BibTex RIS Cite

LİBERAL DEMOKRATİK BARIŞ KURAMI: ELEŞTİREL BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Year 2012, Issue: 40, 1 - 19, 20.05.2015

Hakkı Büyükbaş Nilgün Atıcı

Abstract

Liberal Demokratik Barış Kuramı, demokratik devletlerin birbirlerine karşı savaşmayacakları tezini ileri sürmektedir. Bu tez, demokratik egemenlik biçiminin doğası gereği barışçıl olduğu kabulü ile temellendirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada söz konusu iddialar ele alınıp irdelenmiş; ileri sürülen bu iddiaların geçerli olup olmadığı tartışılmıştır. Liberal Demokratik Barış Kuramı, Uluslararası İlişkiler disiplininde önemli kuramsal katkılardan biri olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Bu çalışmada öncelikle kuramın gelişimi, pratik sonuçları ele alınacak ve daha sonra yeni kuramsal katkı ve modeller tartışılacaktır. Bu şekilde kuramın güçlü ve zayıf tarafları tespit edilmeye ve demokratik barış kuramının Uluslararası İlişkiler teorisi açısından önemi belirlenmeye çalışılacaktır. Çalışma, sonuç bölümünde genel bir değerlendirme yapılarak tamamlanacaktır. 

Keywords

Demokrasi Siyasal Sistem Dış Politika Savaş Barış.

References

  • BABST, Dean V.; (1964), “Elective Governments - A Force for Peace”, The Wisconsin Sociologist, 3(1), pp. 9-14.
  • CHOJNACKİ, Sven; (2003), “Demokratien und Krieg: Das Konfliktverhalten demokratischer Staaten, 1946-2001”, WZB Discussion Papers P 2003-304, friedensforschung.de/ index.php/component/content/article/17-details- foerderprofil/65-eberwein, Date of Access: 03. 03. 2013.
  • CHOJNACKİ, Sven; (2003a), “Schnelle Siege bei geringen Kosten? Demokra- tien und Kriege”, WZB-Mitteilungen Heft, 100, ss. 18-22.
  • DAASE, Christopher; (2004), “Demokratischer Frieden - Demokratischer Krieg. Drei Gründe für die Unfriedlichkeit von Demokratien”, in Björn AUST und Peter SCHLOTTER (Hg), Demokratien im Krieg, Christi- ne Schweitzer, Baden-Baden: Nomos Verl.-Ges, ss. 53-71.
  • DALACOURA, Katerina; (2005), “US Democracy Promotion in The Arab Middle East Since 11 September 2001: A Critique”, International Af- fairs, 81 (5), pp. 963-79.
  • ERALP, Atilla; (2006), Devlet ve Ötesi: Uluslararası İlişkilerde Temel Kav- ramlar, Birinci Baskı, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  • GEIS, Anna; (2001), “Diagnose: Doppelbefund - Ursache ungeklärt? Die Kont- roverse um den ‘demokratischen Frieden’, Politische Vierteljah- resschrift, 42 (2), ss. 282-298.
  • HASENCLEVER, Andreas; (2002), “The Democratic Peace Meets Internatio- nal Institutions.Überlegungen zur internationalen Organisation des de- mokratischen Friedens”, Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 9(1), ss. 75-112.
  • HASENCLEVER, Andreas; (2003), “Liberale Ansätze zum ‚demokratischen Frieden”, in Siegfried SCHIEDER und Manuela SPINDLER (Hg.), Theorien der Internationalen Beziehungen, Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich UTB, ss. 199-225.
  • HERMANN, Margaret G. and Charles KEGLEY Jr.; (1995), “Rethinking De- mocracy and International Peace: Perspectives from Political Psycholo- gy”, International Studies Quarterly, 39(4), pp. 511- 533.
  • KAHL, Colin; (1998-99), “Constructing a Separate Peace: Constructivism, Col- lective Liberal Identity and Democratic Peace”, Security Studies 8(2/3), pp. 94-144.
  • KANT, Immanuel; (1984), Zum Ewigen Frieden, Stuttgart: Reclam Verlag.
  • KEGLEY, Charles W. and Margaret G. HERMANN;(1995), “The Political Psychology of ‘Peace through Democratization’”, Cooperation and Conflict, 30(1), pp. 5 - 30.
  • KİELMANNSEGG, Peter Graf; (2004, 22 Dezember), “Drei Regeln für den Frieden, Politik Essay”, Die Zeit, 53, s. 3.
  • KRAUSE, Joachim (2003), “Vom ewigen Frieden zum demokratischen Frie- den? Die Aussagekraft von Theorien des demokratischen Friedens”, Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 13(2), ss. 693-716.
  • LAYNE, Christopher; (1994), “Kant or Can’t: The Myth of the Democratic Peace”, International Security, 19 (2), pp. 5 - 49.
  • LEVY, Jack; (1988), “Domestic Politics and War”, Journal of Interdiscipli- nary History, 18, pp. 653–673.
  • MANSFIELD, Edward D. and Jack SNYDER; (1995), “Democratization and the Danger of War”, International Security, 1, pp. 5-38.
  • NAVARİ, Cornelia; (2011),“The English School and the Emerging Democracy Norm in International Society”, WISC Third International Confe- rence, 17-20 August, Porto, Portugal: World International Studies Committee, pp. 1-12, Internet Address: http://www.wiscnetwork.org/ report_on_porto.php, Date of Access: 05.03.2013.
  • ONEAL, John R. and Bruce RUSSETT; (1999), “The Kantian Peace: The Pa- cific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organ- izations, 1885 – 1992”, World Politics. A Quarterly Journal of In- ternational Relations, 52 (1), pp. 1-37.
  • OREN, Ido; (1995), “The Subjectivity of the ‘Democratic’ Peace. Changing U.S. Perceptions of Imperial Germany”, International Security, 20(2), pp. 147-184.
  • OWEN, John M.; (1994), “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”, In- ternational Security, 19 (2), pp. 87-125.
  • ÖZCAN, Ufuk; (1997), “Wilson Prensipleri Üzerine”, İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 4, ss. 37-48.
  • PECENY, Mark; (1997), “A Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Peace: The Ambiguous Case of the Spanish-American War”, Journal of Peace Research, 34 (4), pp. 415 - 430.
  • QUACKENBUSH, Stephen L. and Michael RUDY; (2006), “Evaluating the Monadic Democratic Peace”, Annual Meeting of the Midwest Politi- cal Science Association, 20-23 April, Chicago-Illinois: Midwest Politi- cal http://www.mpsanet.org/ kingGroups/ tabid/794/Default.aspx, Date of Access: 05.03.2013.
  • Conference/ConferenceSections/ Address: Wor
  • RAUCH, Carsten; (2005), Die Theorie des Demokratischen Friedens. Gren- zen und Perspektiven, Erste Auflage, Frankfurt/Main: Campus Verlag Gmbh.
  • RISSE-KAPPEN, Thomas; (1995), “Democratic Peace – Warlike Democra- cies? A Social Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Argument”, European Journal of International Relations, 1(4), pp. 491-517.
  • ROBINSON, William I.; (1996), “Globalization, The World System, and “De- mocracy Promotion”, Theory and Society, 25 (5), pp. 615-665.
  • ROSATO, Sebastian; (2003), “The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theo- ry”, American Political Science Review, 97 (4), pp. 585 – 602.
  • ROUSSEAU, David, L. Christopher GELPİ, Dan REITER and Paul K. HUTH; (1996), “Assessing the Dyadic Nature of the Democratic Peace, 1918- 88”, The American Political Science Review, 90(3), pp. 512-533.
  • RUMMEL, Rudolph J.; (1975-1981), Understanding Confl ict and War, Vol. 1 – 5, New York: Sage Publications.
  • RUMMEL, Rudolph J.; (1983), “Libertarianism and International Violence”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, pp. 27-71.
  • RUSSETT, Bruce; (1993), Grasping the Democratic Peace -Principles for a Post-Cold War World, First Edition, New Jersey: Princeton Universi- ty Press.
  • SCHEEL, Constanze; (2007), “Die liberale Theorie des Demokratischen Frie- dens –Frieden durch weltweite Demokratisierung?”, Sicherheit und Frieden, 25(4), ss. 208-213.
  • SCHRADER, Lutz; (2003), Frieden und Demokratie, Erste Auflage, Hagen: Fernuniversität Gesamthochschule.
  • SINGER, J. David and Melvin SMALL; (1972), The Wages of War, 1816- 1965: A Statistical Handbook, First Edition, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
  • SMALL, Melvin and J. David SİNGER; (1976), “The War Proneness of De- mocratic Regimes”, Jerusalem Journal of International Relations, 4, pp. 50-69.
  • SPIRO, David E.; (1994), “The Insignificance of the Liberal Peace”, Interna- tional Security, 19 (2), pp. 50 – 86.
  • TEUSCH, Ulrich und Martin KAHL; (2001), “Ein Theorem mit Verfallsdatum? Der ‘Demokratische Frieden’ im Kontext der Globalisierung”, Zeitsch- rift für Internationale Beziehungen, 2, ss. 287-320.
  • THRONTVEİT, Trygve; (2010), “Wilson, Past and Present”, Democracy Jo- urnal, 16, pp. 99-106.
  • WRIGHT, Quincy; (1942), A Study of War, First Edition, Chicago: Univer- sity of Chicago Press.
  • YALVAÇ, Faruk; (2006), "Savaş ve Barış", iç Atila ERALP (Ed.), Devlet ve Ötesi: Uluslararası İlişkilerde Temel Kavramlar, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, ss. 251-285.

Year 2012, Issue: 40, 1 - 19, 20.05.2015

Hakkı Büyükbaş Nilgün Atıcı

Abstract

References

  • BABST, Dean V.; (1964), “Elective Governments - A Force for Peace”, The Wisconsin Sociologist, 3(1), pp. 9-14.
  • CHOJNACKİ, Sven; (2003), “Demokratien und Krieg: Das Konfliktverhalten demokratischer Staaten, 1946-2001”, WZB Discussion Papers P 2003-304, friedensforschung.de/ index.php/component/content/article/17-details- foerderprofil/65-eberwein, Date of Access: 03. 03. 2013.
  • CHOJNACKİ, Sven; (2003a), “Schnelle Siege bei geringen Kosten? Demokra- tien und Kriege”, WZB-Mitteilungen Heft, 100, ss. 18-22.
  • DAASE, Christopher; (2004), “Demokratischer Frieden - Demokratischer Krieg. Drei Gründe für die Unfriedlichkeit von Demokratien”, in Björn AUST und Peter SCHLOTTER (Hg), Demokratien im Krieg, Christi- ne Schweitzer, Baden-Baden: Nomos Verl.-Ges, ss. 53-71.
  • DALACOURA, Katerina; (2005), “US Democracy Promotion in The Arab Middle East Since 11 September 2001: A Critique”, International Af- fairs, 81 (5), pp. 963-79.
  • ERALP, Atilla; (2006), Devlet ve Ötesi: Uluslararası İlişkilerde Temel Kav- ramlar, Birinci Baskı, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  • GEIS, Anna; (2001), “Diagnose: Doppelbefund - Ursache ungeklärt? Die Kont- roverse um den ‘demokratischen Frieden’, Politische Vierteljah- resschrift, 42 (2), ss. 282-298.
  • HASENCLEVER, Andreas; (2002), “The Democratic Peace Meets Internatio- nal Institutions.Überlegungen zur internationalen Organisation des de- mokratischen Friedens”, Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 9(1), ss. 75-112.
  • HASENCLEVER, Andreas; (2003), “Liberale Ansätze zum ‚demokratischen Frieden”, in Siegfried SCHIEDER und Manuela SPINDLER (Hg.), Theorien der Internationalen Beziehungen, Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich UTB, ss. 199-225.
  • HERMANN, Margaret G. and Charles KEGLEY Jr.; (1995), “Rethinking De- mocracy and International Peace: Perspectives from Political Psycholo- gy”, International Studies Quarterly, 39(4), pp. 511- 533.
  • KAHL, Colin; (1998-99), “Constructing a Separate Peace: Constructivism, Col- lective Liberal Identity and Democratic Peace”, Security Studies 8(2/3), pp. 94-144.
  • KANT, Immanuel; (1984), Zum Ewigen Frieden, Stuttgart: Reclam Verlag.
  • KEGLEY, Charles W. and Margaret G. HERMANN;(1995), “The Political Psychology of ‘Peace through Democratization’”, Cooperation and Conflict, 30(1), pp. 5 - 30.
  • KİELMANNSEGG, Peter Graf; (2004, 22 Dezember), “Drei Regeln für den Frieden, Politik Essay”, Die Zeit, 53, s. 3.
  • KRAUSE, Joachim (2003), “Vom ewigen Frieden zum demokratischen Frie- den? Die Aussagekraft von Theorien des demokratischen Friedens”, Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 13(2), ss. 693-716.
  • LAYNE, Christopher; (1994), “Kant or Can’t: The Myth of the Democratic Peace”, International Security, 19 (2), pp. 5 - 49.
  • LEVY, Jack; (1988), “Domestic Politics and War”, Journal of Interdiscipli- nary History, 18, pp. 653–673.
  • MANSFIELD, Edward D. and Jack SNYDER; (1995), “Democratization and the Danger of War”, International Security, 1, pp. 5-38.
  • NAVARİ, Cornelia; (2011),“The English School and the Emerging Democracy Norm in International Society”, WISC Third International Confe- rence, 17-20 August, Porto, Portugal: World International Studies Committee, pp. 1-12, Internet Address: http://www.wiscnetwork.org/ report_on_porto.php, Date of Access: 05.03.2013.
  • ONEAL, John R. and Bruce RUSSETT; (1999), “The Kantian Peace: The Pa- cific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organ- izations, 1885 – 1992”, World Politics. A Quarterly Journal of In- ternational Relations, 52 (1), pp. 1-37.
  • OREN, Ido; (1995), “The Subjectivity of the ‘Democratic’ Peace. Changing U.S. Perceptions of Imperial Germany”, International Security, 20(2), pp. 147-184.
  • OWEN, John M.; (1994), “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”, In- ternational Security, 19 (2), pp. 87-125.
  • ÖZCAN, Ufuk; (1997), “Wilson Prensipleri Üzerine”, İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 4, ss. 37-48.
  • PECENY, Mark; (1997), “A Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Peace: The Ambiguous Case of the Spanish-American War”, Journal of Peace Research, 34 (4), pp. 415 - 430.
  • QUACKENBUSH, Stephen L. and Michael RUDY; (2006), “Evaluating the Monadic Democratic Peace”, Annual Meeting of the Midwest Politi- cal Science Association, 20-23 April, Chicago-Illinois: Midwest Politi- cal http://www.mpsanet.org/ kingGroups/ tabid/794/Default.aspx, Date of Access: 05.03.2013.
  • Conference/ConferenceSections/ Address: Wor
  • RAUCH, Carsten; (2005), Die Theorie des Demokratischen Friedens. Gren- zen und Perspektiven, Erste Auflage, Frankfurt/Main: Campus Verlag Gmbh.
  • RISSE-KAPPEN, Thomas; (1995), “Democratic Peace – Warlike Democra- cies? A Social Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Argument”, European Journal of International Relations, 1(4), pp. 491-517.
  • ROBINSON, William I.; (1996), “Globalization, The World System, and “De- mocracy Promotion”, Theory and Society, 25 (5), pp. 615-665.
  • ROSATO, Sebastian; (2003), “The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theo- ry”, American Political Science Review, 97 (4), pp. 585 – 602.
  • ROUSSEAU, David, L. Christopher GELPİ, Dan REITER and Paul K. HUTH; (1996), “Assessing the Dyadic Nature of the Democratic Peace, 1918- 88”, The American Political Science Review, 90(3), pp. 512-533.
  • RUMMEL, Rudolph J.; (1975-1981), Understanding Confl ict and War, Vol. 1 – 5, New York: Sage Publications.
  • RUMMEL, Rudolph J.; (1983), “Libertarianism and International Violence”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, pp. 27-71.
  • RUSSETT, Bruce; (1993), Grasping the Democratic Peace -Principles for a Post-Cold War World, First Edition, New Jersey: Princeton Universi- ty Press.
  • SCHEEL, Constanze; (2007), “Die liberale Theorie des Demokratischen Frie- dens –Frieden durch weltweite Demokratisierung?”, Sicherheit und Frieden, 25(4), ss. 208-213.
  • SCHRADER, Lutz; (2003), Frieden und Demokratie, Erste Auflage, Hagen: Fernuniversität Gesamthochschule.
  • SINGER, J. David and Melvin SMALL; (1972), The Wages of War, 1816- 1965: A Statistical Handbook, First Edition, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
  • SMALL, Melvin and J. David SİNGER; (1976), “The War Proneness of De- mocratic Regimes”, Jerusalem Journal of International Relations, 4, pp. 50-69.
  • SPIRO, David E.; (1994), “The Insignificance of the Liberal Peace”, Interna- tional Security, 19 (2), pp. 50 – 86.
  • TEUSCH, Ulrich und Martin KAHL; (2001), “Ein Theorem mit Verfallsdatum? Der ‘Demokratische Frieden’ im Kontext der Globalisierung”, Zeitsch- rift für Internationale Beziehungen, 2, ss. 287-320.
  • THRONTVEİT, Trygve; (2010), “Wilson, Past and Present”, Democracy Jo- urnal, 16, pp. 99-106.
  • WRIGHT, Quincy; (1942), A Study of War, First Edition, Chicago: Univer- sity of Chicago Press.
  • YALVAÇ, Faruk; (2006), "Savaş ve Barış", iç Atila ERALP (Ed.), Devlet ve Ötesi: Uluslararası İlişkilerde Temel Kavramlar, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, ss. 251-285.
There are 43 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Hakkı Büyükbaş This is me

Nilgün Atıcı This is me

Publication Date May 20, 2015
Published in Issue Year 2012 Issue: 40

Cite

APA Büyükbaş, H., & Atıcı, N. (2015). LİBERAL DEMOKRATİK BARIŞ KURAMI: ELEŞTİREL BİR DEĞERLENDİRME. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(40), 1-19.

Ethical Principles and Ethical Guidelines

The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences places great emphasis on publication ethics, which serve as a foundation for the impartial and reputable advancement of scientific knowledge. In this context, the journal adopts a publishing approach aligned with the ethical standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to preventing potential malpractice. The following ethical responsibilities, established based on COPE’s principles, are expected to be upheld by all stakeholders involved in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors).

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
Make decisions on submissions based on the quality and originality of the work, its alignment with the journal's aims and scope, and the reviewers’ evaluations, regardless of the authors' religion, language, race, ethnicity, political views, or gender.
Respond to information requests from readers, authors, and reviewers regarding the publication and evaluation processes.
Conduct all processes without compromising ethical standards and intellectual property rights.
Support freedom of thought and protect human and animal rights.
Ensure the peer review process adheres to the principle of double-blind peer review.
Take full responsibility for accepting, rejecting, or requesting changes to a manuscript and ensure that conflicts of interest among stakeholders do not influence these decisions.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
Submitted works must be original. When utilizing other works, proper and complete citations and/or references must be provided.
A manuscript must not be under review by another journal simultaneously.
Individuals who have not contributed to the experimental design, implementation, data analysis, or interpretation should not be listed as authors.
If requested during the review process, datasets used in the manuscript must be provided to the editorial board.
If a significant error or mistake is discovered in the manuscript, the journal’s editorial office must be notified.
For studies requiring ethical committee approval, the relevant document must be submitted to the journal. Details regarding the ethical approval (name of the ethics committee, approval document number, and date) must be included in the manuscript.
Changes to authorship (e.g., adding or removing authors, altering the order of authors) cannot be proposed after the review process has commenced.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Accept review assignments only in areas where they have sufficient expertise.
Agree to review manuscripts in a timely and unbiased manner.
Ensure confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript and not disclose any information about it, during or after the review process, beyond what is already published.
Refrain from using information obtained during the review process for personal or third-party benefit.
Notify the journal editor if plagiarism or other ethical violations are suspected in the manuscript.
Conduct reviews objectively and avoid conflicts of interest. If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review.
Use polite and constructive language during the review process and avoid personal comments.
Publication Policy
The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences is a free, open-access, peer-reviewed academic journal that has been in publication since 1981. The journal welcomes submissions in Turkish and English within the fields of economics, business administration, public finance, political science, public administration, and international relations.

No submission or publication fees are charged by the journal.
Every submitted manuscript undergoes a double-blind peer review process and similarity/plagiarism checks via iThenticate.
Submissions must be original and not previously published, accepted for publication, or under review elsewhere.
Articles published in the journal can be cited under the Open Access Policy and Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is given.
The journal is published three times a year, in April, August, and December. It includes original, high-quality, and scientifically supported research articles and reviews in its listed fields. Academic studies unrelated to these disciplines or their theoretical and empirical foundations are not accepted. The journal's languages are Turkish and English.

Submissions are first subject to a preliminary review for format and content. Manuscripts not meeting the journal's standards are rejected by the editorial board. Manuscripts deemed suitable proceed to the peer review stage.

Each submission is sent to at least two expert reviewers. If both reviews are favorable, the article is approved for publication. In cases where one review is positive and the other negative, the editorial board decides based on the reviews or may send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

Articles published in the journal are open access and can be cited under the Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is made.