ENERJİ HEGEMONYASI VE POLİTİK ETKİ: GAZPROM-GUAM İLİŞKİLERİNİN PLÜTOKRATİK YETKİ TEORİSİ BAĞLAMINDA ANALİZİ

Abstract

Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemde yeniden şekillenen Avrasya jeopolitiğinde, Rusya Federasyonu’nun bölgesel liderlik iddiası hem askeri hem ekonomik araçlarla yeniden inşa edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu süreçte, Rus dış politikasının en etkili araçlarından biri enerji sektörü olmuştur. Özellikle Vladimir Putin’in iktidara gelmesiyle birlikte Rusya’nın doğrudan denetimine alınan enerji "stratejik sektör" ilan edilerek enerji alanında hegemonik ve yönlendirici bir aktör olarak Gazprom ön plana çıkmıştır. Gazprom, yalnızca ekonomik bir işletme değil, aynı zamanda Kremlin’in dış politika hedeflerini destekleyen yarı-devlet niteliğinde bir güç merkezi olarak işlev görmeye başlamıştır. Gazprom'un ticari bir varlık ve politik bir araç olarak ikili rolüne odaklanan bu çalışmada örnek vaka olarak şirketin faaliyet alanındaki GUAM ülkeleri analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmanın temel amacı Gazprom’un GUAM ülkeleri üzerindeki ekonomik araçlarla kurduğu nüfuzu, Plütokratik Yetki Teorisi bağlamında incelemektir. Araştırmada Gazprom’un GUAM ülkeleriyle enerji ilişkilerinin, nasıl bir plütokratik yetki biçimi inşa ettiği ve bu yapının bölgesel siyasi dengeyi nasıl etkilediği, sorularına cevap aranmıştır. Nitel araştırma yönteminin benimsendiği çalışmada eleştirel içerik analizi tekniği kullanılarak; Gazprom’un etkisi plütokratik bir güç olarak yeniden kavramsallaştırmış ve GUAM ülkeleri bağlamında enerji-politika etkileşimi teorik bir çerçevede açıklanmıştır. Elde edilen bulgularda enerji politikalarının yalnızca devlet merkezli analizlerle açıklanamayacağı ve enerji şirketlerinin, plütokratik yetki temelinde hareket ederek uluslararası sistemde etkili aktörlere dönüştükleri sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışma, mevcut enerji güvenliği literatürünü ekonomik gücün siyasal etkisi bağlamında genişleterek özgün bir nitelik kazanmıştır.

Keywords

• Enerji Güvenliği
• GUAM
• Gazprom
• Plütokratik Yetki Teorisi
• Rusya

ENERGY HEGEMONY AND POLITICAL INFLUENCE: AN ANALYSIS OF GAZPROM-GUAM RELATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF PLUTOCRATIC AUTHORITY THEORY

Abstract

In the post-Cold War era, as the geopolitical landscape of Eurasia was being reshaped, the Russian Federation sought to re-establish its claim to regional leadership through both military and economic means. In this context, one of the most effective tools of Russian foreign policy has been the energy sector. Especially following the rise of Vladimir Putin, energy was declared a "strategic sector" and brought under the direct control of the Russian state, with Gazprom emerging as a hegemonic and directive actor. Far from being a purely economic enterprise, Gazprom began to function as a semi-state power centre supporting the Kremlin’s foreign policy objectives. Focusing on Gazprom’s dual role as both a commercial entity and a political instrument, this paper analyses the GUAM countries as a case example within the company’s sphere of operation. The main aim of the study is to examine the influence Gazprom exercises over GUAM countries through economic instruments, within the framework of Plutocratic Authority Theory. The paper seeks to answer the questions of how Gazprom’s energy relations with the GUAM countries have constructed a form of plutocratic authority, and how this structure has influenced the regional political balance. Adopting a qualitative research approach and employing critical content analysis, the study reconceptualises Gazprom’s influence as a form of plutocratic power and provides a theoretical explanation of the interaction between energy and politics in the GUAM context. The findings suggest that energy policy cannot be understood solely through state-centric analyses, and that energy companies, by operating within a plutocratic framework, have become influential actors in the international system. By broadening the existing literature on energy security to include the political influence of economic power, this paper offers an original contribution to the field.

Keywords

• Energy Security
• GUAM
• Gazprom
• Plutocratic Authority Theory
• Russia

References

1. Ağır, O. (2016), “Rusya-Ukrayna Krizi’nin Avrasya Ekonomik Birliği Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi”, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 23-42.
2. Batumi Declaration. (2008), GUAM – Integrating Europe’s East. https://guam-organization.org/en/batumi-declaration-guam-integrating-europe-s-east/ (07.01.2025)
3. Chisinau Declaration. (2005), In The Name of Democracy, Stability and Development. https://guam-organization.org/en/... (25.02.2025)
4. Dağ, R. and Tüfekçi, Ö. (2022), Great Power Politics in Greater Eurasia: Regional Alliances, Institutions, Projects, and Conflicts, Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group.
5. Delcour, L. (2010), Shaping the Post-Soviet Space? EU Policies and Approaches to Region-Building. Ashgate.
6. Euractiv. (2021), Moldova declares energy emergency over gas shortage.
7. Final Communique of The GUUAM Summit. (2002, 2003), Organization for Democracy and Economic Development. https://guam-organization.org/en/...
8. Fukuyama, F. (2014), Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

9. Gazprom. (2021), Annual Report. Gazprom Export.
10. Gazprom. (2023), Annual Report. Gazprom Public Joint Stock Company. www.gazprom.com
11. Gelzer, M. (1969), The Roman Nobility. Oxford University Press.
12. Gilens, M. and Page, B. I. (2014), “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Gro-ups, and Average Citizens”, Perspectives on Politics, 12(3), 564–581.
13. Gilpin, R. (2001), Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. Princeton University Press.
14. Goldman, M. (2008), Petrostate: Putin, Power, and the New Russia. Oxford University Press.
15. Goss, K. A. (2016), “Policy Plutocrats: How America’s Wealthy Seek to Influence Governance”, PS: Political Science and Politics, 49(3), 442–448.
16. GUAM Working Group on Energy. (2010–2013), Meeting Reports and Working Documents. https://guam-organization.org/en/category/structure-of-guam/working-groups-and-working-subgroups/working-group-on-energy/ (erişim tarihleri: 01–05.09.2021).
17. _____ (2010), 6th Meeting of GUAM Working Group on Transport. https://guam-organization.org/en/category/structure-of-guam/working-groups-and-working-subgroups/working-group-on-transport/page/2/ (01.09.2021).
18. _____ (2011), 7th Meeting of GUAM Working Group on Transport. https://guam-organization.org/en/category/structure-of-guam/working-groups-and-working-subgroups/working-group-on-transport/page/2/ (03.01.2025).
19. _____ (2013), 7th Meeting of the GUAM Working Group on Energy. https://guam-organization.org/en/category/structure-of-guam/working-groups-and-working-subgroups/working-group-on-energy/ (05.03.2025).
20. GUAM. (2002), Agreement on Cooperation Among The Governments of GUUAM Participating States in The Field of Combat Against Terrorism, Organized Crime and Other Dangerous Types of Crimes (20.07.2002).
21. ______ (2003a), Memorandum on Understanding GUUAM Participating States on Trade and Transportation Facilitation (04.06.2003).
22. ______ (2003b), Agreement on Establishment of Free Trade Area Between The GUUAM Participa-ting States (10.12.2003).
23. ______ (2007a), GUAM Sectoral Cooperation Development Strategy (19.06.2007).
24. ______ (2007b), Memorandum on Cooperation and Mutual Assistance in The Field of Nuclear and Radiation Safety (19.06.2007).
25. ______ (2013), Development Concept for The GUAM Transport Corridor (13.02.2013).
26. Investopedia. (2025), What Is Plutocracy? Definition, Meaning, and Example Countries. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/plutocracy.asp
27. Kuzemko, C. (2014), The Energy Security-Climate Nexus: Institutional Change in the UK and Beyond. Palgrave Macmillan, s. 8–10.
28. Kyiv Declaration (2006), GUAM on The Issue of Conflict Settlement (23.05.2006).
29. Maugeri, L. (2006), The Age of Oil: The Mythology, History, and Future of the World's Most Controversial Resource. Praeger.
30. Merriam-Webster (2025), Plutocracy. In Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plutocracy
31. Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation. (2021), Budget Revenues Report.
32. Mitchell, T. (2011). Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil. Verso Books, ss. 109–140.
33. Mitrova, T. (2018), The Outlook for Russia’s Energy Sector. https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/dr-tatiana-mitrova-outlook-russias-energy-sector/?utm_source=chatgpt.com [10.01.2025].
34. Myhre, J. (2012), Lithuania, Russia Tense Over Natural Gas Law. Foreign Policy Association. https://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2012/03/27/lithuania-russia-tense-natural-gas-law/ [10.08.2024].
35. Nygren, B. (2008). The Rebuilding of Greater Russia: Putin's Foreign Policy towards the CIS Countries. Routledge.
36. OneMoneyWay (2025), Plutocracy. https://onemoneyway.com/en/dictionary/plutocracy/ [21.02.2025].
37. Pirani, S., Stern, J. and Yafimava, K. (2009), The Russo-Ukrainian Gas Dispute of January 2009: A Comprehensive Assessment, The Oxford Energy Studies.
38. Rutland, P. (2008), “Putin’s Economic Record: Is the Oil Boom Sustainable?” Europe-Asia Stu-dies, 60(6), 1051–1072.
39. Siddi, M. (2018), “The Role of Power in EU–Russia Energy Relations: The Interplay Between Markets and Geopolitics”, Europe-Asia Studies, 70(10), 1552-1571.
40. Smith, R. E. (2006), The Roman Republic: A Study in Government, Cambridge University Press.
41. Socor, V. (2007), “GUAM Energy Strategies and the Failure of Odessa–Brody–Plock”, Eurasia Daily Monitor, 4(99), 3–5.
42. Stern, J. (2005), The Future of Russian Gas and Gazprom, The Oxford University Press.
43. Stern, J. (2006), The Russian-Ukrainian Gas Crisis of January 2006, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
44. Stiglitz, J. (2012), The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society Endangers Our Future, W. W. Norton and Company.
45. Tarbell, I. M. (1904), The History of the Standard Oil Company, McClure, Phillips and Co.
46. Tatlı, M. (2025), “Regional Integration Efforts in The Post-Cold War USSR Geography: The Eurasian Economic Union”, ASSAM, 26, 36-49.
47. The Baku GUAM Summit Communique. (2007), Organization for Democracy and Economic De-velopment (19.06.2007).
48. Tüfekçi, Ö. (2025), “The Ukrainian War: A Realist Perspective on Geopolitical Implications and International Response”, Karadeniz Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi. 11(23), 85-101.
49. Tsygankov, A. (2016), Russia’s Foreign Policy: Change and Continuity in National Identity, Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group.
50. Yalta Charter (2001), Yalta GUUAM Charter (07.06.2001).
51. Yergin, D. (1991), The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power, Free Press.