Rus stratejik kültürünün analizi ve Kırım'ın ilhakına etkileri

Öz

Kırım, 1783’te II. Katerina tarafından ilhak edilmesinden 1954’te Ukrayna’ya devredilene kadar, Rusya’nın bir parçası olarak kalmıştır. 1954’teki devir esnasında hem Rusya hem Ukrayna Sovyetler Birliği’nin bir parçasıydı. Ancak 1991 yılında Birlik dağılınca, Kırım’ın kime ait olması gerektiği konusunda anlaşmazlıklar çıktı. Mart 2014’te ise, uluslararası baskılara ve kınamalara rağmen, Rusya Kırım’ı uluslararası hukuka aykırı bir şekilde ilhak ederek topraklarına kattı. Bu makale, Rusya’nın Kırım’ı ilhak kararını Rus stratejik kültürü’nün perspektifinden incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Stratejik kültür çalışmaları nispeten yeni olmasına rağmen, bu makale stratejik kültürel çerçevenin, Rusya’nın bir dış ve güvenlik kararını analiz etmede faydalı olduğunu göstermektedir, özellikle Kırım konusunda. Bu sebeple, makalenin ana araştırma sorusu olan “Rus stratejik kültürü, Rusya’nın Kırım’ı ilhak kararını nasıl etkilemiştir?” cevaplanması amaçlanmaktadır. Makalede, ilhak kararının Rusya’nın stratejik kültürünün bir yansıması olduğu savunulmaktadır. Çünkü, Rus stratejik kültürünü oluşturan kurucu unsurlar (Rus tarihi, elitlerin inançları ve Rus rejiminin özellikleri) Kırım’ın ilhak kararının şekillenmesinde önemli rol oynamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• stratejik kültür
• Rus dış politikası
• Kırım'ın ilhakı

THE ANNEXATION OF THE CRIMEA: AN ANALYSIS FROM RUSSIAN STRATEGIC CULTURE’S PERSPECTİVE

Abstract

Crimea has been part of Russia from its annexation in 1783 by Catherine II until its transfer to Ukraine in 1954. When the transfer took place, both Ukraine and Russia were part of the Soviet Union. However, when the Union dissolved in 1991, the disputes have risen about “to whom” Crimea should belong. Regardless of international pressures, today Crimean Peninsula has become de facto part of Russia since March 2014. This study aims to analyze the Russian decision to annex Crimea from the perspective of strategic culture. Although strategic cultural studies are relatively new, this article demonstrates that it has utility in analyzing security decision of Russia, especially for the Crimean case. Therefore, this study aims to answer its main research question: How did Russia’s strategic culture effect Russian decision to annex Crimea? It argues that the decision to annex was a reflection of Russia’s strategic culture. Because, the constitutive elements of Russian strategic culture (namely history, Russian elite and their beliefs, and the characteristics of Russian regime) have played an important role to shape the decision to annex Crimea

Keywords

• strategic culture
• russian foreign policy
• the annexation of Crimea

Kaynakça

1. Acton, Edward. Russia, The Tsarist and Soviet Legacy. 4th ed. London: Routledge, 1999.
2. Booth, Ken. “The Concept of Strategic Culture Affirmed.” In Strategic Power: USA/USSR, edited by Carl G. Jacobsen, 121-130. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-349-20574-5_8
3. Bremmer, Ian, and Samuel Charap. “The Siloviki in Putin’s Russia: Who They Are and What They Want.” Washington Quarterly 30, no. 1 (2007): 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1162/wash.2006-07.30.1.83.
4. Bukkvoll, Tor. “Why Putin Went to War: Ideology, Interests and Decision-Making in the Russian Use of Force in Crimea and Donbas.” Contemporary Politics 22, no. 3 (2016): 267–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2016.1201310.
5. Degaut, Marcos. “The Russian Strategic Culture and the Annexation of Crimea: The Empire Strikes Back?” Mundorama Journal of International Affairs, no. May 2014 (2014). http://www.mundorama.net/2014/05/10/the-russian-strategic-culture-and-the-annexation-of-crimea-the-empire-strikes-back-by-marcos-degaut/.
6. Eitelhuber, Norbert. “The Russian Bear: Russian Strategic Culture and What It Implies for the West.” Connections: The Quarterly Journal 09, no. 1 (2009): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.11610/connections.09.1.01.
7. Ermarth, Fritz W. “Russia’s Strategic Culture: Past, Present, and... In Transition?,” no. October (2006): 1–22.
8. Fisher, Alan W. The Crimean Tatars. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1978.

9. Freedom House. “Explore the Map | Freedom House.” 2020. https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=nit&year=2021&status[semi-consolidated-democracy]=semi-consolidated-democracy&status[consolidated-democracy]=consolidated-democracy.
10. Gardner, Hall. Crimea, Global Rivalry, and the Vengeance of History. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
11. Gel'man, Vladimir. Authoritarian Russia: Analyzing Post-Soviet Regime Changes. Pittsburg, Pa.: University of Pittsburg Press, 2015.
12. Hale, Henry E. “Eurasian Polities as Hybrid Regimes: The Case of Putin’s Russia.” Journal of Eurasian Studies 1, no. 1 (2010): 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2009.11.001.
13. Hill, Fiona, and Clifford Gaddy. “Putin and the Uses of History.” National Interest, no. 117 (2012): 21–31.
14. Howlett, Darryl. “Strategic Culture : Reviewing Recent Literature.” Policy IV, no. 10 (2005).
15. İmanbeyli, Vügar. "Ülke-İçi Krizden Uluslararası Soruna Ukrayna-Kırım Meselesi." SETA, no.36 (2014). http://file.setav.org/Files/Pdf/20140320184806_ulke-ici-krizden-uluslararasi-soruna-ukrayna-kirim-meselesi-pdf.pdf
16. Jack L. Snyder. “The Soviet Strategic Culture: Implications for Limited Nuclear Operation.” Rand Corporation. Santa Monica, 1977.
17. Johnston, Alastair Iain. “Thinking about Strategic Culture.” International Security 19, no. 4 (1995): 32. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539119.
18. Karadeli, Cem. "Ukrayna'da Milli Aidiyet, Rekabet ve Azınlıklar". In Uluslararası Politikada Ukrayna Krizi, edited by Hasret Çomak, Caner Sancaktar, Zafer Yıldırım, 113-136. İstanbul: Beta, 2014.
19. Kent, Neil. Crimea: A History. London: Hust&Company, 2016.
20. Kolesnikov, Andrei. "Two Years After Crimea: The Evolution of a Political Regime." Carnegie Moscow Center (March, 2016). Accessed May 29, 2021, https://carnegie.ru/commentary/63082
21. Kryshtanovskaia, Ol’ga V. “Transformation of the Old Nomenklatura into a New Russian Elite.” Sociological Research 34, no. 6 (1995): 18–40. https://doi.org/10.2753/sor1061-015434066.
22. Kryshtanovskaya, Olga, and Stephen White. “The Rise of the Russian Business Elite.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 38, no. 3 (2005): 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2005.06.002.
23. Lane, David. “Transition under Eltsin: The Nomenklatura and Political Elite Circulation.” Political Studies, no. 5 (1997): 855–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00116.
24. Lantis, Jeffrey S. “Strategic Culture: From Clausewitz to Constructivism.” Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 2006.
25. Levada Center. "Putin's Approval Rating." Accessed June 15, 2021. https://www.levada.ru/indikatory/
26. Lieven, Anatol. Ukraine&Russia: A Fraternal Rivalry. Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1999.
27. Mankoff, Jeffrey. Russian Foreign Policy: The Return of Great Power Politics. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
28. Mearsheimer, John J. “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault.” Foreign Affairs 93, no. 5 (2014): 1–12.
29. Neumann, Iver B., and Henrikki Heikka. “Grand Strategy, Strategic Culture, Practice: The Social Roots of Nordic Defence.” Cooperation and Conflict 40, no. 1 (2005): 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836705049731.
30. Sinovets, Polina. “From Stalin to Putin: Russian Strategic Culture in the XXI Century, Its Continuity, and Change.” Philosophy Study 6, no. 7 (2016): 417–23. https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5313/2016.07.002.
31. Renz, Bettina. “Russia and ‘Hybrid Warfare.’” Contemporary Politics 22, no. 3 (2016): 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2016.1201316.
32. Russia Today. "95.7% of Crimeans in referandum voted to join Russia - preliminary results." March 16, 2014. Accessed June 5, 2021. https://www.rt.com/news/crimea-vote-join-russia-210/
33. Rivera, Sharon Werning, William Zimmerman and Eduard Ponarin. The Russian Elite 2016. May 11, 2016. Conducted by Hamilton College, https://www.hamilton.edu/documents/russianelite2016final.pdf
34. Sakwa, Richard. Russian Politics and Society. Russian Politics and Society. 4th ed. London and New York: Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2008. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203931257.
35. Sergunin, Alexander. Explaining Russian Foreign Policy Behavior. Theory and Practice. Edited by Andreas
36. Umland. Europe-Asia Studies. Vol. 69. Stuttgart: ibidem Press, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2017.1314624.
37. Sherlock, Thomas. “Russian Society and Foreign Policy: Mass and Elite Orientations After Crimea.” Problems of Post-Communism 67, no. 1 (2020): 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2018.1561190.
38. Shyrokykh, Karina. “The Evolution of the Foreign Policy of Ukraine: External Actors and Domestic Factors.” Europe - Asia Studies 70, no. 5 (2018): 832–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2018.1479734.
39. Skak, Mette. “Russian Strategic Culture: The Role of Today’s Chekisty.” Contemporary Politics 22, no. 3 (2016): 324–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2016.1201317.
40. Thomas Henry Rigby. “Staffing USSR Incorporated: The Origins of the Nomenklatura System.” Soviet Studies 40, no. 4 (1988): 523–37. https://www.jstor.org/stable/151806.
41. Treisman, Daniel. “Why Putin Took Crimea.” Foreign Affairs, 2016.
42. Tsygankov, Andrei. "Vladimir Putin's Last Stand: The Sources of Russia's Ukraine Policy." Post-Soviet Affairs 31, no.4 (2015): 279-303. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2015.1005903
43. Volkov, Denis. “Russian Elite Opinion After Crimea.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2016. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep13014.
44. Williams, Brian Glyn. The Crimean Tatars From Soviet Genocide to Putin's Conquest. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.
45. Yapıcı, Merve İrem. Rus Dış Politikasını Oluşturan İç Etkenler. Ankara: USAK Yayınları, 2010.