı Turhan Fevzioğlu'nun görevden alınması nedeniyle eylem yapan öğrencilerin gözaltına alınması ve mahkemeye verilmesi, İTÜTB'nin üniversitedeki yemek boykotu nedeniyle öğrencilerin gözaltına alınmaları, mahkemeye verilmeleri ve hükümet yetki-lilerinin bu konuda yaptıkları açıklamalar demokratik bir iktidar sivil toplum kuruluşu ilişki tarzına aykırı olmuştur. Tahkikat Komisyonu kararları ile örfi idarelerin kurulması ve öğrencilerin tepkilerinin engellenmesi de demokrasi açısında doğru olmayan uygula-malar olmuştur. Kiracılar Cemiyeti'nin istekleri dikkate alınarak Kira Kanunu'nun ka-bul edilmesi, tüccar, esnaf ve sanayicilerin derneklerinin talepleri dikkate alınarak Milli Korunma Kanunu'nda yapılan değişiklik ve kredi imkanlarının artırılması gibi karar-larda dernekler ile ilgili hükümetin olumlu yönde uygulamaları olmuştur. Ayrıca hükü-metin irtica ve komünizm ile mücadeleleri de dernekler tarafından olumlu karşılan-mıştır. Hükümetin sendikalar ile ilişkilerine baktığımızda ise grev hakkı tartışmalarının en önemli sorun olduğunu söyleyebiliriz. İktidarın seçim vaatlerinde ve programında olan grev hakkı ile ilgili sendikalar tarafından onlarca talep gelmiştir. 1951 yılında bir tasarı hazırlanmış olmasına ve ilgili bakanların bu hakkın verileceğini yıllarca söyleme-lerine karşın grev hakkı verilmemiştir. Çalışma bakanları grev hakkının verilmeme ne-denini, genellikle iktisadi ve sosyal düzenin bozulabileceğine dayandırmışlardır. Ayrıca, grev hakkı verildiğinde işverene lokavt hakkının da tanınması gerektiği için sendikala-rın mali gücünün bunu kaldıramayacağını ve işçilerin zor durumda kalacağını iddia et-mişlerdir. Bu nedenlerle grev hakkı için acele edilmemesini dile getirmişlerdir. İşçiye grev hakkının verilmemesinin yanında işçi mitinglerinin yasaklanması; kanunsuz grev nedeniyle bazı sendikaların kapatılması; işsizlik rakamları açıklamaları nedeniyle Çalışma Bakanlığı ile tartışmaya giren bazı sendika birliklerinin Sendikalar Kanunu'nun sekizinci maddesinde yer alan ayrı ayrı iş kolundaki sendikaların sendikal birlik olama-yacağı gerekçesiyle kapatılması; işçi seminerlerinin yasaklanması ve burada konferans verenlerin cahillikle, komünistlikle ve siyasi propaganda yapmakla ile itham edilmesi; Zonguldak Maden İşçileri Sendikası ikinci başkanının muhalif açıklamaları nedeniyle görevden alınması ve sendikanın kongresine müdahale edilmesi gibi olaylar demokratik olmayan tutumlar olmuştur. Kolektif İş Akdi tasarısının TBMM'ye getirilmesi, işçiler için ev yapılması, yıllık ücretli iznin verilmesi, tatil yapamayanlara çalıştıkları gün için yevmiye ödenmesi, sendikal faaliyet nedeniyle işten çıkarılmaların kanunla yasaklan-ması, işçi sigortalarındaki düzenlemelerde işçilerin ve sendikaların lehine olan demok-ratik uygulamalar olmuştur. Basın ve onun teşkilatları ile ilişkilerine baktığımızda Demokrat Parti, muhalefet yıllarında ve iktidarının ilk üç, dört yılında basının büyük bir bölümü tarafından destek- lenmiştir. Fakat hükümet politikalarındaki değişmeler ve ekonomideki kötü gidiş bası-nın büyük bir bölümünün hükümete muhalif olmasına neden olmuştur. Bu nedenle bası-nının muhalif partilerin eylem ve söylemlerini sayfalarına taşıması; hükümet politikala-rını eleştiren yazılar yayınlaması hükümetin yukarıda aktardığımız kanuni önlemleri al-masına neden olmuştur. Bu kanunların kabulüne bazı gazetecilerin hükümet üyeleri ile ilgili eleştirinin boyutunu aşarak hakaret içeren yazıları kaleme almaları da etkili olmuş-tur. Özellikle 1958 yılından sonra basın kuruluşları ile hükümet üyeleri arasında ilişkiler gerginleşmiştir. Basın sanki bir muhalefet partisi gibi muhalefeti hükümete karşı tek cephede birleşmeye çağırırken hükümette basını reklam ödeneklerinin azalması nede-niyle bu yönde hareket etme ve meşru hükümete karşı halkı ayaklanmaya teşvik etmek-le itham etmiştir. İsmet İnönü'nün ve CHP'lilerin yurt gezileri ile Osman Bölükbaşı'nın Kırşehir'i ziyareti ve tutuklanması sırasında bazı gazetecilerin polis tarafından tartak-lanması, fotoğraf makinelerinin ellerinden alınması, gözaltına alınmaları, yargılanma-ları, bu olayların yayının yasaklanması hükümet ile basının ilişkilerini daha da gergin-leştirmiştir. Bu olaylar nedeniyle basın örgütlerinin tebliğler yayınlamaları ve bu tebliğ-lerden birisi nedeniyle İstanbul Gazeteciler Sendikası'nın siyaset yaptığı gerekçesiyle kapatılması ve Beynelmilel Basın Enstitüsü'nün Türkiye'deki basın hürriyeti ile ilgili açıklamasının yayınının yasaklanması basınla iktidarı karşı karşıya getirmiştir. Bu olay-lar bazı gazeteci örgütlerinden istifa edenlerin Demokrat Parti'ye yakın gazeteciler ile radyo ve Anadolu Ajansı'nda çalışan gazetecilerden oluşan Matbuat Kulübü'nün kurul-ması ile sonuçlanmıştır. CHP'nin son olaylar nedeniyle halkı iktidara karşı isyana teşvik ettiği ve silahlı hücreler kurduğu gerekçesiyle Tahkikat Komisyonu'nun kurulması ve bu olay sonucunda örfi idarelerin ilan edilmesi bazı örfi idare kararlarına uymadığı ne-deniyle bazı gazetelerin kapatılmasına neden olmuştur. Tabi ki sadece hükümetin basın-la olumsuz yönde ilişkileri olmamıştır. Başbakan Adnan Menderes birçok kez bazı ga-zetecilere ziyafet vermiş, onların teşekküllerini ziyaret etmiş ve istek ve sorunlarını din-lemiştir. Özetle Demokrat Parti İktidarı Türkiye'de demokrasi kültürünün oluşmadığı ve Cumhuriyet'in ilanının üzerinden çok fazla zamanın geçmediği bir dönemde işbaşına gelen bir iktidardır. Bu nedenle devri sabık yaratılmayacağı ve demokratik hak ve hürriyetlerin tanınacağı, TC Anayasası'nın demokrasi ilkelerine uygun biçimde tanzim edileceği sözleri tutulamamıştır.ABSTRACTOn November 10, 1938 with the death of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, Ismet Inonu country, the management of which the President has become the most authoritative person. İnönü, CHP and the state administration dominated by single units (National Chief), especially the period of Celal Bayar reaction caused CHP deputies and managers. Direction of the party and the country is a party to the Second World War due to the domination of the majority of the people and the power of the economic distress of the people in conflict with conservative political circles and outside the CHP applications in educational and social fields, and a large part of the population has led to the formation of an oppositional stance. In conjunction with this process, the government organized a number of radical opposition movement has led to applications.Due to the reasons stated above, and openly turned into a discourse and actions of individual behavior within the CHP has emerged during the bid for the first time legislation for land reform. CHP deputies Celal Bayar and Adnan Menderes, Fuat Koprulu, and Refik Koraltan, May 14, 1945 with the start of the discussion in Parliament on the proposal of this law the government's attitude towards the application put forward by their speeches. However, prior to the submission to Parliament of the draft of this law is essentially a dissident group within the CHP meetings began Thursday in the home of the formation of Tevfik Rüştü Aras. Aras Tevfik Rüştü since April of 1945 came together at home Emin Sazak sure, Adnan Menderes and Fuat Koprulu CHP reported that they were under the authority of Ismet Inonu and focused on the need to change this situation. Fuat Koprulu Adnan Menderes coming together for the second time and agreed on establishing a democratic center. Refik Koraltan later participated in the meetings. Adnan Menderes, the party and in the community should join this group Celal Bayar has announced that effective. The meeting with the group at the end of Celal Bayar, it has been included. Group members at the meeting held on May 18, Calm before the Turkish Grand National Assembly without a vote of the state budget of 1945 three hundred and seventy-three deputies involved in İzmir deputy Celal Bayar,Deputy Aydin Adnan Menderes, Mersin deputy Refik Koraltan, Kars deputy Fuat Koprulu and Eskişehir deputy Emin Sazak used negative vote against the budget. Against the budget vote against the Republican period was used for the first time. Thus, the attitudes of the opposition put forward a second time. 1945 was prepared by the CHP Parliamentary Group Quartet Motion to think.Group members on June 7, 1945 at Celal Bayar and Adnan Menderes, Fuat Koprulu and the CHP Parliamentary Group of the motion hazard with the signature of President Rafik Koraltan'ın attitudes explicitly put forward by the opposition. The operation of the CHP's proposal to be brought into line with democratic principles and the TC. Recognition of citizens' rights and freedoms of the Constitution claimed that exists.CHP Parliamentary Group on June 12, 1945 This resolution was discussed and rejected. Calm in the ongoing process of this staff within the CHP with the rejection of the possibility of politics as no event requested a proposal to establish an order could not be fighting in the CHP has emerged.The proposals given in the CHP parliamentary group, recently President Ismet Inonu, the idea of establishing a new party he has met with Rauf Orbay. This meeting, the group ventured İnönü his other speeches negative attitude against members of the CHP managers and members of parliament, the party organ of the Nation newspaper articles full of heavy words to leave the group members has led to the CHP. Already published in Homeland Adnan Menderes and Fuat Koprulu writings were expelled from the CHP CHP by the Court on September 25, 1945.Other names resigned. The remaining members of the group began the work of establishing party-Party and the Democratic Party was formally established on January 7, 1946. The Democratic Party, Four signatories to the motion: Celal Bayar and Adnan Menderes, was founded by Fuat Koprulu, and Refik Koraltan. Symbol of the Democratic Party, "DP", is headquartered in Ankara Antalya Deputy Cemal Tunca Sumerian has been building street number eight.The justification of the Democratic Party establishment of a democratic regime in Turkey to install and program, contrary to the laws of democracy, the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey removed, will be guaranteed by the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens are expressed. In opposition to the CHP, and the government has been accused of exhibiting non-democratic attitudes and behaviors. The opposition between the two parties yıllılarında many events occurred against democracy. Even the Democratic Party, which took place on January 7, 1947 the First General Congress of the abolition of laws which are contrary to the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey adopted the Convention on Freedom and democracy has been requested to the appropriate law. These requests are not adhered to given the right to withdraw from the Parliament of the Board of Directors of the Democratic Party. If the Democratic Party came to power managers to recognize the rights and freedoms of citizens, democracy, contrary to the laws of the Republic to remove the words of the Constitution gave making them compatible with democracy.May 14, 1950 election activities, the same promise was repeated. Even speaking Kasımpaşa on April 2, 1950 Democratic Party Chairman Celal Bayar, that democratic rights and democracy in countries where the right to strike as the social order and stated that the economy will not harm the workers the right to strike. On behalf of the Democratic Party won the elections on May 22, 1950 the government of Adnan Menderes set up and on May 29, 1950 the Parliament approved the government's program.The government program as well as the party's electoral declaration is no shock of the moral and material change of government in the country the possibility to open the account will not be recognized, and in particular sorulmayacağı previous government was emphasized. In the program, the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey is based on the will of the citizens' rights and freedoms and the nation are expressed in stable arrangements shall be made to ensure the realization of a state order. In addition, the governments of the CHP (single-party period) and the remaining non-democratic laws, habits, and understandings change is emphasized. In the program, the workers explained to recognize the right to strike will not disrupt the social and economic order.Programme of the Government of the Democratic Party would get only the rights of citizens were not included. In addition, even though at that time by some of the minority rights in the banned activities took place. Reforms for the protection of the Republic and the extreme left movements (communism) and will not be allowed to deal with them effectively unless otherwise indicated. Legal action will be taken against them because such conditions, the ideas and thoughts of the day is not seen as freedom of conscience is emphasized. This idea will not be allowed to broadcast under the guise of freedom of currents currents of thought because it has been claimed that the purpose of eliminating freedoms. The idea of communism would not be allowed to flow as well as the reactionary movements never be emphasized.Democratic Party Period Before summarizing the power of civil society in its relations with non-governmental organizations would be appropriate to define the organization. The concept of civil society is a concept defined in different ways. In particular the relationship between the state and civil society leads to different definitions. Some of these definitions, civil society, completely independent of the government, which controls the state and even the organized power of the state, which has been described as an alternative. Other definitions of the state and civil society is not so much a sharp separation, has the purpose of ensuring the participation of civil society, the state has been suggested that social. The concept of civil society in the modern sense "Non Govern mental Organizations" (independent of the state organizations), as well as the definition of "voluntary organizations", "nonprofit organizations" as well as the terms are defined. After the definition of civil society non-governmental organization prior to the governments of the Democratic Party has been removed briefly when you let the government's interference.Turkey Associations law no. 3512 came into force on June 28, 1938 and 1909 by the Ottoman Empire era and societies act no. 121 and no. 387 to the law and the law was abolished 353. This is the ninth article of the law bendiyle h "family, class, race, gender" on the basis of the establishment of associations is prohibited. This material association with the trade unions and the establishment of many prohibited. Accept the justification for this law, existing at the time of communist and fascist regimes in some countries to avoid taking over the administration of the country suggested that.Ismet Inonu, 10 to 11 May 1946, after his speech to the CHP congress of the law no. 4919 on June 5, 1946 permitting process and formalities to freedom of association has been removed. Class on the basis of the ban on freedom of association disappeared. Time of the adoption of this law, gave a speech on behalf of the Democratic Party of Adnan Menderes, the change in the law is an important step on the road to democracy, termed. Removed the obstacles to the organization of civil society ahead of the Democratic Party Government.Relations with non-governmental organizations in the Government of the Democratic Party can be considered in two parts. The first part consists of the Regulation in the field of government, civil society. The second part of power approach to civil society organizations, that is, their attitude towards the activities of the country, on the decisions taken on the management of non-governmental organizations and civil society responses in decisions related to their field consists of absence from these organizations to take into account requests and objections.The Governments of the Democratic Party made many regulations in the field of civil society. The government's approach to his time with the level of democracy in today's terms of these regulations and take no account of the formation process of a culture of democracy means. The government's first regulation in the field of civil society Press Act no. 5680. The adoption of the Law has been a practice incompatible with the principles of democracy. Therefore, the press and media organizations saw this as a step towards the law. The second legal regulation in the field of civil society, the government's Struggle Against Communism Act 5844 to issue no. The idea of communism and communist publications program flow of power to fight against the idea of a democratic currents of ideas and activities seen as contrary to freedom of conscience to abolish the democratic regime is emphasized as an attitude and demeanor. Opposition to have the same thought on this subject, power and facilitated the removal of this law. İktidarı'nın Democratic Party not to allow this kind of thought currents and their activities in terms of assessing the time and would be wise to keep in mind that the process of the formation of a culture of democracy. Another application is related to the field of civil society that the government is the removal of the law no. 5816 of Atatürk. Atatürk's personality, principles and reforms of this law which has been adopted as a result of the attacks also applies today. This law established by Ataturk party, the CHP deputies opposed the removal of the need to focus on to be an important consideration. If the regulation is carried out by the Government in the field of non-governmental No. 6761 is the adoption of the Law on Protection of conscience and the right to freedom of assembly. The law was a result of the arrival of fundamentalist movements become increasingly threaten the regime. Harekelere reactionary allowed the democratic regime of government that proclaimed the need to protect the program fulfilled. The use of religion for political or other interests is not possible to reconcile democratic principles and the establishment of such organizations. Another area of civil society through the intervention of the government or the Radio Broadcasting to be covered by the Act on Certain Felonies by extraction with replacement of some provisions of the laws of 6732 and 6733 has been no press. Without these laws, prosecutors publications related to the complaints of the people pass the element of self-motivation has created a condition that prevents the freedom to receive and impart news. Again, journalists, columnists wrote articles for their news and to be able to prove that the right to defend themselves if they are complaining verilmeyişi them on some issues (related to power and corruption, governors, etc.) make news, the media has created to prevent writing to write. In addition, the public freedom of information, has been hampered by journalists to operate freely and independently. Proof is not given the right to increase the penalties for press articles and news like this kind of freedom is eliminated. For this reason, some members of the media even if they are convicted of moving content, news and articles critical of the government's policies, press the dozens of employees and the transfer of prison sentences would be given rights and freedoms of citizens who have no former Democratic Party İktidarı'nın these practices conflict with the name of his discourses, and from what has been . Any other legal regulation in the field of civil society that the Government No. 6771 Law on Meetings and Demonstrations landing. The law of political parties and election rallies like there's a lot of rally speakers heavily criticized the government and even some harsh words said to the members of the government on grounds of orators were adopted. With this law, meetings, parties, rally and off the field is limited to election time. Therefore, this application has an arrangement undemocratic. Act contrary to the laws of association, unless a party or get permission at any time be able to rally with the condition.If we look at the government's relations with civil society organizations can talk about the existence of positive and negative attitudes and practices. Power relations with non-governmental organizations, associations, trade unions and the press offices of three main parts: can be handled. When we look at the relations of relations with associations, student associations say that more intense. Student associations and federations, such as TMTF MTTB especially relations with governments creates the most important part of relations with student associations. Management of associations in this regard the parties desire to achieve, which continues today İktidarı'nın Democratic Party, one of the activities occurred. Various studies the management of the opposition to change. In this respect the government of the Democratic Party the benefit of four deputies student associations established to solve the problems of deploying and youth, the Youth Bureau's board of directors MTTB'nin TMTF and after the elections and the events in the intervention was not consistent with democratic principles. In addition, while Turkey's National Youth Organization is a youth association, and thus the establishment of the Turkish National Union geçliği different fronts at loggerheads with each other to become the youth organization has led to the request. Radio unlawfully by not obeying the closure of the League of the Governor of Istanbul Ethem Yetkiner, Dean of the Faculty of Political Sciences, Ankara University, Turhan Fevzioğlu'nun dismissal of the action because of the detention and court-students who, due to the boycott of food İTÜTB'nin university students detention, without trial and government officials and their explanations in this regard the relationship of a democratic style of government, non-governmental organizations has been inconsistent. Research Commission decisions and the establishment of the legal authorities and the students' reactions have been prevented by applications that are not correct in terms of democracy. Requests, taking into account the adoption of the Law on Lease Tenants Association, merchants, tradesmen, and taking into account the demands of the industrialists' associations, and credit facilities amendment to the Law on Protection of National Associations of decisions, such as increasing the government has applications in a positive way. In addition, the government struggles with fundamentalism and communism was welcomed by the associations.If we look at the government's relations with the trade unions the right to strike is the most important problem söyleyebiliriz.Hükümetin election promises and program discussions with the trade unions on the right to strike has been requested by the dozens. In 1951, a bill has been prepared and the relevant ministers would say that for many years, but the right to strike were not given this right. The right to strike or not to study the cause of ministers, generally relied on the economic and social order can go wrong. In addition, the employer is given the right to strike or lock-out should be recognized the right of the workers to handle this difficult situation will remain the financial power of the trade unions have claimed. For these reasons expressed not to rush to the right to strike. An employee is not given the right to strike of workers rallies next to the prohibition of certain trade unions due to the closure of illegal strikes, unemployment figures into the discussion with the Ministry of Labour for comments eighth article of the Law on Trade Unions located in some of the trade union trade union trade union unity can not be separate business line on the ground, working seminars ban and ignorance of those who lecture here, to be accused of being a communist and political propaganda; Zonguldak Mine Workers' Union and the second president of the union congress to intervene in the dismissal of the opposition, such as descriptions of events were non-democratic attitudes. The introduction to Parliament of the draft collective employment contract for workers to home, paid annual granting of a permit, work groups not on the payment of per diem for the day, because of the dismissal law, the prohibition of trade union activity, labor regulations, workers and trade unions in favor of insurances has been democratic practices.Look at the Democratic Party's relations with the press and its agencies, the opposition and the government die in the first three, four, supported by a large part of the press in. However, changes in government policies and the economy is going bad, the opposition to the government has led to a large part of the media. For this reason, the actions and rhetoric of media sheets to carry the opposition parties and the government to publish articles critical of the government's policies have quoted above, has led to take legal measures. The adoption of this law, the size of some of the criticism of journalists, members of the government to submit written papers has been effective in overcoming-round insulting. Especially in 1958, after the tense relations between members of the press and the government. Press it as an opposition party, the opposition to unite against the government calling a single front to move in this direction due to the decline in government appropriations media advertising and the people to revolt against the legitimate government has been accused. . Ismet Inonu and CHP foreign trips and a visit to Kirşehir Osman Bölükbaşı some journalists during his arrest by the police, beaten, deprived cameras, detention, trial, media relations with the government banning the publication of these events gerginleştirmiştir. This is due to the events of press organizations publish papers and one of the papers due to the closure of Istanbul, on the grounds that the political Union of Journalists and the international Press Institute press freedom in Turkey, the prohibition of publication of the statement on the power of the press has faced. These events are close to the Democratic Party, who resigned some journalist organizations, journalists and radio and printed documents of journalists working in the Anatolian Agency resulted in the establishment Club. Due to recent events in the CHP encourages people to revolt against the government and the armed cells, and this event as a result of the establishment of the Commission of Inquiry on the grounds established by customary authorities declared martial law in some of the decisions of the breach has led to the closure of some newspapers. Of course, only the government's relationship with the press has been negative. Some reporters several times Prime Minister Adnan Menderes feast, I have visited their formations and listened to requests and problems.In summary declaration of the Democratic Party Government of the Republic of Turkey, the culture of democracy are generated does not exceed too much time in power, which came to power at a time. For this reason, touched and democratic rights and freedoms recognized representatives of the previous government, the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey promises to be devised in accordance with the principles of democracy has not been realized.

"The news from Delaware is crystal clear: it's Sarah Palin's party now." Senator John Kerry The Tea Party insurrection against the establishment is causing some headaches for the Republican leadership. Republican primary elections everywhere are being won by Tea Party candidates, some of which are credible and electable in national contests (Marco Rubio in Florida, Joe Miller in Alaska), but many of which are an embarrassment to the party. Christine O'Donnell, who won the Delaware primary, last week, falls into the latter category. The Republican Party had fielded a very strong candidate, Mike Castle, who had already been elected seven times to Congress, and would most likely have won the coveted seat in the national election. But he was considered "too liberal" and "too wedded to the establishment" by the Tea Party. Instead, victory went to Tea Party candidate O'Donnell, who had been endorsed by Sarah Palin. During her campaigning the 41-year old O'Donnell, fresh faced and attractive, adopted the dress style, body language and folksy speech of her flashy mentor, lending some credence to Senator John Kerry's claim that the GOP "is Sarah Palin's party now." O'Donnell had been signed out as not credible by the GOP: not only does she lack any experience and qualifications, but she has a questionable personal finance history and a bizarre background that includes having "practiced witchcraft" before becoming a Christian youth counselor and defender of sexual abstinence. She had run for a House seat twice before and lost, getting only about 4.5% of the vote statewide. Her story brings into focus the dire position the GOP finds itself in: by stirring up the anger and frustration of a public deeply affected by the Great Recession and worried about their economic future, and by using the Tea Party movement's energy and populism to mobilize the electorate, Republicans now find themselves in the awkward situation of having to support and fund fringe candidates for the November election. The Tea Party upheaval has been compared to the Reagan Revolution of 1980. Ronald Reagan transformed the Republican Party by creating a new coalition of social and fiscal conservatives and foreign policy hawks. He brought in the Southern Democrats and the Christian Right, and many moderates from the North East were purged from the party. He forged a new majority, renewed the party's cadre and dominated the national political agenda at least for a decade. Similarly, the Tea Party is imposing a "purity test" on Republicans that includes long-held party principles such as fiscal discipline, balanced budgets and low taxes. But it also demands adherence to more intrusive social dogmas such as opposition to abortion and gay marriage, and blatantly reactionary ideas against immigration and free trade, and in favor of the right to carry guns. With its populist, nativist rhetoric it is feeding the frenzy and anger prevalent in certain sectors of the country today to the point of rendering it ungovernable. Indeed, in order to win, Republican candidates everywhere find that they have to adopt Tea party language and principles even when some of these run counter to the realities of governing. In deep contrast with their extreme views of closed borders, Reagan gave amnesty to a huge mass of illegal immigrants, and was a staunch supporter of free trade, a central tenet of the conservative business class that is anathema to the Tea Party insurgents. Their brand of rampant populism was quite absent from the Reagan revolution: he was a leader who understood where the country was historically and emotionally, and he had the convictions and the policies to move it forwards. His philosophy of hard work, sacrifice, fiscal responsibility and smaller government has endured and influenced many conservative and moderate politicians around the world. In addition, he had the great gift of communication and persuasion, and knew how to use history and logic to back up his actions. Few would compare the Great Communicator with the grammatically challenged elements that lead the Tea party: they tend to speak in sound bites, have poor syntax and grammar, and make obscure, often absurd references that few people are able to follow (for example, Sarah Palin's 2008 comment that "as Putin rears his head and enters U.S airspace, the first thing he sees is Alaska" as an justification of why being governor of that state gave her some foreign policy experience; or Christine O'Donnell's "mice with human brains" reference when explaining her opposition to stem cell research). Their inexperience, rampant populism, and contempt for intellect and knowledge do not bode well for next Congress. Others consider late Senator Barry Goldwater, a blunt-spoken conservative libertarian from Arizona, as the predecessor of the Tea Party. Goldwater, who ran for president in the 1960s against Lyndon Johnson, wanted to abolish the whole welfare state established by the New Deal, and advocated the use of nuclear weapons in Vietnam. He lost to LBJ by a landslide, bringing the Republican Party down with him. But he was a libertarian and this put him at odds with the Christian right agenda of the 1970s. Although it is true that there is a libertarian, Goldwater-like element in some groups of the Tea Party, most of its members embrace an ultra-conservative social agenda of government intrusiveness into people's lives, and that is already a source of contention and conflict within the movement. Given its grassroots, decentralized approach, its platform is a hybrid of sometimes conflicting ideas, but at its core, it is an anti-federalist movement. It officially appeared in the political map on tax-filing day, April 15 of 2009, when "tea parties" were organized in several states to protest against government spending. It grew as a bottom-up organization but, as it gathered strength, it was courted by the GOP as an instrument to revive the party and mobilize its supporters. The Tea Party in its nature and its approach to politics is more reminiscent of the movement that coalesced around Ross Perot in the 1990s. He was against the expansion of the federal government, against free trade and open borders, against Washington "insiders" of both parties, and in favor of balanced budgets and lower taxes. The main difference is that the Tea Party is trying to transform the Republican Party from the inside, instead of running against it as a third party, as Perot did in 1992, thereby preventing the re-election of President Bush senior, and delivering a victory to the Democrats. The question is whether the Tea Party movement will succeed and, whether, by moving the party to the Right, it will have a "corrective" effect, or whether, due to its populist excesses, it will self destroy and bring the party down with it. The Perot movement dissolved because of its internal dissent and lack of leadership, and the Tea Party may encounter the same fate. What the Tea Party movement has in vigor and energy, it lacks in logic, organization and cohesiveness. They would most certainly not have been so successful if they had had to find their own moneys to fund their campaigns. Unfortunately for the GOP, there are at least two Political Action Committees (PACs) that are giving financial support to these fringe-quality candidates: Sarah Palin's own PAC, and the Tea Party Express run by old Republican political operative and entrepreneur Sal Russo, who identifies "promising" candidates that can attract contributions and bring treasure into his own formerly moribund PAC. A third PAC, FreedomWorks, run by former Representative Dick Armey, has been more selective in the Tea Party candidates it supports. It refused to fund Christine O'Donnell, who instead received substantial campaign funds from the other two. Some serious conservative voices are being raised against the Tea Party, but it may be too late. Charles Krauthammer, one of the leading conservative intellectuals, called O'Donnell's triumph a "stunning but pyrrhic victory" that will prevent the Republicans from regaining control of the Senate. While conceding that the Tea Party itself was "the most vigorous and salutary grass-roots movement of our time" and a "source of electoral energy", he still cautioned Republicans that they had to be selective. He said that O'Donnell was problematic and most likely unelectable. Showing his frustration with the defeat of Mike Castle, he stated that the so-called "Buckley rule"-"Support the most conservative candidate that is electable" -had been violated. Also, Karl Rove from his new column in the Wall Street journal called her "unfit for office" and "not a credible" candidate. O'Donnell was the seventh Tea Party candidate to defeat an incumbent, so now the National Republican Committee will most likely have to fund their national campaigns. Not all are unelectable, but the question is, once in power, will they follow the party line or their own? As the GOP moves to the extreme Right to please the Tea Party supporters, it is the moderates that are left out of place. In Florida, the unstoppable Senate race of Tea Party candidate Marco Rubio has forced his opponent Charlie Crist, whom Rubio defeated in the primary, to leave the GOP and run as an Independent. Unlike O'Donnell, Rubio is a very credible candidate who may some day run for president, while Crist has been too much of a moderate for the present political climate, and as governor has supported several of Obama's initiatives. Tea Party Senate candidate Joe Miller, who beat incumbent Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski in the Alaska primary, is also a candidate with solid credentials (WestPoint graduate, then Yale Law), but he is still outside the mainstream on basic issues such as Social Security, which he considers "unconstitutional, because it is not in the Constitution". This is what most worries the party moderates: that a huge part of the electorate, frustrated with the expansion of US government, debt and deficits, will feel so disgruntled as to elect a Republican Congress majority populated with extremist candidates that will ignore the party line, and will try to impose their simplistic, atavistic views of government, turning the clock back one or even two centuries. Unquestionably, not all is said and done in this election, and the Republican primary results are cautiously being watched by Democratic candidates who now see an opening to regain the moderate Independents' vote. But the generalized anger against incumbents in the electoral may very well lead many of them to vote for Tea party newcomers all the same, no matter how extreme and erratic they may seem. Objectively, one can understand and respect philosophical differences and the traditions of this country's two-party politics. In order to survive in the post-Bush era, the Republican Party needed to undergo a correction towards smaller government and balanced budgets, which are the core principles of their ideology. During his eight years in power, Republican George Bush oversaw the biggest expansion of the federal government since the 1960s; he made the decision to fight two wars while at the same time lowering taxes across the board and deregulating private financial institutions. It should thus come as no surprise that his course of action brought about the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression, and that a public backlash against government spending ensued. A year and a half of frantic efforts by the Obama White House and Congress, which obviously demanded more government spending for the short-term, have not delivered palpable results and, although the Recession has officially ended, unemployment is still at 10%. The popular outcry against big government is to be expected. But some groups have used this opportunity to propose hare-brained schemes based on ignorance, nescience and prejudice. Whether they are railing against immigrants, taxes and social welfare programs, or in favor of armed insurrection against the federal government, quite often, to legitimize their demands, they refer their critics to the US Constitution of 1787. To the extent that the Constitution established the federal government and its relative power over the states, their claims have little merit. Perhaps they confuse it with the Articles of Confederation that preceded it and vested power in the states. In any case, the infantile worship of a three centuries old document in an era of globalization, interdependence and a communications revolution speaks for itself: the Tea Party is reactionary, regressive, and irritating to mainstream Americans. But given the level of anger and disenchantment with Washington, they may linger in the political landscape longer than initially predicted. Tea Party supporters tend to confuse their candidates' folksiness with authenticity, their simple- mindedness with sincerity and their populist slogans with serious policy proposals. The truth is that the United States, for all its failures, has governmental institutions that have endured, and is governed by the rule of law and not by mob rule. It is normal and healthy in a democracy to protest against an unresponsive government. It is quite a different thing to put opportunistic, unproven, inexperienced people at the helm in order to role back institutions that took years to build and that the newcomers in their ignorance scorn upon. There is no telling that they would be less greedy or more competent than those they replace. More likely, a Tea-Party-dominated Congress would be a complete disaster as they focus on their petty interests and ideological vendettas; they repeal existing social legislation and refuse to fund the federal government; they start handing out subpoenas to investigate made-up claims against the Executive, and they do not address any of the real problems facing the country. Their narrow-mindedness, their disdain for the realities of democracy and their disinterest in the welfare of others is quite alarming. It may come back to haunt the other Republicans in Congress, who will realize too late that they have to rely on Democrats in order to pass any spending bill and that anger cannot be turned into an agenda for governing. Ironically, this week has been proclaimed Education Week in America, as the White House unveils its new plan to reform the public school system and to bring American students up to par with other advanced democracies. Although the new emphasis will be on science, math and a longer school year, one can only hope there is room in the curriculum for more civic education, a better understanding of American History and a greater appreciation for democracy and its institutions. Only when that happens will this kind of movement be forever confined to the fringes of society, where it belongs. Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia

The evolution of Costa Rica's social sectors over the past decade has been dichotomous. On the one hand, economic growth has remained relatively high, however poverty and inequality have not declined (moreover, they have increased), and persistent employment challenges remain. On the other hand, the country has continued experiences advances in many social indicators, such as pre-primary and tertiary enrollment rates, access to improved sanitation, and labor force participation, though not in others (secondary school completion, immunizations, employment). Higher economic growth and (to a lesser extent) revenues seem to have allowed a substantial increase in public social spending. Looking forward, the key challenges Costa Rica faces are related to continuing improving the quality and efficiency in the social sectors, while improving targeting to serve the most in need, in a tight and severe fiscal context. To expand coverage of excluded population, priority will have to be given to reallocations and improvements within the spending envelope for the social sectors to maximize impact. With a fiscal deficit of more than 6 percent of GDP, further expanding public social spending is no longer an option and budget cuts are looming. Improvements in public spending management and budget execution, including the need of institutional reform to consolidate programs and improve coordination among executing agencies is equally important. In a country that has long been the champion in expanding universal welfare state, sustainability concerns will imply that hard fiscal decisions would need to be made to increase the social returns of budget allocation.

Afghanistan will experience a major security and development transition over the next three years. At the Kabul and Lisbon Conferences in 2010, NATO and the Afghan government agreed that full responsibility for security would be handed over to the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) by the end of 2014. Development progress since 2001 has been mixed. Some major achievements have been recorded, such as rapid economic growth (with large fluctuations), relatively low inflation (after hyperinflation in the 1990s), better public financial management, and gains in basic health and education. Key social indicators, including life expectancy and maternal mortality, have improved markedly (admittedly from an extremely low base), and women are participating more in the economy. Yet in other respects, particularly governance and institution building, the country has fared less well, and many indicators have worsened in recent years. Afghanistan remains one of the world's least developed countries, with a per capita gross domestic product (GDP) of only $528 in 2010/11. More than a third of the population live below the poverty line, more than half are vulnerable and at serious risk of falling into poverty, and three?quarters are illiterate. This report is intended to be comprehensive, so it also discusses the broader historical and political economy context of development in the country, and how Afghanistan compares with other countries that have undergone their own transitions over the past 30 years. This report is based on data collected from various sources in 2011, and its analysis and findings therefore comprise the team's considered assessment using the best available information available by the end of that year. In addition, projections of future trends in Afghanistan inevitably are subject to uncertainty and reflect any weaknesses in the underlying data. Thus the report's projections should be seen as subject to further adjustments and improvements as better and more recent information become available. This report is presented in two volumes. Volume one is a stand?alone Overview which highlights the main findings, projections, and recommendations of the study. Volume two consists of five chapters presenting the detailed empirical background, analytical findings, projections, and recommendations of the study, along with a concluding chapter and three technical appendices.

Investing in young children is the responsible thing to do. All children deserve a chance to grow into healthy, educated, and competent people, no matter where and when they were born. While parents bear most of the responsibility for raising their children, especially in the early years of life, governments also have an important role during this critical time of human capital accumulation. For example, governments can ensure that all expectant mothers and young children have access to quality health services and nutrition. They can support parents and other caregivers in providing a positive and stimulating environment for children from birth on by promoting parenting information programs, investing in direct services such as home-based visits, funding daycare centers and preschools, or providing financial incentives to access good quality programs for infants and children. This Early Childhood Development (ECD) guide presents lessons and experiences that have been useful in informing the policy debate about ECD interventions and the design of such programs across the world. Whether the user of this guide is at the initial stage of deciding whether to expand an ECD portfolio or already in the program design stage, the content offers a range of evidence- based options to inform policy and investment choices.

In the wake of the revolution, Tunisian society is currently undergoing a significant transformation. In late 2011, the country's first representative government in more than three decades was formed, as the Constituent Assembly was seated. Hundreds of legitimate candidates ran in an election that was free, fair, and enjoyed nearly 90 percent participation by eligible voters. 'Tunisia: from revolutions to institutions,' published one year after the exile of Ben Ali, seeks to describe the factors driving this transformation, examining how specific elements of society have changed, or not changed, in the post-revolutionary period. Information and communication technologies (ICTs), which played a central role in the lead-up to the revolution as well as the revolution itself, have continued to influence rapid changes in the past year. This report charts the application of these technologies by citizens, civil society, entrepreneurs, and government stakeholders. It also identifies openings to capitalize on technology's ability to improve governance, expand economic opportunity, and encourage social cohesion.

Together with reductions in indirect taxes on food imports, cash for work programs were one of the main responses implemented by African governments following the food, fuel, and financial crisis of recent years. The main objective of those programs was to help the poor cope with the various shocks by increasing their net earnings through community-level work paid for under the programs. Yet it is unclear whether these cash for work programs indeed reached their intended beneficiaries and to what degree they generated other, potentially long-term beneficial impacts. This paper explores these issues in the context of Liberia and the performance of the Cash for Work Temporary Employment Program (CfWTEP) funded by the World Bank through an emergency crisis facility in response to the 2007/2008 food crisis. Both quantitative and qualitative data are presented, focusing on the operational and policy experiences emerging from program implementation. This paper analyzes the context that led to the creation and implementation of the CfWTEP in Liberia, the nature and administrative arrangements for the program, and its operational performance. The objective is to share the lessons learned from evaluation findings so that they can be useful for implementing similar programs in the future in Liberia itself or in other countries. Findings from the analysis highlight the possibilities of implementing public works program in low capacity, post conflict setting and the scope for using the program as a springboard towards a broader and more comprehensive social safety net.

This case study examines contemporary experiences of conflict in four contexts: Papua New Guinea, with particular reference to the island of Bougainville and the Highlands region; Solomon Islands; and Vanuatu. We find common themes in these experiences, despite the regions famous sociolinguistic diversity, fragmented geography and varied experience of globalization. Melanesia offers distinctive lessons about how conflict may be understood, promoted and avoided. The paper is organized in two broad parts. The first part is contextual. It provides a brief account of conflict and violence in social life before and after colonization. It then tracks, largely chronologically, through the local, national and transnational dimensions of contemporary conflict, how it was avoided, how it has changed, and how it has been managed in different contexts. Particular attention is given to global and regional influences, and to how governments, local people, and external security, development and commercial actors, have worked to mitigate and, at times, exacerbate conflict. The second part of the case study is more analytical. It steps back from the particulars to address themes and propositions in the overall conceptual framing of World Development Report (WDR) 2011 about the nature of conflict, and the underlying stresses and interests that may render it more likely. Part two draws lessons from the histories and contexts discussed in part one. The report organizes these around three themes that reflect views shared with us by people during consultations. The first highlights the need to recognize conflict as an inherent part of social change and thus the need to distinguish between socially generative social contest, and forms of conflict that are corrosive and destructive. The second examines how the ways people 'see' and understand the world directly shapes systems of regulation and 'the rules of the game' and thus directly affect responses to conflict. The third theme argues that capable and legitimate institutions to regulate social contest requires not just capable state institutions, but as much, relationships with local and international agents and organizations operating below and above the state.

This report seeks to inform the development of a framework for addressing governance reform in fragile and conflict affected environments through are view of international experiences. The report analyzes the experience both of countries that sustained a transition to peace and those that fell back into conflict. Pertinent lessons will be drawn selectively from a range of fragile and conflict affected countries, including Haiti, Cambodia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mozambique, Liberia, Timor-Leste, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Indonesia, Sierra Leone, and Angola. No specific typologies have been adopted or formed in order to assess these lessons, because typologies can be limiting and experiences can be better assessed based on the specificity of each country's context. The first section of the report sets out broadly accepted definitions of key terms such as governance, state building, and fragility. The second section reviews experiences with diverse governance dimensions and explores the objectives, opportunities, and constraints associated with each.

This Country Status Report (CSR) for Liberia is part of an ongoing series of country specific reports being prepared by the World Bank in collaboration with governments and development partners. The series aims to enhance the knowledge base for policy development. This report is intended to help engage a diverse audience on issues and policies in the education sector and to develop a shared vision for the future of Liberia. It is the first sector-wide report produced on the education system in Liberia since the end of the war. A policy options matrix follows the executive summary, which will provide government and partners with guidance on the key priorities to tackle. Besides consolidating information in a policy-relevant manner, this CSR makes a unique contribution to the education knowledge base by documenting not only traditional and basic indicators, such as gross enrollment rates and retention, but also examining the performance of the education system in terms of access, quality, equity, and resource allocation and utilization. The report also includes chapters on education governance and teacher management. This report highlights the country's significant education progress since the end of the 14-year civil war in 2003 and the challenges that need to be addressed.