| dc.description.abstract | This study seeks to understand if, and how, the securitisation of a group within one state can have extraterritorial effects on members of this group living beyond the borders of the securitising state. This is a phenomenon that I call “securitisation extension.” This research was formulated with a view to addressing the “territorial limitation” (Adamson, 2016) in much of the securitisation theory literature. Turkish academics based in the West were the chosen unit of analysis, utilising in-depth, semi-structured interviews with academics known to be critical of Turkish state polices. This allowed me to locate the securitising practises used by Turkish state and pro-regime agents, with the perceived aim of encouraging self-censorship amongst oppositional voices in Europe and the U.S. This study finds that these practises have been partially successful, as self-censorship is occurring amongst a substantial number of critical Turkish academics. This was predominantly displayed in non-academic output, with respondents displaying greater resistance to reducing critical output in the academic sphere. The significance of this is in showing that a nation-state, supported by pro-regime agents, is employing practises aimed at curtailing freedom of speech beyond their own borders. Increased global interconnectivity has been shown to facilitate and amplify the effects of this phenomenon, as a significant finding of this research is that considerable changes in behaviour were displayed by academics who have not been directly affected by the practises of securitisation extension. This was due to living in a context of what is here called an “atmosphere of fear,” which has extended from Turkey to impact lived experiences in Turkish communities abroad. | |
