Post-hegemonyacı dünya düzeni altında Çin’in Avrasya bölgeciliği

Abstract

Çin’in dış siyasetinde 2000’li yıllarda artan çok taraflılık ve bölgecilik vurgusu dünya siyasetinin çok kutuplulaşmasına nasıl etki etmektedir? Çin inisiyatifindeki çok kutuplulaşma sürecinin başlıca lokomotifi Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü (ŞİÖ) nasıl bir normatif ve kurumsal temel üzerine inşa edilmiştir? Post-hegemonya, birbiriyle iç içe geçen ve birçok uluslararası proje üzerinden, tutarlı bir sistem alternatifi önerilmeksizin ABD hegemonyasının sorgulandığı bir dünya düzenini betimlemektedir. Çin’in bölgecilik siyasetinin post-hegemonyacı dünya düzenine katkısı dört farklı cephede (kültür, ekonomi, finansal iş birliği ve bölgesel savunma) yoğunlaşmaktadır. Ancak, ŞİÖ tarafından temsil edilen Avrasya’da belirleyici gündem uluslararası güvenliktir. ŞİÖ, en başta Çin’in katkısıyla güçlü bir normatif çerçeve üzerinden meşruiyetini savunmaktadır ve iç kaynaklı (endogenous) bir kültür, eğitim ve savunma altyapısı kurmayı amaç edinmiştir. ABD denetimindeki uluslararası örgütlerden bağımsız ekonomik, finansal ve altyapısal kalkınma amaçları öne çıkarılmıştır. Ne var ki, uzun vadede bütün bunların başarılı bir şekilde uygulamaya geçirilmesinin önünde ciddi engeller vardır. Avrasya’nın güvenlik merkezli gündemi, ABD hegemonyasına tutarlı bir şekilde karşı çıkabilmek adına neoliberalizme alternatif bir ekonomik kalkınma vizyonu oluşturma gereğini gözardı etmektedir. Ayrıca, Çin’in bölgecilik girişimleri, milli egemenlik ve ulus üstü bölgecilik arasındaki gerilimleri ele almakta zorlanmıştır. Bu alanlarda, bölgeci örgütsel kararların bağlayıcılığında ilerleme kaydedilememesi ve askeri iş birliğinde ABD merkezli kurumlarla yarışacak düzeyde bir bütünleşme yaşanamaması dikkate değerdir.

Keywords

• Avrasya
• bölgecilik
• Çin
• hegemonya
• Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü

China’s Eurasian regionalism in the post-hegemonic world order

Abstract

How does the growing emphasis of Chinese foreign policy on multilateralism and regionalism affect the multipolarisation of global politics in the 2000s? What is the normative and institutional setting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) as the locomotive of the China-led multipolarisation? Post-hegemony refers to a situation in which the unipolar organisation of the global political economy is challenged by a plurality of alternative projects, but without being entirely replaced by another system. The contribution of China’s regionalism to the post-hegemonic world order is centred on four main areas: culture, economy, financial cooperation and regional defence. The driving force of China’s regionalism within the SCO is international security, and this regionalism hinges on a strong normative framework of legitimacy and aims at building an endogenous cultural, educational and defence infrastructure under the initiative of China. It also seeks to accelerate economic, financial and infrastructural development, independent of the US-dominated international institutions. As for the limitations and contradictions of China’s post-hegemonic regionalism, the SCO has to date failed to offer a coherent alternative economic development model to counter US hegemonism. Moreover, the SCO experience still suffers from unresolved tensions between national sovereignty and supranationalism, which adds to the SCO’s lack of bindingness of organisational decisions and military competitiveness with US-dominated organisations.

Keywords

• Eurasia
• regionalism
• China
• hegemony
• Shanghai Cooperation Organization

References

1. Ahmed, Z. S., S. Ahmed ve S. Bhatnagar. 2019. “Conflict or Cooperation? India and Pakistan in Shanghai Cooperation Organisation” Pacific Focus, 34(1), 5-30.
2. Akhtar, M., ul Ain, Q. ve A. Kiran. 2018. “Shanghai Cooperation Organization and Conflict Resolution” National Defense University Journal, 8(1), 89-97.
3. Ambrosio, T. 2008. “Catching the 'Shanghai spirit': how the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Promotes Authoritarian Norms in Central Asia” Europe-Asia Studies, 60(8), 1321–1344.
4. Aris, S. 2009. “The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation: 'Tackling the Three Evils'. A Regional Response to Non-traditional Security Challenges or an Anti-Western Bloc?” Europe-Asia Studies, 61(3), 457–482.
5. Aris, S. 2011. Eurasian Regionalism - The Shanghai Cooperation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
6. Bennett, A. 2010. “Process Tracing and Causal Inference” Brady, H.E. ve D. Collier (der.), Rethinking Social Inquiry, Plymouth: Rowman and Littlefield, 207–20.
7. Bhagwati, J. 2004. In Defense of Globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Briceño-Ruiz, J. ve A.R. Hoffmann. 2015. “Post-Hegemonic Regionalism, Unasur, and the Reconfiguration of Regional Cooperation in South America” Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 40(1), 48-62.

9. Calabrese, L. 2019. “China and global development: what to read ahead of the Belt and Road Forum.” https://www.odi.org/blogs/10752-china-and-global-development-what-read-ahead-belt-and-road-forum
10. Camdessus, M. 2017. “Why China’s belt and road must be a pathway to sustainable development.” https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/2094611/why-chinas-belt-and-road-must-be-pathway-sustainable
11. Carroll, W. K. 2010. The Making of a Transnational Capitalist Class. London: Zed Books.
12. China Center for International Economic Exchanges. 2017. “The Belt and Road Initiative: A new means to transformative global governance towards sustainable development.” https://www.undp.org/content/dam/china/docs/Publications/UNDP-CH-GGR%202017.pdf
13. China Daily. 2018. “Xi gives new impetus to Belt and Road Initiative.” http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201808/28/WS5b84994fa310add14f388114.html
14. Collier, D. 2011. “Understanding Process Tracing” Political Science and Politics, 44(4), 823–830.
15. Dadabaev, T. 2014. “Shanghai Cooperation Organization SCO Regional Identity Formation from the Perspective of the Central Asia States” Journal of Contemporary China, 23(85), 102–118.
16. Desai, R. 2013. Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto Press.
17. Desai, S. 2019. “SCO 2019: hits and misses for India.” https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/06/opinion/sco-2019-hits-and-misses-for-india/
18. Du Boff, R.B. 2003. “U.S. Hegemony: Continuing Decline, Enduring Danger” Monthly Review, 557, 1–15.
19. George, A.L. ve A. Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
20. Gürcan, E. C. 2010. “New Regionalisms and Radical Identity Formation in Latin America” Journal of Social Research & Policy, 1(2), 19–33.
21. Gürcan, E. C. 2015. “The nonprofit-corporate complex: An integral component and driving force of imperialism in the phase of monopoly-finance capitalism” Monthly Review, 66(11), 37–53.
22. Gürcan, E. C. 2019a. “Geopolitical Economy of Post-Hegemonic Regionalism in Latin America and Eurasia” Research in Political Economy, 34(1), 102–118.
23. Gürcan, E. C. 2019b. Multipolarization, South-South Cooperation and the Rise of Post-Hegemonic Governance. New York: Routledge.
24. Gürcan, E. C. 2019c. “Political geography of Turkey’s intervention in Syria: underlying causes and consequences (2011-2016)” Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 11 (1), 1–10.
25. Gürcan, E. C. 2019d. “BRICS Ülkelerinin Afrika'daki Yükselişine Jeopolitik Ekonomi Penceresinden Bir Bakış” Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 10 (3), 556-569.
26. Gürcan, E. C. 2019e. “Geopolitical Economy of Post-Hegemonic Regionalism in Latin America and Eurasia” Research in Political Economy, 34 (1), 59–88.
27. Gürcan, E. C. ve O. Bakiner. 2015. “Beyond Neoliberal Hegemony in Latin America: Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América (ALBA), Kreps, D. (der.), Gramsci and Foucault: A Reassessment, Farnham: Ashgate, 131–155.
28. Hardt, M. ve A. Negri. 2005. Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire. New York: Penguin Books. Kembayev, Z. 2018. “Implementing the Silk Road Economic Belt: from the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation to the Silk Road Union?” Asia Europe Journal, 16(1), 37–50.
29. National Development and Reform Commission. 2015. “Action Plan on the Belt and Road Initiative” http://english.www.gov.cn/archive/publications/2015/03/30/content_281475080249035.htm
30. Riggirozzi, P. ve D. Tussie (Der.). 2012. The Rise of Post-hegemonic Regionalism: The Case of Latin America. New York: Springer
31. Robinson, W.I. 2008. Latin America and Global Capitalism: A Critical Globalization Perspective. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
32. Robinson, W.I. 2014. Global Capitalism and the Crisis of Humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. SCO Business Council. 2016. Official Website. https://bc-sco.org/?lang=en.
34. SCO Youth Council. 2016. Official Website. http://www.forumsco.com/?lng=en.
35. Sklair, L. 2002. Globalization, Capitalism and Its Alternatives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Slaughter, A. M. 2004. A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
37. Song, W. 2013. “Feeling Safe, Being Strong: China's Strategy of Soft Balancing through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization” International Politics, 50(5), 664–685.
38. Song, W. 2014. “Interests, Power and China's Difficult Game in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization SCO” Journal of Contemporary China, 23(85), 85–101.
39. Song, W. 2016. China's Approach to Central Asia: The Shanghai Co-operation Organisation. New York: Routledge.
40. Stratfor. 2012. “Central Asia’s Looming Conflict Over Water, Part 1: The Upriver Countries. Assessments” http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/central-asias-looming-conflict-over-water-part-1-upriver-countries.
41. The Guardian. 2019. “Macron criticised by US and Germany over Nato 'brain death' claims.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/07/macron-warns-of-nato-brain-death-as-us-turns-its-back-on-allies
42. United Nations. 2016. “International Trade Statistics Database” https://comtrade.un.org/.
43. USAID. 2016. “Foreign Aid Explorer” https://explorer.usaid.gov/.
44. Vennesson, P. 2008. “Case Studies and Process Tracing: Theories and Practices” della Porta, D. ve M. Keating (der.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 223–39.
45. Wallace, T. 2014. “China and the Regional Counter-Terrorism Structure: An Organizational Analysis” Asian Security, 10(3), 199–220.
46. Water Politics. 2014. “Conflicts in Kyrgyzstan: Foreshadowing Water Wars to Come?” Water Politics, http://www.waterpolitics.com/2014/06/17/conflicts-in-kyrgyzstan-foreshadowing-water-wars-to-come/
47. Wolf, Martin. 2004. Why Globalization Works. New Haven: Yale University Press.