Terörizm, Devletlerin Tepkileri, Özgürlükler: İnsan Hakları ve Güvenlik Arasındaki Denge Fikrini Kavramak

Year 2019, Volume: 21 Issue: 2, 163 - 176, 01.12.2019

Melih Demirtaş

Abstract

Bu makale, çoğunlukla terörle ilgili meselelerin egemen olduğu güncel dönemde, devletler düzeyinde güvenlik ve insan hakları kavramları arasındaki ilişkiye odaklanacaktır. Terörizm, Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemde ve özellikle “11 Eylül” saldırılarını müteakip, ulusal ve uluslararası güvenlik ajandalarını daha fazla değiştirir hale gelen bir “acil durum” olarak ele alınacaktır. Bu gibi “acil durum”larda güvenlik ve haklar söylemleri arasındaki denge fikrini incelerken, her iki tarafın destekçilerine dikkat çekilecektir. Bu şekilde, ana görüş, geniş bir bağlamda diğer tüm haklardan yararlanabilmek için güvenliğin tüm insanlar için bir ihtiyaç olduğu ve terörizmin, insanların hak ve özgürlükleri ile sorunları çözme amaçlı “müzakereler” önündeki en büyük engellerden birini teşkil ettiği fikriyle açıklanabilir. Bu düşünceye bağlı olarak, tamamen sürdürülebilir güvenli bir ortamın tesisini teminen, terör tehdidi gibi acil durumlarda dahi, güvenlik ile hak ve özgürlükler söylemleri arasındaki dengeyi korumanın, Batı’nın “başat” güçleri dahil tüm Devletler için temel önkoşullardan biri haline geldiği ifade edilecektir

Keywords

Güvenlik, Devletler, insan hakları, 11 Eylül, terörizm, acil durum, demokrasi

Terrorism, States’ Responses, Liberties: Understanding the Idea of Balance between Human Rights and Security

Abstract

This paper will focus on the relation between security and human rights at the states’ level within the current period dominated mostly by terrorism-related issues. Terrorism will be taken as an emergency issue, which has changed national and international security agenda more frequently in the post-Cold War and increasingly during post 9/11 era. While examining the particular idea of a balance between security and rights-discourses in such emergency times, supporters of both sides will be given attention. So, the main argument can be explained in line with the idea that security is a need for all human beings in order to enjoy any other kinds of rights in a wider context, and terrorism is one of main obstacles to peoples’ rights and liberties and to any kind of “deliberations” to find solutions. It will be argued correspondingly, for a fully sustainable secure environment, even during emergency times, like under a terrorist threat, keeping the balance between security and rights-discourses has turned to be one of the main prerequisites for all States, including for Western “supreme” powers

Keywords

Security, States, human rights, 9/11, terrorism, emergency issue, democracy

References

• Acharya, A. (2002). State-society relations: Asian and world order after september 11. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 194-204.
• An-Na’im, A.A. (2002). Upholding international legality against Islamic and American jihad. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order, edited by. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 162-171
• Blick, A., Byrne, I. & Weir, S. (2005). Democratic audit: Good governance. Human rights, war against terror. Parliamentary Affairs, 58, No.2, pp. 408-423.
• Booth, K., & Dunne, T. (2002). Worlds in collision. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1-26.
• Dunne, T. (2002). After 9/11: What next for human rights?. The International Journal of Human Rights, 6, No. 2, pp. 93-102.
• Elster, J. (1993). Majority rule and individual rights. in Stephen Shute and Susan Hurley (eds.), On human rights: the Oxford amnesty lectures 1993. New York: Basic Books, pp. 175-216.
• Elster, J. (2005). Responses to uncertainty: Terrorism and civil liberties. at http://economics. uchicago.edu/download/Responses_ to_uncertainty.pdf (accessed lastly on Nov.2008)
• Falk, R. (2002). Testing patriotism and citizenship in the global terror war. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 325-335.
• Fukuyama, F. (2002). History and september 11. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 27-36
• Freeman, M. (2007). Human rights: An interdisciplinary approach. Cambridge: Polity
• Gearty, C. (2007). Civil liberties, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gray, C. (2002). World politics as usual after september 11: Realism vindicated. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 226-234.
• Hoffman, P. (2004). Human rights and terrorism. Human rights quarterly, 26, pp. 932- 955.
• Ignatieff, M. (2004). The lesser evil: Political ethics in an age of terror. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.
• Kalın, İ. (2018). Barbar, modern, medeni. İstanbul: İnsan Yayınları.
• Keohane, R. (2002). The public delegitimation of terrorism and coalition politics. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 141-151.
• Kessing, P. V. (2007). Terrorism and human rights. in Stéphanie Lagoutte, Hans-Otto Sano and Peter Scharff Smith (eds.), Human rights in turmoil: Facing threats, consolidating achievements. Leiden and Boston: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 133-162.
• Landman, T. (2006). Holding the line: Human rights defenders in the age of terror. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 8, No.2, pp. 123-147.
• Linklater, A. (2002). Unnecessary suffering. In worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.303-312
• Mullard, M., & Bankole A. C. (2007). Introduction. in Maurice Mullard and Bankole A. Cole, (eds.), Globalization, citizenship and the war on terror. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar, pp. 1-12.
• Mullard, M. (2007). Citizenship, globalization and the politics of the war on terror. Maurice
• Mullard and Bankole A. Cole,(eds.), Globalization, citizenship and the war on terror. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar,pp. 81-97.
• Nacos, B. L. (2008). Terrorism and counterterrorism: Understanding threats and responses in the Post-9/11 World. New York, London: Pearson Longman
• Nickel, J. W. (2007). Making sense of human rights. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Posner, E. A., & Vermeule, A. (2007). Terror in the balance: Security, liberty, and the courts. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Ramcharan, B. G. (2002). Human rights and human security, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Rogers, P. (2002). Political violence and global order. Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 215 225.
• Schaumburg-Müller, S. (2007). The uneasy balance between individual rights and the necessity of communities. in Stéphanie Lagoutte, Hans-Otto Sano and Peter Scharff Smith (eds.), Human rights in turmoil: Facing threats, consolidating achievements. Leiden and Boston: Martinus Nijhoff, pp.71-96.
• Scheurman, W. (2006). Survey article: Emergency powers and the rule of law after 9/11. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14., No. 1, pp. 61-84.
• Tilly, C. (2004). Terror, terrorism, terrorists. Sociological Theory, 22, No.1 (Theories of terrorism: A symposium), pp. 5-13.
• Waldron, J. (2003). Security and liberty: The image of balance. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11, No. 2, pp. 191-210.
• Waltz, K. (2002). The continuity of internatioanal politics. Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.), Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 348-353.