The thesis issue: a road trip along the Mediterranean

After several months of pretending to do important things, I've finally started writing my thesis since a couple of months. Doing research is something I like very much, so I do not have any difficulty in the process of research. However, as there are so many possible subjects - and paths within these subjects - I do find it difficult to make decisions. For this reason, my attempts to write a thesis have turned in something like a road trip along the Mediterranean.

Last year, when I was studying in Florence, Italy, I was thinking of doing my final thesis on Turkish-Italian relations in the Ataturk-Mussolini period. I had always been interested in the two Mediterranean countries and thought that my thesis would be a good opportunity to study the relations between the two. However, after I returned to Amsterdam, I realized that my interests lay somewhat more to the east: the Levant. Thus, I changed my plans and started thinking about a Levantine topic for my thesis.

At first I tried to focus on Syria, another Mediterranean country/region, and was intrigued by the Syrian political scene in the late Ottoman period (first quarter of the 20^th century). Within a couple of weeks, my interest shifted to the relation between the Ottoman capital Constantinople (which is Mediterranean too) and the Syrian political scene (btw Syria included Lebanon - also Mediterranean - back then). I decided to do research on the former's influence on the latter. However, I was soon caught by the idea that I had to be familiar with Arabic to carry out a 'good' research on this topic and subsequently dropped the Syrian issue from my agenda.

I continued with the Constantinopolitan political scene and was now interested in the ideology of nationalism during the Second Constitutional Period (1908-1918; also called the Young Turkish period). That's where I'm at now and I hope that this will really be the end of the trip. I've just finished the first step of the research: an analysis of the thought of Ziya Gökalp, the most prominent thinker in the nationalist camp at the time.

The second step appears to be a bit more difficult to take. I have several options and I just can't decide! That's why I'm asking you to vote for one of the three options below:

1. I might compare Gökalp with a liberal thinker, like Prince Sabahaddin, and find out whether the differences between the nationalist and liberal camps were superficial or deep (the liberals were the main adversaries of the nationalists). This would also include a research on the balance between the two camps in the political scene. This is interesting, because it enables me to assess the prevalence of nationalism in the Second Constitutional Period. In literature, the period is often described as one in which nationalism is rising.

2. I might use the Gökalpist theoretical framework to analyze the Kemalists policies in the 1920's and 1930's. This is interesting, because Gökalp is often mentioned as "the father of Turkish nationalism". This option would enable me to check this claim.

3. I might bring in IR theories (Realism, Idealism and Social Constructivism for example) and try to place Gokalp's thoughts in the modern academic context of IR.

Dear Readers, please help me on this matter and leave a comment with your vote! Any kind of suggestion or criticism is welcome!