Shanghai Cooperation Organization as the China’s and Russia's Hegemonic Regionalising Mechanism in Central Asia

Abstract

Central Asia has been one of the hegemonic competition areas of great powers in the post-Cold War period as well as in the historical process due to its strategic location and the attraction created by its rich resources. Despite their different definitions of interests, China and Russia opted to establish their influence in the region by cooperating on the basis of multilateralism, and this common choice of these two actors ensured the establishment of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in the beginning of the 2000s. In this study, on the basis of the theoretical framework provided by the concept of hegemonic regionalisation, the impact of China and Russia, two great powers that are increasing their power in world politics, on the regionalisation of Central Asia is analysed with reference to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which provides a legal basis for the cooperation of the two actors in the region. The study provides an assessment of hegemonic regionalisation in Central Asia and the impact of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation on this process, using the method of process analysis.

Keywords

• Central Asia
• Hegemonic Regionalism
• China
• Russia
• Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

Çin ve Rusya’nın Orta Asya’da Hegemonik Bölgeselleşme Aracı Olarak Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü

Abstract

Orta Asya stratejik konumu ve zengin kaynaklara sahip olmasının yarattığı çekimin etkisi ile tarihsel süreçte olduğu gibi Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemde de büyük güçlerin hegemonik mücadele alanlarından biri haline gelmiştir. Çin ve Rusya farklı çıkar tanımlamalarına rağmen bölgedeki etkilerini çok taraflılık temelinde iş birliği yaparak tesis etme tercihinde bulunmuş ve iki aktörün bu ortak tercih 2000’li yılların başında Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü’nün kurulmasını sağlamıştır. Bu çalışmada hegemonik bölgeselleşme kavramının sunduğu teorik çerçeve temelinde, dünya siyasetinde gücünü arttırmakta olan iki büyük güç Çin ve Rusya, Orta Asya’nın bölgeselleşmesine olan etkisi, iki aktörün bölgedeki iş birliğine yasal bir zemin sağlayan Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü’nden hareketle analiz edilmektedir. Süreç analizi yöntemine dayanan çalışmada yapılan analizler neticesinde Orta Asya’da hegemonik bölgeselleşme ve Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü’nün bu sürece etkisine dair bir değerlendirme sunulmaktadır.

Keywords

• Orta Asya
• Hegemonik Bölgeselleşme
• Çin
• Rusya
• Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü.

References

1. Ali, H., Muhammadi, M., Masood, Y. et al. (2021). The grand strategy of China towards Central Asia: An assessment of Chinese new regionalism strategy and its geopolitical implications for US in the post 9/11 era, Journal of South Asian Studies, 9(3), 225-233. Doi: 10.33687/jsas.009.03.3906
2. Allison, R. (2018). Protective integration and security policy coordination: Comparing the SCO and CSTO, The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 11(3), 297-338. Doi: 10.1093/cjip/poy008
3. Altundağ, Z. (2016). Geçmişten günümüze Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü, Avrasya Etütleri, 49(1), 99-124.
4. Amineh, M. P. (2022). China’s rise and the question of hegemony and world order, M. P. Amineh (Der.), The China-led Belt and Road Initiative and its reflections: The crisis of hegemony and changing global orders içinde (36-69), Oxon: Routledge.
5. Anadi, A. (2024). New regionalism and norm creation: A case of Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Journal of Strategic Security, 17(1), 100-111. Doi: 10.5038/1944-0472.17.1.2184
6. Aris, S. (2009). Spreading the “Shanghai spirit”: A chinese model of regionalization in post-soviet central asia, E. Kavalski (Der.), China and the global politics of regionalization içinde (153-163), New York: Ashgate Publishing.
7. ---. (2011). Eurasian regionalism: The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Palgrave Macmillan.
8. Astana Times. (2025, Ocak 2025). https://astanatimes.com/2025/01/kazakhstan-ranks-first-among-chinas-central-asian-trade-partners-in-2024/#:~:text=The%20Kyrgyz%20Republic%20followed%20with,from%20%2489.4%20billion%20in%202023 (Erişim: 25.03.2025).

9. Atal, S. (2003). Central Asia geopolitics and U.S. policy in the region: The post-11 september era, Mediterranean Quarterly, 14(2), 95-109.
10. Baral, B. N. (2024). Shifting trends in regionalism, Journal of Political Science, 24, 170-184. Doi: 10.3126/jps.v24i1.62862
11. Bayraktar, G. (2008). Soğuk Savaş sonrası Orta Asya’daki sosyo-kültürel dönüşüm, Harp Akademileri Dergisi, 8(23), 46-58.
12. Beeson, M. (2006). Does hegemony still matter? Revisiting regime formation in the Asia-Pacific, E. S. Helen (Der.), Globalisation and economic security in East-Asia: Governance and institutions içinde (183-199), Oxon: Routledge.
13. Bird, J., M. Lebrand, & A. J. Venables. (2020). The belt and road initiative: Reshaping economic geography in Central Asia?, Journal of Development Economics, 144. Doi: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2020.102441
14. Bohr, A. (2004). Regionalism in Central Asia: New geopolitics, old regional order, International Affairs, 80(3), 485-502.
15. Buranelli, F. C. (2018). Spheres of influence as negotiated hegemony – The case of Central Asia, Geopolitics, 23(2), 378-403. Doi: 10.1080/14650045.2017.1413355
16. Cabestan, J. P. (2013). The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Central Asia, and the great powers, an introduction: One bed, Different Dreams, Asian Survey, 53(3), 423-435. Doi: 10.1525/as.2013.53.3.423
17. Carroll, W. E. (2011). China in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Hegemony, multi-polar balance, or cooperation in Central Asia, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(19), 1-8.
18. Clarke, M. (2010). China and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization: The dynamics of “new regionalism,” “vassalization,” and geopolitics in Central Asia, E. Kavalski (Der.), The new Central Asia: The regional ımpact of ınternational actors içinde (117-147), Singapur: World Scientific Press.
19. Cooley, A. (2012). Great games, local rules: The new great power contest in Central Asia, Oxford University Press.
20. Dani, A. H. (1992). History of civilizations of Central Asia, v. 1: The dawn of civilization, earliest times to 700 B.C. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000094466 (Erişim: 01.09.2024).
21. Deyermond, R. (2009). Matrioshka hegemony? Multilevelled hegemonic competition and security in post-Soviet Central Asia, Review of International Studies, 35(1), 151-173. Doi: 10.1017lS0260210509008365
22. Duşanbe Bildirisi. (2014, Eylül 11-12). http://eng.sectsco.org/documents/ (Erişim: 30.06.2024).
23. Dwan, R., O. Pavliuk. (2007). Building security in the new states of Eurasia: Subregional cooperation in the former Soviet space, Oxon: Routledge Press.
24. Eder, T. S. (2020). China-Russia relations in Central Asia: Energy policy, Beijing’s new assertiveness and 21st century Geopolitics, Londra: Palgrave Macmillan.
25. Erdoğan, S. (2020). İran-Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü ilişkileri ve İran’ın üyelik beklentisi, Medeniyet Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(2), 151-169.
26. Fawcett, L. (2005). Regionalism from an historical perspective, M. Farrell, B. Hettne & L. Van Langenhove (Der.), Global politics of regionalism: Theory and practice içinde (21-37), Londra: Pluto Press.
27. Friedberg, A. L. (2011). Hegemony with Chinese characteristics, The National Interest, 114, 18-27.
28. George, A. L., A. Bennett. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences, Cambridge: MIT Press.
29. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in world politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Gleason, G. W. (1997). The Central Asian states: Discovering independence, New York: Routledge.
31. Gomez, C. J., P. Parigi. (2015). The Regionalization of intergovernmental organisation networks: A non-linear process, Social Networks, 43, 192-203. Doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2015.03.007
32. Güneş, E. (2020). Çin-Rusya ilişkilerinde asimetrik denge ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 70(4), 839-867. Doi: 10.1501/SBFder_0000002374
33. Gürcan, E. C. (2019). Multipolarization, South-South Cooperation and the Rise of Post-Hegemonic Governance, Oxon: Routledge.