Defense Expenditure: Central America and The Dominican Republic

It is often speculated that the high allocation of funds to retirement pension systems has influenced the capacity of Central American and Dominican Republic military to modernize. Yet, the comparative study of the allocation of pension and social funds in these particular countries suggest that there is not direct linkage between the poor funding of military modernization plans and the allocation of funds to military pension systems. The research conducted on this subject shows the following results: 1. The Dominican Republic is the only country that has embarked on a considerable procurement of modern equipment and still reports the largest proportion of social expenditures. 2. El Salvador’s defense budget allocates minimal funding to Social Welfare Institute, which as alternative sources of funding. In 2009, El Salvador increased 15 percent funding to the military to respond to increased role in domestic security issues. 3. The Guatemalan defense expenditure on social programs is fairly low, but it has grown during the past six years due to processes of demobilization. However, the Military Social Welfare Institute is administered by a decentralized institution funded directly by the Ministry of Finance. If it were to be considered as a part of the defense budget, its social expenses would account for almost 16% of it. 4. The Honduran Defense Budget has faced a considerable enlargement during the past four years, with social spending expenses taken precedence over modernization efforts. 2 5. The Nicaraguan system of military pensions is administered by a decentralized entity (IPSM) through a system of salary deductions. Information on the funding of this entity is inconclusive. The Nicaraguan Defense spending on social services has reported a drastic 90% drop since the year 2007.

Democracy promotion and Turkey

The dissertation documented the degree of Turkey's involvement in the promotion of democracy in the Arab Middle East (ME). Initially, I investigated why and under what conditions Turkey promotes democracy in the ME, and then I explained strategies through which Turkey promotes democracy in the region. I applied the neo-classical realist theoretical framework and a mixed methodology in the research, and I provided evidence from two sources: face-to-face interviews with the Turkish and foreign officials and common citizens, and the statistical data from institutions, such as the OECD, Turkish Statistical Institute, and World Bank.^ My research indicates that Turkey promotes democracy through seven channels. These channels are official development assistance (ODA), mentoring, demonstrative effect, normative pressure, conditionality, military power, enlargement, and civil society organizations. Turkey promotes democracy in the ME for three substantial reasons: first, to advance its security and economic interests; second, to improve the political, social, and economic conditions of people living in the region; and third, to create long-term regional stability, crucial for cooperation in economic and security realms.^ I attempted to engage in debates with two distinct, but interrelated fields of comparative politics and international relations. My most important contribution to the field is that I documented Turkey's case of democracy promotion regarding the degree of Turkey's involvement in this endeavor, its strategies, specificities, and effectiveness in the region. I also contribute to the field as I explained the difference between democracy promotion policies of a regional power, such as Turkey, and global powers, such as the US. I further engaged in discussions that illuminate some aspects of the interplay between the identity and strategic interests in states' foreign policy decisions.^