Güvenlik Anlayışının Derinleşmesi ve İnsan Güvenliğinin Meydan Okuyucuları Olarak Şiddet Kullanan Devlet-dışı Aktörler

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1, 105 - 116, 01.02.2014

Bülent Sarper Ağır Murat Necip Arman

https://doi.org/10.30803/adusobed.188806

Öz

Geleneksel güvenlik yaklaşımı, devlet ve ulusal güvenlik sorunsalı üzerine odaklanır. Bununla birlikte, bireylerin güvenliğin referans nesnesi olarak ayrıcalıklı kılınması gerektiği ileri sürülmektedir. İnsan güvenliği kavramı, geleneksel güvenlik yaklaşımı tarafından değerlendirmeye alınmayan aktörleri ve gündemleri içerir. İnsan güvenliği, devletin güvenliğinin zorunlu olarak insanların güvenliği anlamına gelmediği anlayışına sahiptir. Ulus-devlet, egemenlik ve güç anlamında bir erozyon yaşamaktadır ve devlet-dışı aktörler, bu sürecin bir nedenidir. Devlet-dışı aktörlerin bir yönünü, devletin kuvvet kullanma tekelini sorgulayan ve insan güvenliğine yönelik bir meydan okuma oluşturan şiddet içeren devlet dışı aktörler oluşturur. Bu çalışma, şiddet içeren devlet-dışı aktörlerin ortaya çıkışına katkıda bulunan faktörleri, eğilimleri ve gelişmeleri insan güvenliğine olan yansımaları çerçevesinde ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Güvenlik, İnsan Güvenliği, Şiddet İçermeyen

Kaynakça

• AĞIR, Bülent Sarper (2008), “Küreselleşen Dünyada Kitle İmha Silahları ve Terörizm.” In Küreselleşmeden
• Post-Küreselleşmeye Değişim Sürecindeki Dünya Düzeni ve Türkiye, edited by Murat Saraçlı, Lotus, Ankara, s. 99-129. BAJPAI, Kanti (2010), “Human Security: Concept and Measurement.” Kroc Institute Occasional Paper, August http://www.hegoa.ehu.es/dossierra/seguridad/Human_security_concept_and_measurement.pdf. Accessed July
• BİGO, Didier (2001), “The Möbius Ribbon of Internal and External Security(ies).” In Identities, Borders and Orders: Rethinking International Relations Theory, edited by Mathias Albert, David Jacobson and Yosef
• Lapid, Minnesota University Pres, Minneapolis, s. 91-116. BİLGİN, Pınar (2005), Regional Security in the Middle East - A Critical Perspective. Routledge, London.
• ______(2003), “Individual Security and Societal Dimensions of Security.” International Studies Review 5, s. 203-222.
• BOOTH, Ken (1991), “Security and Emancipation.” Review of International Studies 17, no. 4, s. 313-326.
• BOURNE, Mike (2005), “The Proliferation of Small Arms and Ligth Weapons.” In New Threats and New
• Actors in International Security, edited by Elke Krahman, Macmillan, New York, s. 155-176. BUZAN, Barry (1991) People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post
• Cold War Era, Harvester, Hemel Hempstead. ______ (1997), “Rethinking Security After the Cold War.” Cooperation and Conflict 32, no. 1, s. 5-28.
• BUZAN, Barry, WæVER, Ole, and WILDE, Jaap (1998), Security: A New Framework for Analysis, Lynne
• Reinner Publishers, London. BUZAN, Barry, and HANSEN, Lene (2009), The Evolution of International Security Studies, Cambridge
• University Pres, New York. CHA, Victor D (2000), “Globalization and the Study of International Security.” Journal of Peace Research , no. 3, s. 391-403.
• FLOYD, Rita (2007), “Human Security and the Copenhagen School’s Securitization Approach:
• Conceptualizing Human Security as a Securitizing Move.” Human Security Journal 5, s. 38-49. HOUGH, Peter (2008), Understanding Global Security, Routledge, New York.
• HUMAN SECURITY CENTER, “What is Human Security”, Accessed July 21, 2010. http://www.humansecurityreport.info/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=24&itemid=59.
• HYDE-PRICE, Adrian (2001), “Beware the Jabberwock ”: Security Studies in the Twenty-First Century.” In
• Europe’s New Security Challenges, edited by Heinz Görtner, Adrian Hyde-Price and Erich Reiter, Boulder, London, s. 27-54. KRAHMAN, Elke (2005), “From State to Non-State Actors: The Emergence of Security Governance.” In
• New Threats and New Actors in International Security, edited by Elke Krahman, Macmillan, New York, s. 19. _______(2005), “New Threats and New Actors in Security Governance: Developments, Problems, and Solutions.” In New Threats and New Actors in International Security, edited by Elke Krahman, Macmillan, New York, s. 199-212.
• KRAUSE, Keith (1998), “Critical Theory and Security Studies: The Research Programme of ‘Critical
• Security Studies’.” Cooperation and Conflict 33, no. 3, s. 298-333. KRAUSE, Keith, and WILLIAMS, Michael C. (1997), “From Strategy to Security: Foundations of Critical
• Security Studies.” In Critical Security Studies: Concepts and Cases, edited by Keith Krause and Michael C. Williams, UCL Pres, London, s. 33-59. McSWEENY, Bill (1999), Security, Identity and Interest: A Sociology of International Relations,
• Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. MILLER, Benjamin (2001), “The Concept of Security: Should it be Redefined?.” The Journal of Strategic Studies 24, no. 2, s. 1-52.
• NEWMAN, Edward (2001), “Human Security and Constructivism.” International Studies Perspectives 2, s. 251.
• SJURSEN, Helene (2003), “Security and Defence.” ARENA Working Paper 10, Accessed October 10, http://www.arena.uio.no/publications/wp_03_10_sjursen.pdf.
• SORENSEN, Georg (1996), “Individual Security and National Security: The State Remains the Principal
• Problem.” Security Dialogue 27, no. 4, s. 371-386. ULLMAN, Richard (1983), “Redefining Security.” International Security 8, no. 1, s. 129-153.
• WALT, Stephen (1991), “The Renaissance of Security Studies.” International Studies Quarterly 35, no. 2, s. 239.
• WILKINSON, Paul (1974), Political Terrorism, Macmillan Press, London. UNDP, http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr1994/ http://www.humansecurityreport.info/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=24&itemid=59