Çok Uluslu Anayasal Yapılarda Ulus-Devlet Kırılganlığı, Kimlik Ve Dış Politika

Öz

Çok uluslu ve çok dilli anayasal yapılar, farklılığı tanıma ile birliği koruma arasında ince bir denge kurmak zorundadır. Bu çalışma, bu yapılarda ulus-devlet kırılganlığını üreten yapısal etkenleri belirlemeyi; kimlik inşası ve dış politika yönelimi üzerindeki yansımalarını çözümlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Yorumlayıcı çoklu vaka tasarımı çerçevesinde Osmanlı İmparatorluğu, Avusturya-Macaristan, Sovyetler Birliği, Yugoslavya, Çekoslovakya, İsviçre ve Kanada içerik ve söylem çözümlemesiyle karşılaştırmalı incelenmiştir. Önerilen bütünleşik meşruiyet çerçevesi; anayasal mimari, söylemsel kimlik üretimi ve dışa açılım tabakalarını tek bir analitik mercekte birleştirmektedir. Bulgular, üç tabaka arasında dengeli akış sağlanamadığında kırılganlığın derinleştiğini; kurumsal hafıza, dayanıklılık ve etik liderlik birlikte canlı tutulduğunda dayanıklılığın üretildiğini göstermektedir. Çerçeve, modernist ulusçuluk ile çoğulcu yurttaşlık yazınları arasında kuramsal bir köprü kurmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çok uluslu anayasal yapılar
• Ulus-devlet kırılganlığı
• Bütünleşik meşruiyet çerçevesi
• Kimlik inşası
• Dış politika

Destekleyen Kurum

Bu çalışmayı destekleyen kurum bulunmamaktadır.

Proje Numarası

1

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma için etik rapor gerekmemektedir. Ayrıca bu çalışmada etik ihlal yapılmamıştır.

Teşekkür

Makalemin yayınlanmasına vasıta olan bu dergiye emeği geçen ve emeği geçecek olan tüm yetkili ve de ilgililere çok teşekkür ederim.

Nation-State Fragility, Identity And Foreign Policy In Multinational Constitutional Orders

Öz

Multinational and multilingual constitutional orders must strike a delicate balance between recognizing diversity and preserving unity. This study aims to identify the structural factors producing nation-state fragility in such structures and to analyze their reflections on identity construction and foreign policy orientation. Within an interpretive multiple-case design, the Ottoman Empire, Austria-Hungary, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Switzerland, and Canada are comparatively examined through content and discourse analysis. The proposed integrated legitimacy framework unites the layers of constitutional architecture, discursive identity production, and external orientation under a single analytical lens. Findings show that fragility deepens when a balanced flow among the three layers cannot be sustained; resilience emerges when institutional memory, durability, and ethical leadership are kept alive together. The framework establishes a theoretical bridge between modernist nationalism and pluralist citizenship literatures.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Multinational constitutional orders
• Nation-state fragility
• Integrated legitimacy framework
• Identity construction
• Foreign policy

Destekleyen Kurum

This study was not supported by any institution.

Proje Numarası

1

Etik Beyan

This study does not require an ethics committee approval. Furthermore, no ethical violations were committed in the conduct of this study

Teşekkür

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all the editors, reviewers, and staff of this journal who have contributed—and will continue to contribute—to the publication of my article.

Kaynakça

1. Akçam, T. (2012a). 21. yüzyılda Ermeni meselesi: Sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. İletişim Yayınları.
2. Akçam, T. (2012b). The Young Turks' crime against humanity: The Armenian genocide and ethnic cleansing in the Ottoman Empire. Princeton University Press.
3. Aktürk, Ş. (2011). Regimes of ethnicity: Comparative analysis of Germany, the Soviet Union/Post-Soviet Russia, and Turkey. World Politics, 63(1), 115–164. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887110000304
4. Aktürk, Ş. (2012). Regimes of ethnicity and nationhood in Germany, Russia, and Turkey. Cambridge University Press.
5. Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso.
6. Anderson, B. (1998). The spectre of comparisons: Nationalism, Southeast Asia, and the world. Verso.
7. Aydınoğlu, E. (2011). Etnisite, sınıf ve devlet. Kalkedon Yayınları.
8. Bakke, K. M., & Wibbels, E. (2006). Diversity, disparity, and civil conflict in federal states. World Politics, 59(1), 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2007.0013

9. Banac, I. (1984). The national question in Yugoslavia: Origins, history, politics. Cornell University Press.
10. Barak, A. (2012). Proportionality: Constitutional rights and their limitations. Cambridge University Press.
11. Barkey, K. (2008). Empire of difference: The Ottomans in comparative perspective. Cambridge University Press.
12. Barkey, K., & Gavrilis, G. (2016). The Ottoman millet system: Non-territorial autonomy and its contemporary legacy. Ethnopolitics, 15(1), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2015.1101845
13. Beissinger, M. R. (2002). Nationalist mobilization and the collapse of the Soviet state. Cambridge University Press.
14. Breuilly, J. (1993). Nationalism and the state (2nd ed.). Manchester University Press.
15. Brown, A. (1996). The Gorbachev factor. Oxford University Press.
16. Burg, S. L. (1983). Conflict and cohesion in socialist Yugoslavia: Political decision making since 1966. Princeton University Press.
17. Burg, S. L., & Shoup, P. S. (1999). The war in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Ethnic conflict and international intervention. M. E. Sharpe.
18. Calhoun, C. (2007). Nations matter: Culture, history, and the cosmopolitan dream. Routledge.
19. Cohen, A. P. (1985). The symbolic construction of community. Routledge.
20. Cohen, L. J. (1995). Broken bonds: Yugoslavia's disintegration and Balkan politics in transition (2nd ed.). Westview Press.
21. Cohen, L. J., & Warwick, P. V. (1983). Political cohesion in a fragile mosaic: The Yugoslav experience. Westview Press.
22. Conversi, D. (2012). Modernism and nationalism. Journal of Political Ideologies, 17(1), 13–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2012.644982
23. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
24. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage.
25. Deringil, S. (1998). The well-protected domains: Ideology and the legitimation of power in the Ottoman Empire, 1876–1909. I.B. Tauris.
26. Diamond, L., & Plattner, M. F. (Eds.). (1994). Nationalism, ethnic conflict, and democracy. Johns Hopkins University Press.
27. Elazar, D. J. (1987). Exploring federalism. University of Alabama Press.
28. Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means: Peace and conflict, development and civilization. Sage.
29. Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and nationalism. Cornell University Press.
30. George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press.
31. Gerring, J. (2004). What is a case study and what is it good for? American Political Science Review, 98(2), 341–354. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055404001182
32. Gurr, T. R. (1993). Minorities at risk: A global view of ethnopolitical conflicts. United States Institute of Peace Press.
33. Gurr, T. R. (2000). Peoples versus states: Minorities at risk in the new century. United States Institute of Peace Press.
34. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press.
35. Hanson, P. (2014). The rise and fall of the Soviet economy: An economic history of the USSR from 1945. Routledge.
36. Hechter, M. (2000). Containing nationalism. Oxford University Press.
37. Hobsbawm, E. J. (1990). Nations and nationalism since 1780: Programme, myth, reality. Cambridge University Press.
38. Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic groups in conflict. University of California Press.
39. Horowitz, D. L. (2000). Ethnic groups in conflict (2nd ed.). University of California Press.
40. Jović, D. (2009). Yugoslavia: A state that withered away. Purdue University Press.
41. Karaca, A. (2009). Yugoslavya'nın dağılmasında ekonomik faktörlerin rolü. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 6(22), 67–89.
42. Karpat, K. H. (2001). The politicization of Islam: Reconstructing identity, state, faith, and community in the late Ottoman state. Oxford University Press.
43. Kaufman, S. J. (2001). Modern hatreds: The symbolic politics of ethnic war. Cornell University Press.
44. Keating, M. (2001). Plurinational democracy: Stateless nations in a post-sovereignty era. Oxford University Press.
45. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2001). Power and interdependence (3rd ed.). Longman.
46. Keyman, E. F. (2017). Türkiye'de devlet, kimlik, demokrasi. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
47. Köker, L. (2010). Modernleşme, Kemalizm ve demokrasi. İletişim Yayınları.
48. Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized hypocrisy. Princeton University Press.
49. Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Clarendon Press.
50. Kymlicka, W. (2001). Politics in the vernacular: Nationalism, multiculturalism, and citizenship. Oxford University Press.
51. Lampe, J. R. (2000). Yugoslavia as history: Twice there was a country (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
52. Leff, C. S. (1997). The Czech and Slovak republics: Nation versus state. Westview Press.
53. Leff, C. S. (1999). Democratization and disintegration in multinational states: The breakup of the communist federations. World Politics, 51(2), 205–235. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100008169
54. Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. Yale University Press.
55. Lijphart, A. (2004). Constitutional design for divided societies. Journal of Democracy, 15(2), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2004.0029
56. Linder, W. (2010). Swiss democracy: Possible solutions to conflict in multicultural societies (3rd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
57. Mardin, Ş. (2017). Türkiye'de toplum ve siyaset: Makaleler 1. İletişim Yayınları.
58. Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Sage.
59. Mazower, M. (2000). The Balkans: A short history. Modern Library.
60. McGarry, J., & O'Leary, B. (2005). Federation as a method of ethnic conflict regulation. In S. Noel (Ed.), From power sharing to democracy: Post-conflict institutions in ethnically divided societies (pp. 263–296). McGill-Queen's University Press.
61. Mill, J. S. (2011). A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive. Cambridge University Press. (Özgün eser 1843'te yayımlanmıştır)
62. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
63. Moravcsik, A. (1993). Liberalism and international relations theory (CFIA Working Paper No. 92-6). Harvard University, Center for International Affairs.
64. Oran, B. (Ed.). (2013). Türk dış politikası: Kurtuluş Savaşı'ndan bugüne olgular, belgeler, yorumlar (Cilt 1–2). İletişim Yayınları.
65. Ortaylı, İ. (2008). İmparatorluğun en uzun yüzyılı. Timaş Yayınları.
66. Özbudun, E. (2021). Türk anayasa hukuku. Yetkin Yayınları.
67. Özkırımlı, U. (2008). Milliyetçilik kuramları: Eleştirel bir bakış. Doğu Batı Yayınları.
68. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
69. Pomfret, R. (2006). The Central Asian economies since independence. Princeton University Press.
70. Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42(3), 427–460. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027697
71. Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press.
72. Ramet, S. P. (2006). The three Yugoslavias: State-building and legitimation, 1918–2005. Indiana University Press.
73. Rosenau, J. N. (1997). Along the domestic-foreign frontier: Exploring governance in a turbulent world. Cambridge University Press.
74. Sakwa, R. (1999). The rise and fall of the Soviet Union, 1917–1991. Routledge.
75. Sancar, M. (2011). Geçmişle hesaplaşma: Unutma kültüründen hatırlama kültürüne. İletişim Yayınları.
76. Silverman, D. (2016). Qualitative research (4th ed.). Sage.
77. Skocpol, T. (Ed.). (1984). Vision and method in historical sociology. Cambridge University Press.
78. Smith, A. D. (1995). Nations and nationalism in a global era. Polity Press.
79. Smith, G. (Ed.). (1996). The nationalities question in the post-Soviet states (2nd ed.). Longman.
80. Suny, R. G. (1993). The revenge of the past: Nationalism, revolution, and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Stanford University Press.
81. Taylor, C. (2004). Modern social imaginaries. Duke University Press.
82. Thomas, D. C. (2001). The Helsinki effect: International norms, human rights, and the demise of communism. Princeton University Press.
83. Tilly, C. (1975). The formation of national states in Western Europe. Princeton University Press.
84. Tilly, C. (2001). Mechanisms in political processes. Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.21
85. Todorova, M. (1997). Imagining the Balkans. Oxford University Press.
86. Wheeler, N. J. (2000). Saving strangers: Humanitarian intervention in international society. Oxford University Press.
87. Woodward, S. L. (1995). Balkan tragedy: Chaos and dissolution after the Cold War. Brookings Institution Press.
88. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (11. baskı). Seçkin Yayıncılık.
89. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Sage.