Değişen Dünya Düzeninde AB’nin Küresel Aktörlüğü: Stratejik Özerklik ve Normatif Tutarlılık mı?

Abstract

“Değişen Dünya Düzeninde AB’nin Küresel Aktörlüğü; Stratejik Özerklik mi Normatif Tutarlılık mı?” başlıklı bu çalışma, değişen uluslararası düzende Avrupa Birliği’nin (AB) küresel aktörlük kapasitesini, stratejik özerklik ve normatif tutarlılık ekseninde incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda, realist, liberal kurumsalcı ve konstrüktivist yaklaşımlar temelinde, AB’nin sınırlı askerî kapasitesi, transatlantik bağımlılığı, normatif söylem ile dış politika uygulamaları arasındaki uyumsuzluklar ve üye devletler arasındaki çıkar farklılıklarının Birlik’in küresel etkisini nasıl sınırlandırdığı ele alınmaktadır. Özellikle Rusya-Ukrayna Savaşı, enerji güvenliği, göç yönetimi ve Çin-ABD stratejik rekabeti gibi güncel krizler, AB’nin stratejik özerklik iddiaları ile normatif güç kimliği arasındaki gerilimleri değerlendirmek için örnek teşkil etmektedir. Bu bağlamda elde edilen bulgular, AB’nin ekonomik ve düzenleyici alanlarda küresel bir güç, normatif alanda ise referans noktası olmasına karşın, askerî ve stratejik boyutta hâlâ sınırlı ve bağımlı bir aktör olduğunu göstermektedir. Dolayısıyla, AB’nin küresel aktörlük kapasitesinin güçlendirilmesi, stratejik özerklik ile normatif tutarlılık arasında sürdürülebilir bir denge kurabilmesine bağlıdır; bu dengeyi sağlamak ise, üye devletler arasında koordineli politika yapımı, kurumsal kapasitenin güçlendirilmesi ve uzun vadeli stratejik önceliklerde uzlaşının tesis edilmesini gerektirmektedir. Ayrıca, çalışma AB’nin gelecekteki küresel rolünün, ekonomik, normatif ve stratejik boyutları birbirini destekleyecek şekilde entegre edebilme kapasitesiyle belirleneceğini ortaya koymaktadır ve böylece Birlik, küresel sistemde etkili bir aktör olma yönünde yeteneklerini optimize edebilecektir.

Keywords

• Avrupa Birliği
• Küresel aktör
• Stratejik özerklik
• Normatif güç
• Jeopolitik

The EU's Global Actorship in a Changing World Order: Strategic Autonomy and Normative Consistency?

Abstract

This study, titled "The EU's Global Actorship in a Changing World Order: Strategic Autonomy or Normative Consistency?", aims to examine the European Union's (EU) capacity for global actorship in a changing international order, focusing on strategic autonomy and normative consistency. In this context, based on realist, liberal institutionalist, and constructivist approaches, it addresses how the EU's limited military capacity, transatlantic dependence, inconsistencies between its normative discourse and foreign policy practices, and differences in interests among member states limit the Union's global influence. Current crises, particularly the Russia-Ukraine War, energy security, migration management, and the China-US strategic competition, serve as examples for assessing the tensions between the EU's claims of strategic autonomy and its normative power identity. In this context, the findings show that while the EU is a global power in economic and regulatory areas and a reference point in the normative sphere, it remains a limited and dependent actor in the military and strategic dimensions. Therefore, strengthening the EU's capacity as a global actor depends on establishing a sustainable balance between strategic autonomy and normative consistency; achieving this balance requires coordinated policy-making among member states, strengthening institutional capacity, and establishing consensus on long-term strategic priorities. Furthermore, the study reveals that the EU's future global role will be determined by its capacity to integrate its economic, normative, and strategic dimensions in a mutually supportive manner, thereby enabling the Union to optimize its capabilities to become an effective actor in the global system.

Keywords

• European Union
• Global actor
• Strategic autonomy
• Normative Power
• Geopolitics

References

1. Birnhack, M.& Mundlak, G. (2025). The Brussels Effect(s) and the rise of a privacy profession, International Data Privacy Law, 15(2), 138-155. doi: 10.1093/idpl/ ipaf005.
2. Bradford, A. (2020). The Brussels Effect: How the European Union rules the world. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. CNN Türk (2026). NATO proposes "Strategic solidarity" to EU aiming for "strategic autonomy," 03.03.2021, https://w ww.cnnturk.com/dunya/natodan-stratejik-ozerklik-hedefleyen-abye stratejik-dayanisma onerisi -1627465.
4. Coche, E., Kolk, A., & Ocelík, V. (2023). Unraveling cross-country regulatory intricacies of data governance: the relevance of legal insights for digitalization and international business. Journal of International Business Policy, 7, 112–127. doi: 10.1057/ s42214-023-00172-1.
5. Council of the EU (2025). EU defense readiness: Council Launches sixth wave of new PESCO projects. Press Release, 416/25, May 27, 2025.
6. Economic Development Foundation (2025), "IKV Information Note on OECD 2024 International Development Assistance Data," April 2025,https://www.ikv.org.tr/ikv. asp?id=9510&lng= tr.
7. Élysée. (2017, September 26). President Macron gives speech on new initiative for Europe. https://www. elysee.fr/en/emmanuel-macron/2017/09/26/president-macron-gives-speech-on-new-initiative-for-europe
8. EUR-Lex (2026), "General product safety regulation," https://eurlex.europa.eu/EN/legalcontent/ summary/general-product-safety-regulation-2023.html.

9. European Commission (2026). “Corporate sustainability due diligence”, https://commission. europa.eu/business-economy-euro/doing-business-eu/sustainability-due-diligencerespons ible-business/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence_en.
10. European Commission (2026). “Humanitarian aid,What the EU does” https://commis sion.europa. eu/topics/humanitarian-aid_en?.
11. European Commission (2026). EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement”, 21 September 2017” https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationshipscountryand region/countries-and-regions/canada/eu-canada-agreement/cetachapter chapter_en.
12. European Council (2026). "EU invests €7.3 billion from Horizon Europe to enhance its competitiveness and talent growth," May 14, 2025, https://ec.europa.eu/commission /press corner/detail/en/ip_25_ 1146.
13. European Council (2026). "Official development assistance: the EU and its member states remain the biggest global provider," June 24, 2024, https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/ press-releases/2024/06/24/official-development-assistance-the-eu-and-its-member-states-remain-the-biggest-global-provider/.
14. European Council (2026). “EU defense innumbers,” https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies /defence-numbers/.
15. European Parliament (2026).https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2023/747099 /EPRS_BRI(2023)747099_EN.pdf.
16. Eurostat (2025). “Key Figures on the EU in the World – 2025 Edition,” Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2025 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/ products-key-figures/w/ks-01-25-002.
17. Eurostat (2026). "EU spent €381.4 billion on R&D in 2023," December 11, 2024, https:/ /ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20241211-2.
18. Eurostat (2026). "International trade in goods," August 15, 2025,https://ec.europa.eu/euros tat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=International_trade_in_goods.
19. Eurostat (2026). “Euro area international trade in goods surplus €36.8 bn”, 16 May 2025, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-euro-indicators/w/6-16052025-ap.
20. FASI (2026). "EU Commission Presents the Budget Proposal 2025," June 19, 2024,https: //fasi.eu/en/articles/news/27231-eu-commission-presents-the-budget-proposal2025. html.
21. Fiott, D. (2018). Strategic autonomy: Towards ‘European sovereignty’ in defence? European Union Institute for Security Studies.1-8 doi:10.2815/247228.
22. George, J. & Sandler T. (2022). NATO defense demand, free riding, and the Russo-Ukrainian war in 2022. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 49, 783–806. doi: 10.1007/s40812-022-00228-y.
23. German Federal Government. (2022). Policy statement by Olaf Scholz, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany and Member of the German Bundestag (Berlin).https://www.bundesregierung. de/breg-en/news/policy-statement-by-olaf-scholz-chancellor-of-the-federal-republic-of-germany-and-member-of-the-german-bundestag-27-february-2022-in-berlin-2008378.
24. Hadjiyianni, I. (2020). The European Union as a global regulatory power. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 41(1), 243–264.doi: 10.1093/ojls/gqaa042.
25. Hill, C.(1993). The Capability-Expectations Gap, or Conceptualizing Europe’s international role. Journal of Common Market Studies 31(3), 305-328.doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.1993.tb00466.xDigital Object Identifier (DOI).
26. Howorth, J. (2019). Strategic autonomy and EU-NATO cooperation: A Win-Win approach. L'Europe en Formation, 2(389), 85-103. doi: 10.3917/eufor.389.0085.
27. Hürriyet (2026). "NATO Secretary General Rutte Issues 'US' Warning to EU Members," January 26, 2026, https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/dunya/nato-genel-sekreteri-rutteden-ab-uyelerine-abd-uyarisi43093539.
28. İMMİB (2026). European Union Global Gateway Project. January 24, 2022, https:/ /immib.org.tr/tr/ avrupa-birligi-kuresel-gecit-projesi-eu-global-gateway.
29. International Monetary Fund (2025). World Economic Outlook: Navigating Divergent Paths.April 2025, Washington, D.C.: IMF,https://www.imf.org/en/publications/weo/issues/2025 /04/22/world-economic-outlook-april-2025.
30. Keohane, R. O.& Nye, J. S. (1997). Power and interdependence, Boston: Little Brown.
31. Manners, I. (2002). Normative power Europe: A Contradiction in terms. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 235–258. doi: 10.1111/1468-5965.00353Digital Object Identifier.
32. Marcu, A., Maratou, A., Fleury, L., Paperini, T., Meinardi, C. & Caruana, N. (2025). Future of emissions trading in the EU, EU ETS – CBAM Package: A strawman, Brussels: ERCST, pp.1-41
33. Martill, B., & Gebhard, C. (2023). Combined differentiation in European defense: Tailoring Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) to strategic and political complexity. Contemporary Security Policy, 44(1), 97–124. doi: 10.1080/13523260.2022.2155360.
34. Mearsheimer, J. (2006). Structural realism. In T. Dunne et al., (Eds)., International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, (pp. 77-94). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35. Milward, A. S. (2000). The European rescue of the Nation-State. London: Routledge.
36. Moravcsik, A. (1998). The Choice for Europe: Social purpose and state power from Messina to Maastricht. London: UCL Press.
37. Morgenthau, H., J. (1949). Politics among nations the struggle for power and peace. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
38. Narin, S. (2013). The European Union's policies towards Africa as a normative power. Unpublished master’s thesis. Dokuz Eylül University Institute of Social Sciences European Union Department European Union Program. Izmir.
39. Nováky, N. (2018). The EU’s Permanent Structured Cooperation in defence: Keeping sleeping beauty from snoozing. European View, 17(1), 97–104. doi: 10.1177/178168 5818764813.
40. Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The Means to success in world politics, New York: Public Affairs.
41. Pekcan, C. & Uygun, A., G. (2021). The European Union-China strategic partnership in the context of China's mediterranean policies. Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 35(3), 1145-1164. doi: 10.16951/atauniiibd. 9072 51.
42. Price-Hyde, A. (2006). Normativep Europe: A Realist critique. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(2), 217-234. doi: 10.1080/13501760500451634.
43. Schimmelfennig, F., & Sedelmeier, U. (2004). “Governance by conditionality: EU rule transfer to the candidate countries of Central and Eastern Europe”, Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4), 661–679. doi: 10.1080/1350176042000248089.
44. Schimmelfennig, F., & Sedelmeier, U. (2019). The Europeanization of Eastern Europe: The external incentives model revisited. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(6), 814–833. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2019.1617333
45. Sweeney, S. & Winn, N. (2022). Do or die? The UK, the EU, and internal/external security cooperation after Brexit. European Political Science, 21(2), 237-254. doi: 10.1057/s41304-021-00322-0.
46. Toje, A. (2011). The European Union as a small power: After the post-cold war. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
47. Türkeş K. S. (2020). Rational and normative foundations of the European Union-Japan strategic partnership agreement. Ankara Journal of European Studies, 19(2), 439-466. doi:10.32450/aacd.886933.
48. Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49. Wolf, S., Teitge, J., Mielke, J., Schütze, F. & Jaeger C. (2021). The European Green Deal more than climate neutrality. Intereconomics, 56(2), 99-107. doi: 10.1007/s10272-021-0963-z.
50. Yazıcı Çakmak, A. N. M. (2024). The Issue of who are the responsible persons under the product safety and technical regulations law (ÜGTDK), SÜHFD, 32(4), 2611-2659. doi:10.15337/suhfd.1573555.