GÜNEY ÇİN DENİZİ’NDE AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ’NİN DÖNÜŞTÜRÜCÜ ROLÜ: BÖLGESEL ENTEGRASYON YOLUYLA ALTERNATİF ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMÜ MEKANİZMALARI

Öz

Önemli jeostratejik konumu, değerli deniz kaynakları ve zengin hidrokarbon yatakları ile Güney Çin Denizi, devam eden birçok kara ve deniz ihtilafının merkez üssü haline gelmiştir. Avrupa Birliği (AB) de bu bölgede önemli çıkarlara ve potansiyel kilit rollere sahiptir. Bu makalede AB’nin Güney Çin Denizi anlaşmazlığında oynayabileceği çatışmayı dönüştürücü roller, koşulluluk politikası, sosyal öğrenme ve model oluşturma etkisi çerçevesinde analiz edilmektedir. Çalışmada öncelikle Güney Çin Denizi anlaşmazlığının coğrafi ve tarihsel arka planının bir özeti sunulmaktadır. Sonrasında AB’nin bu çatışmada üstlenebileceği roller, bölgesel entegrasyon yoluyla kullanabileceği alternatif çatışma çözümü mekanizmaları ve bölgedeki çıkarları göz önünde bulundurularak değerlendirilmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Güney Çin Denizi
• Avrupa Birliği
• Güneydoğu Asya Ülkeleri Birliği
• Bölgesel Entegrasyon
• Çatışma Çözümü

The Transformative Role of the European Union in the South China Sea: Alternative Conflict Resolution Mechanisms Through Regional Integration

Abstract

With its important geostrategic location, valuable marine resources and rich hydrocarbon deposits, the South China Sea has become the epicenter of many ongoing territorial and maritime conflicts. The European Union (EU) also has vital interests and potential key roles in this region. In this article, the conflicttransforming roles that the EU can play in the South China Sea conflict are analyzed within the framework of conditionality policy, social learning and modelsetting effect. In the study, firstly, a summary of the geographical and historical background of the South China Sea conflict is presented. Afterwards, the roles that the EU can play in this conflict are evaluated by considering alternative conflict resolution mechanisms that it can use through regional integration and its interests in the region.

Keywords

• South China Sea
• European Union
• Association of South East Asian Nations
• Regional Integration
• Conflict Resolution

Kaynakça

1. ASEAN Regional Forum. “ARF Annual Security Outlook 2005”, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 21, 2022, https://aseanregionalforum.asean.org/librarycat/arf-annual-security-outlook- 2005/
2. ASEAN Secretariat. “Chairman’s Statement of 17th ASEAN-China Summit”, 29 Aralık 2014, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 21, 2022, https://asean.org/chairmans-statement-of-17th-asean- china-summit/
3. ASEAN Secretariat. “Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea”, 4 Kasım 2002, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 21, 2022, https://asean.org/declaration-on-the-conduct-of- parties-in-the-south-china-sea-2/
4. ASEAN Secretariat. “Overview of ASEAN-EU Dialogue Relations”, Nisan 2013, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 01, 2022, http://thaiembassy.dk/asean-eu/
5. Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI), “South China Sea Energy Exploration and Development”, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 05, 2022, https://amti.csis.org/south-china-sea- energy-exploration-and-development/
6. Baviera, Aileen S.P. “South China Sea: Managing Territorial and Resource Disputes”, içinde Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific: An Overview of Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Activities, ed. Annelies Heijmans, Nicola Simmonds, and Hans van de Veen, 505-523. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2004.
7. Bayıllıoğlu, Uğur. “Güney Çin Denizi Tahkiminde Hakemlik Mahkemesi’nin İnsanlığın Ortak Mirası ve Diğer Devletlerin Deniz Alanlarına Sağladığı Koruma: Ada Statüsünün Sınırlanması”, Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, no 130 (2017): 419-456.
8. Börzel, Tanja A. ve Thomas Risse. “From Europeanisation to Diffusion: Introduction”, West European Politics 35, no 1 (2012): 1-19.

9. Busse, Nikolas ve Hanns W. Maull. “Enhancing Security in the Asia-Pasific: European Lessons for the ASEAN Regional Forum”, Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft 3 (1999): 227-236.
10. Buys, Richard. “The South China Sea: Contested Waters”, Torch Magazine, (2021): 19-24.
11. Carlson, Allen. “Helping to Keep the Peace (Albeit Reluctantly): China’s Recent Stance on Sovereignty and Multilateral Intervention”, Pacific Affairs 77, no 1 (2004): 9-27.
12. Casarini, Nicola. “EU Foreign Policy in the Asia Pacific: Striking the Right Balance Between the US, China and ASEAN”, European Union Institute for Security Studies (ISS), Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 02, 2022, https://www.iai.it/en/pubblicazioni/eu-foreign-policy- asia-pacific
13. Checkel, Jeffrey T. “Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change”, International Organization 55, no 3 (2001): 553-588.
14. China Daily. “China’s Position Paper on South China Sea”, 7 Aralık 2014, Erişim Tarihi: Şubat 7, 2022, https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2014-12/07/content_19037946.htm
15. Commission of the Euoropean Union. “A New Partnership with South East Asia”, COM (2003) 399 Final, Brussels, 1-52.
16. Commission of the Euoropean Union. “Europe and Asia: A Strategic Framework for Enhanced Partnerships”, COM (2001) 469 Final, Brussels, 1-38.
17. Commission of the European Communities, “Towards a New Asia Strategy”, COM (94) 314 Final, Brussels, 1-33.
18. Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR) North Sea Commission. “The CPMR North Sea Commission: Who We Are”, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 26, 2022, https://cpmr- northsea.org/who-we-are/
19. Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR) North Sea Commission. “Member Directory & Map”, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 26, 2022, https://cpmr-northsea.org/who-we- are/member-directory-map/
20. Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pasific (CSCAP). Regional Security Outlook, (2013): 1-60.
21. Council of the European Union. “Guidelines on the EU’s Foreign and Security Policy in East Asia”, 2012, Brussels, 1-20.
22. Diez, T., Tocci, N., Faleg, G., ve Eva Scherwitz. “Introduction: Promoting Regional Integration and Transforming Conflicts?”, içinde The EU, Promoting Regional Integration, and Conflict Resolution, ed. Thomas Diez, Nathalie Tocci, 1-28. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.
23. Diez, Thomas. “Introduction: Cyprus and the European Union as a Political and Theoretical Problem”, içinde The European Union and Cyprus Conflict: Modern Conflict, Postmodern Union, ed. Thomas Diez, 1-14. Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press, 2002.
24. Dittmer, Lowell. “China’s New Internationalism”, içinde China Turns to Multilateralism: Foreign Policy and Regional Security, ed. Guoguang Wu, Helen Lansdowne, 21-34. New York: Routledge, 2008.
25. Djalal, Hasjim ve Ian Townsend-Gault. “Managing Potential Conflicts in the South China Sea: Informal Diplomacy for Conflict Prevention”, içinde Herding Cats: Multiparty Mediation in a Complex World, ed. Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, Pamela Aall, 107-134. Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1999.
26. Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in the Kingdom of Sweden. “Foreign Minister Wang Yi Attends China-ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Meeting Stressing China Regards Developing Friendly Cooperation with ASEAN as Priority of Its Relations With Neighbouring Countries”, 30 Haziran 2013, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 21, 2022, https://www.mfa.gov.cn/ce/cese//eng/xwdt/t1055662.htm
27. Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in the Republic of Zimbabwe. “China, ASEAN Nations Agree on Guidelines for Implementation of DOC in South China Sea”, 20 Temmuz 2011, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 24, 2022, https://www.mfa.gov.cn/ce/cezw//eng/xwdt/t843953.htm
28. Emmers, Ralf. “The Changing Power Distribution in the South China Sea: Implications for Conflict Management and Avoidance”, Political Science 62, no 2 (2010): 118-131, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 01, 2022, doi:10.1177/0032318710381519.
29. Euroasia Security Forum. “Under Reported at ARF: The Joint EU-US Statement on the Asia- Pasific Region”, Ağustos 7, 2012, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 02, 2022, https://euroasiasecurityforum.com/2012/08/07/under-reported-at-arf-the-joint-eu-us- statement-on-the-asia-pacific-region/
30. European Commission, “Countries and Regions: Association of South East Asia Nations (ASEAN)”, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 02, 2022, https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries- and-regions/regions/asean/
31. European Union Global Strategy. “Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe, A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy”, Haziran (2016): 16, Erişim Tarihi: Şubat 01, 2022, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:4413648
32. European Union Institute for Security Studies (ISS). “Sense and Sensibility: Addressing the South China Disputes”, ed. Eva Pejsova, Report No 28 (2016): 1-77. Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 05, 2022, https://www.iss.europa.eu/content/sense-and-sensibility- %E2%80%93-addressing-south-china-sea-disputes
33. Fitriani, Evi. “Asian Perceptions About the EU in the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM)”, Asia Europe Journal 9, no 1 (2011): 43-56.
34. Franckx Erik ve Marco Benatar. “The South China Sea: An International Law Perspective”, International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 32, no 2 (2017): 193-372.
35. Goh, Gillian. “The ‘ASEAN Way’: Non-Intervention and ASEAN’s Role in Conflict Management”, Stanford Journal of East Asian Affairs 3, no 1 (2003): 113-118, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 18, 2022, https://web.archive.org/web/20130626113326/http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/jo urnal3/geasia1.pdf
36. Hund, Marcus. “ASEAN and ASEAN Plus Three: Manifestations of Collective Identites in Southeast and East Asia?” (Doktora Tezi, Trier Üniversitesi, 2002)
37. International Crisis Group (ICG). “Dangerous Waters: China-Japan Relations on the Rocks”, Report no 245, 8 Nisan 2013, Beijing/Brussels, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 21, 2022, https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/north-east-asia/china/dangerous-waters-china-japan- relations-rocks
38. International Crisis Group (ICG). “Stirring up the South China Sea (I)”, Report no 223, 23 Nisan 2012, Beijing/Brussels, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 24, 2022, https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/south-china-sea/stirring-south-china- sea-i
39. J. Schenk, C., J. Mercier, T., A. Woodall, C., Finn, T.M., A. Le, P., Marra, K.R., Leathers- Miller, H.M. ve Ronald M. Drake II. “Assessment of Undiscovered Conventional Oil and Gas Resources of Southeast Asia, 2020”, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2020-3046, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 05, 2022, doi:10.3133/fs20203046.
40. Jennings, Ralph. “Why the EU Sides with Southeast Asia in the South China Sea Dispute?”, Voanews, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 01, 2022, https://www.voanews.com/a/east-asia- pacific_why-eu-sides-southeast-asia-south-china-sea-dispute/6209828.html
41. Jetschke Anja ve Philomena Murray. “Diffusing Regional Integration: The EU and Southeast Asia”, West European Politics 35, no 1 (2012): 174-191.
42. Jokela, Juha ve Bart Gaens. “Interregional Relations and Legitimacy in Global Governance: The EU in ASEM”, Asia Europe Journal 10, no 2-3 (2012): 145-164.
43. Katsumata, Hiro. “Reconstruction of Diplomatic Norms in Southeast Asia: The Case for Strict Adherence to the “ASEAN Way””, Contemporary Southeast Asia 25, no 1 (2003): 104- 121.
44. Katzenstein, Peter J. A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium, 1. Baskı. Ithaka and London: Cornell University Press, 2005.
45. Kim, Yeikyoung. “The EU and Regional Integration as a Form of Conflict Transformation in the South China Sea”, içinde The EU, Promoting Regional Integration, and Conflict Resolution, ed. Thomas Diez, Nathalie Tocci, 201-224. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.
46. Lavenex, Sandra ve Emek M. Uçarer. “The External Dimension of Europeanization: The Case of Immigration Policies”, Cooperation and Conflict 39, no 4 (2004): 417-443.
47. Levy, Jack S. “Learning and Foreign Policy: Sweeping a Conceptual Minefield”, International Organization 48, no 2 (1994): 279-312.
48. Liu Nengye ve Qi Xu. “How Might the European Union Engage Constructively with China in the South China Sea?”, Ocean Development & International Law 49, no 4 (2018): 301- 312.
49. Liu, Nengye ve Saiful Karim. “South China Sea after the Philippines v. China Arbitration: Conflict and Cooperation in Troubled Waters”, Asia Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy 2, no 1 (2017): 3-7.
50. Masilamani, Logan ve Jimmy Peterson. “The “ASEAN Way”: The Structural Underpinnings of Constructive Engagement”, Foreign Policy Journal, (2014): 1-21. Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 18, 2022, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2014/10/15/the-asean-way- the- structural-underpinnings-of-constructive-engagement/
51. Maull, Hanns W. “Regional Security Co-operation: Comparison of Europe and East Asia”, Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, no 1 (1997): 49-62.
52. Michael, North ve Barnard Turner. “The Baltic Sea and South China Sea Regions: Incomparable Models of Regional Integration?”, Asia Europe Journal 8, no 3 (2010): 271-277.
53. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Kingdom of Thailand. “Thailand to host the 8th ASEAN-China Senior Officials’ Meeting on the Implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea”, 21 Ekim 2014, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 21, 2022, https://www.mfa.go.th/en/content/5d5bce4f15e39c3060014c76?cate=5d5bcb4e15e39c 3060006834
54. Mission of the People’s Republic of China to ASEAN. “The Sixth Senior Officials Meeting and the Ninth Joint Working Group Meeting on the Implementation of the "Declaration on Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea" Are Held in Suzhou”, 15 Eylül 2013, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 21, 2022, https://www.mfa.gov.cn/ce/ceasean//eng/zgwj/t1079289.htm
55. Moore, Thomas G. “Racing to Integrate, or Cooperating to Compete? Liberal and Realist Interpretations of China’s New Multilateralism”, içinde China Turns to Multilateralism: Foreign Policy and Regional Security, ed. Guoguang Wu, Helen Lansdowne, 35-50. New York: Routledge, 2008.
56. Pal, Deep. “A Code of Conduct for the South China Sea”, The Diplomat, 25 Eylül 2013, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 24, 2022, https://thediplomat.com/2013/09/a-code-of-conduct-for-the- south-china-sea/
57. Pham, Quang Minh. “The South China Sea Security Problem: Towards Regional Cooperation”, Asia Europe Journal 8 (2010): 427-434.
58. Ravenhill, John. “Mission Creep or Mission Impossible? APEC and Security”, içinde Reassessing Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific: Competition, Congruence, and Transformation, ed. Amitav Acharya ve Evelyn Goh, 135-154. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2007.
59. Rees, Nicholas. “EU and ASEAN: Issues of Regional Security”, International Politics 47, no 3/4 (2010): 402-418.
60. Risse, Thomas. “Let’s Argue: Communicative Action in World Politics”, International Organization 54, no 1 (2000): 1-39.
61. Rosenberg, David ve Christopher Chung. “Maritime Security in the South China Sea: Coordinating Coastal and User State Priorities”, Ocean Development & International Law 39, no 1 (2008): 51-68.
62. Rosenberg, David. “Governing the South China Sea: From Freedom of the Seas to Ocean Enclosure Movements”, Harvard Asia Quarterly 12, no 3&4 (2010): 1-9.
63. Schimmelfennig, Frank ve Ulrich Sedelmeier, “Governance by Conditionality: EU Rule Transfer to the Candidate Countries of Central and Eastern Europe”, Journal of European Public Policy 11, no 4 (2004): 661-679.
64. Schimmelfennig, Frank ve Ulrich Sedelmeier. The Politics of European Union Enlargement: Theoretical Approaches, 1. Baskı. London: Routledge, 2005.
65. Schimmelfennig, Frank ve Ulrich Sedelmeier, The Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe, 1. Baskı. Ithaka, Newyork: Cornell University Press, 2005.
66. Solomon, Peter M. “The European Union: Setting a New Course for the South China Sea”, içinde Great Powers, Grand Strategies: The New Game in the South China Sea, ed. Anders Corr, 286-300. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 2018. The World Bank IBRD-IDA Data. “Population Total China”, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 01, 2022, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?end=2020&locations=CN&start= 2020&view=bar
67. Thi Lan Anh, Nguyen. “Origins of the South China Sea Dispute”, içinde Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea, ed. Jing Huang ve Andrew Billo, 15-35. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2015.
68. Tocci, Nathalie. Who is a Normative Policy Actor ?: The European Union and its Global Partners, 1. Baskı. Brussels: The Centre for European Policy Studies, 2008.
69. US Energy Information Administration. “South China Sea”, 7 Şubat 2013, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 05, 2022, https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/regions-of- interest/South_China_Sea
70. von Hofmann, Norbert. “How do Asians Evaluate Europe’s Strategic Involvement in East Asia?”, Asia Europe Journal 5, no 2 (2007): 187-192.
71. Weissmann, Mikael. The East Asian Peace: Conflict Prevention and Informal Peacebuilding, 1. Baskı. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
72. Weitz, Richard. “Why US Made Hanoi Move”, The Diplomat, 18 Ağustos 2010, Erişim Tarihi: Ocak 24, 2022, https://thediplomat.com/2010/08/why-us-made-hanoi-move/
73. Will, Gerhard. “Distant Partners: Europe and the South China Sea”, içinde Power Politics in Asia’s Contested Waters: Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea, Global Power Shift (Comparative Analysis and Perspectives), ed. Enrico Fels ve Truong-Minh Vu, 469-491. Cham: Springer, 2016.