NATO’s Complimentary Role in Energy Security and Turkey’s Potential Contributions at the New Energy Geopolitics

Abstract

Energy-related issues gained a prominent place within the NATO’s new strategic concept declared during the Lisbon Summit (November 20, 2010). This final strategic concept is to address two new sources of threat within the new energy geopolitics - ‘resource nationalism’ and ‘energy terrorism’ -which deeply concern those NATO members that require imported energy resources to meet their soaring domestic demand. Lisbon Summit to remove, if not alleviate, these security challenges tasked NATO with a set of specific roles. As a melting pot of the said two energy related risks, Turkey with its pledge to become the fourth energy artery of Europe will likely serve as a litmus test for NATO’s new energy role. To what extent NATO will contribute to Turkey’s energy security will depend on the degree to which Ankara will find conformity/coherence in between Turkey’s own energy security reliance on Russia and NATO’s possible demands sourcing from the Alliance’s new role conception (based around energy). The prospect of such conformity/coherence matters for both the future terms of relations between the Alliance and Turkey and the relevance of NATO as a security providing organization within the upcoming decades. Especially, in a period of time when the Georgian War of 2008 still haunts the Wider Black Sea Region meanwhile the Arab ‘Spring’ further eclipses already weak stability within the Middle East. 

Keywords

• NATO, New Strategic Concept, Energy Security, Turkey

Yeni Enerji Jeopolitiğinde NATO’nun Enerji Güvenliğinde Tamamlayıcı Rolü ve Türkiye’nin Potansiyel Katkıları

Abstract

Kasım 2010 tarihli Lizbon Zirvesinde, NATO enerji meselesini, ilk kez, öncelikli bir güvenlik sorunu olarak değerlendirmiştir. Bu zirvede kabul ettiği yeni strateji konseptiyle, İttifak ‘yeni enerji jeopolitiğinin’ iki temel kaygı unsuru olan ‘kaynak milliyetçiliğine’ ve ‘enerji terörizmine’, tüketici perspektifinden cevap vermeyi amaçlamıştır. Lizbon Zirvesi, NATO’ya bu türden tehdit unsurlarını giderecek, veya etkilerini azaltacak, bir takım roller yüklemiştir. İttifakın yeni rolündeki performans kıstası, Türkiye’nin enerji güvenliğine yapacağı katkıyla orantılıdır. Bunun nedeni, Türkiye bahsedilen her iki enerji tehdidinin erime potası konumundadır, dahası, Avrupa’nın dördüncü enerji arteri olma iddiasındadır. Bu katkının göreli büyüklüğünü tayin edecek faktörlerden birincisi İttifak-içi tartışmalardır. İkincisi ise Ankara’nın Rus enerji kaynaklarına bağımlı olan ulusal enerji güvenliği stratejisiyle NATO’nun yeni rolünün gerektirdiği öncelikler arasında ne derece özdeşlik bulacağıdır. Bu husus, daha geniş bir perspektiften alınırsa, 2008 Gürcistan Savaşı’nın jeopolitik hatlarını yeniden biçimlendirdiği Geniş Karadeniz Bölgesinde ve Arap ‘Baharının’ istikrarsızlaştırdığı Ortadoğu’da, gerek Türkiye ile İttifak arasındaki bağlaşıklığa gerekse de bizatihi NATO gibi güvenlik hizmeti veren bir kuruluşun geleceğine, büyük oranda, şekil verecektir.

Keywords

• NATO, Yeni Stratejik Konsept, Enerji Güvenliği, Türkiye 

References

1. ALSANCAK Hasan, “The Role of Turkey in Global Energy: Bolstering Energy Infrastructure Security”, Jounal of Energy Security, Mayıs 2010, http://www.ensec. org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=247:the-role-of-turkey- in-the-global-energy-bolstering-energy-infrastructure-security&catid=106:ene rgysecuritycontent0510&Itemid=361.
2. ARIBOĞAN D. Ülke - Mert Bilgin, “New Energy Order Politics Neopolitics: From Geopolitics to Energeopolitics”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, V/20, Winter 2009, p.p. 109-132.
3. BAHGAT Gawdat, An Interdisciplinary Approach to Energy Security, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., New York, 2011.
4. BALMER Crispian, “NATO Commander Says Maritime Security is Weak Link”, Washington Post, 8 Mart 2004, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ articles/A40509-2004Mar8.html.
5. CEBECİ Münevver, “NATO-EU Cooperation and Turkey”, Turkish Policy Quarterly, X/3, p.p. 93-103.
6. CHALK Peter, The Maritime Dimension of International Security, RAND Corpora- tion, Pittsburgh 2008.
7. ÇELİKPALA Mitat, “Protecting the Key National Utilities and Energy Inf- rastructure” içinde James Ker-Lindsay - Alastair Cameron, der., Combating In- ternational Terrorism: Turkey’s Added Value, Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), London, Ekim 2009,p.p. 16-18.
8. DAVIS Ian, “NATO Reform Lite: An Evaluation of the Lisbon Summit (Part I)”, 26 Kasım 2010, s. 3, http://www.natowatch.org/sites/default/files/An_Evalu- ation_of_the_Lisbon_Summit_Part_I_0.pdf.

9. EFEGİL, Ertan, “ Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Dönemde, Devlet-İçi Çatışmalarda Türki- ye-NATO Arasındaki İşbirliği Arayışları” , Ortadoğu Analiz , 4/40 , Nisan 2012 , s.42-48.
10. Energy Security and NATO Policy Research Paper, Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies (RUSI), London, 2008.
11. GALLIS Paul, “NATO and Energy Security”, CRS Report for Congress, Mart 2006, http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rs22409.pdf.
12. Genelkurmay Başkanlığı, “Türk Silahlı Kuvvetlerinin Barışı Destekleme Harekâtına Katkıları”, http://www.tsk.tr/4_uluslararasi_iliskiler/4_1_turkiye- nin_barisi_destekleme_harekatina_katkilari/konular/turk_silahli_%20kuvvet- lerinin_barisi_destekleme_harekatina_katkilari.htm
13. GIROUX Jennifer, “Targeting Energy Infrastructure: Examining the Terrorist Threat in North Africa and its Broader Implications”, Analysis of the Real Instituto Elcano, 25, 2009, 13 Şubat 2009, http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/ rielcano_eng/Content?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/elcano/elcano_in/zonas_ in/international+terrorism/ari25-2009.
14. GOLDMAN Marshall I., Petrostate: Putin, Power, and the New Russia, Oxford Uni- versity Press, Oxford, 2010.
15. HLIHOR Konstantin, “It is Time for a NATO Energy Security”, Romanian Jour- nal of Security Studies, I/2, Winter 2010, ss. 39-46.
16. KHAMASHURIDZE Zurab, “Energy Security and NATO: Any Role for the Al- liance?”, Connetions: The Quarterly Journal, VII/4, Fall 2008, ss. 43-58.
17. KLARE Michael, Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy, New York, Metropolitan Books, 2008.
18. KÖKNAR, Ali M., “Maritime Terrorism: A New Challenge for NATO”, Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, 24 Ocak 2005, http://www.iags.org/n0124051.htm.
19. KÖKNAR Ali M., “The Epidemic of Energy Terrorism” içinde Gal Luft - Anne Korin, der., Energy Security Challenges for the 21st Century: A Reference Handbook, San Diego, Praeger, 2009.
20. LIN, Rosa, “ Different views of NATO countries keep energy security off summit agenda” , 09 Mayıs 2012 , http://nationalsecurityzone.org/natog8/di- fferent-views-of-nato-countries-keep-energy-security-off-summit-agenda/
21. LUFT Gal - Anne Corin, Energy Security Challenges for the 21th Century, Califor- nia, Praeger 2009.
22. LUFT Gal - Anne Korin, “Terrorism Goes to Sea”, Foreign Affairs, LXXXV/6, November/December 2004, ss. 61-71.
23. LUGAR, Dick, “Energy and NATO”, 27 Kasım 2006, http://lugar.senate.gov/ energy/press/speech/riga.cfm .
24. MONAGHAN Andrew, “Energy Security: NATO’s Limited, Complementary Role”, NATO Defense College Research Paper, No 36, Mayıs 2008, http://www.incipe. org/rp_36en.pdf.
25. NATO 2020: Assured Security; Dynamic Engagement. Analysis and Recommendati- ons of the Group of Experts on a New Strategic Concept for Nato, Brussels, NATO Public Diplomacy Division, 17 Mayıs 2010.
26. ÖĞÜTÇÜ Mehmet, “Turkey and the Changing Dynamics of World Energy: Towards Cleaner and Smarter Energy”, Insight Turkey, XII/3, 2010, ss. 63-88.
27. Özkan, Gökhan, “ Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Orta Asya ve Kafkasya Ekseninde Türkiye-NATO-Rusya İlişkileri ve Türk Dış Politikası’na Yansımaları” , Gazi Üni- versitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi , 12/1 , 2010 , ss.109-132.
28. TAYLOR Scott R. vd., “Consequence Management in Need of a Timeout”, Joint Force Quarterly, Summer 1999, ss. 78-85, http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/ jfq_pubs/1422.pdf.
29. SHEA Jamie, “Energy Security: NATO’s Potential Role”, Sonbahar 2006, www.nato.int/docu/review/2006/issue3/english/special1.html.
30. SLOAN Elinor, NATO Approaches to Energy Security: Future Options, Challenges and Directions, Ottawa, Critical Energy Infrastructure Protection Policy Research Series (No. 1), Mart 2007.
31. SMITH, Keith C., Russia and European Energy Security: Divide and Dominate, Was- hington, CSIS Press, 2008, s. 4-7.
32. THE WHITE HOUSE, The National Strategy for Homeland Security, Washington D.C., Mayıs 2011, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/na- tional_security_strategy.pdf.
33. TORBAKOV, Igor,”The Georgia Crisis and Russia-Turkey Relations” , The Ja- mestown Foundation, Washington , 2008, http://www.jamestown.org/uploads/ media/GeorgiaCrisisTorbakov.pdf.
34. WINROW Gareth M, “Protection of Energy Infrastructure” içinde James Ker- Lindsay ve Alastair Cameron, der., Combating International Terrorism: Turkey’s Ad- ded Value, Royal United Services Institute, London 2009, pp.19-22.
35. World Energy Outlook 2009, International Energy Agency, http://www.iea.org/ textbase/nppdf/free/2009/WEO2009.pdf.
36. WRIGHT, George G., It is Time for a National Energy Security Strategy, Philedelphia, The US Army War College Research Project (Num. 298-Rev. 8-98), Mart 15, 2008.
37. YERGIN, Daniel, “Ensuring Energy Security”, Foreign Affairs, LXXXV/2, March/April 2006, p.p. 69-82.
38. YORKAN Arzu, “Ukrayna-Rusya Doğal Gaz Krizi: Avrupa ve Türkiye Zor Günler Geçiriyor”, http://www.abbulteni.org/makale-ve-yorumlar/183-ukrayna- rusya-doal-gaz-krizi-avrupa-ve-tuerkiye-zor-guenler-geciriyor.html.
39. “Hırsızlar BOTAŞ’ı Soymaya Doymadı”, Yeni Şafak, 3 Nisan 2009, http://yeni- safak.com.tr/Ekonomi/?t=03.04.2009&i=178763.
40. “Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI)”, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/ topics_52956.htm.
41. “Kurd Rebels Say They May Hit Pipelines if Attacked”, 19 Ekim 2007, http:// www.reuters.com/article /2007/10/19/idUSL19752599.
42. “Lisbon Summit Declaration”, 20 Kasım 2010, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/ natolive/official_texts _68828.htm.
43. “Ministers Give Nod to EU Energy Security Agenda”, 20 Şubat 2010, http://www. euractiv.com/energy/ministers-give-nod-eu-energy-security-agenda/article-179638.
44. “NATO’s Role in Energy Security: Challenges for South Eastern Europe”, 26-27 Mayıs 2011, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/SID-3810FAC5-FFAFA120/natoli- ve/news_75463.htm.
45. “NATO’s Role in Energy Security”, 2011, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natoli- ve/topics_49208.htm.
46. “Opposing Views: Should NATO Defend Europe Against Russia’s Energy Weapon?”, 2 Nisan 2007, http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1079722.html.
47. “PKK Claims Responsibility for Blast at Turkish Gas Pipeline”, 14 Ağustos 2011, http://articles.cnn.com/2011-08-14/world/iran.pipeline_1_gas-pipeline- pkk-kurdistan-workers-party?_s=PM:WORLD.
48. “Riga Summit Declaration”, NATO.int, 19 Kasım 2006, http://www.nato.int/ docu/pr/2006/p06-150e.htm.
49. “Strasbourg/Kehl Summit Declaration”, 4 Nisan 2009, http://www.nato.int/ cps/en/natolive/news_ 52837.htm.
50. “Strategic Concept For the Defence and Security of The Members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation”, 20 Kasım 2010, http://www.nato.int/lis- bon2010/strategic-concept-2010-eng.pdf
51. “Terrorist Attack at Abqaiq Oil Facility Thwarted,” Saudi-U.S. Relations Infor- mation Service, 25 Şubat, 2006, http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/articles/2006/ nid/060225-abqaiq-attack2.html
52. “World Oil Transit Chokepoints”, EIA , Şubat 2011, http://205.254.135.7/co- untries/regions-topics.cfm?fips=WOTC .