Öz

In recent years, Arctic Region has been the one of the areas most affected by global climate change, also known as the North Pole. The melting of the glaciers in the Arctic Region with the effect of the climate change has made easier to reach inaccessible areas. Thus, access to energy resources on the Arctic Ocean floor has been facilitated and new sea routes have opened. These opportunities, which emerged with the melting of the glaciers, increased the geopolitical and geostrategic importance of the Arctic. In particular, the increase in the economic and commercial potential of the Arctic has caused the coastal states to strengthen their sovereignty claims on the Arctic Ocean and to increase the conflicts between them. The struggle over the opportunities in the Arctic caused to change of the security approach of the coastal states. Russia, which has the longest costline in the Arctic, increased the security measures in order to protect its national interests on both natural resources and new sea routes was perceived as a threat by other coastal states. This caused to the other coastal states come together under the umbrella of NATO against Russia. This situation resulted in NATO’s increasing effectiveness in the region as a powerful and effective actor against Russian militarization as it was in the Cold War years. In this context, the subject of the study is to examine whether NATO is effective in preserving peace and stability against Russia in the Arctic. Within this framework the study will seek to answer the following question: “Is NATO an effective actor against Russia with its presence in the Arctic region in maintaining stability and preventing conflicts?”

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Arctic
• NATO
• Russia
• Armament
• Militarization.

ARKTİK’TE SİLAHLANMA YARIŞI: RUSYA VE NATO

Öz

Son yıllarda küresel iklim değişikliğinden en fazla etkilenen alanlardan biri Kuzey Kutbu olarak da bilinen Arktik Bölgesi olmuştur. İklim değişikliğinin etkisiyle Arktik Bölgesi’ndeki buzulların erimesi, erişilemeyen alanlara ulaşılmasını kolaylaştırmıştır. Böylece, Arktik Okyanusu’nun tabanındaki enerji kaynaklarına erişim kolaylaşmış ve yeni deniz yolları açılmıştır. Buzulların erimesiyle ortaya çıkan bu fırsatlar, Arktik’in jeopolitik ve jeostratejik önemini arttırmıştır. Özellikle Arktik’in ekonomik ve ticari potansiyelinin artması, kıyıdaş devletlerin Arktik üzerindeki egemenlik iddialarını güçlendirmelerine ve bu devletler arasındaki anlaşmazlıkların artmasına neden olmuştur. Arktik’teki fırsatlar üzerindeki bu mücadele ortamı, kıyıdaş devletlerin güvenlik yaklaşımlarını değiştirmelerine neden olmuştur. Arktik’te en uzun kıyı şeridine sahip devlet olan Rusya’nın Arktik’teki hem enerji kaynaklarını hem de yeni deniz yolları üzerindeki ulusal çıkarlarını korumak amacıyla güvenlik önlemlerini arttırması, diğer kıyıdaş devletler tarafından bir tehdit olarak algılanmıştır. Bu da diğer kıyıdaş devletlerin Rusya’ya karşı NATO çatısı altında biraraya gelmelerine neden olmuştur. Bu durum Soğuk Savaş yıllarında olduğu gibi NATO’nun Rusya’nın silahlanması karşısında yeniden güçlü ve etkili bir aktör olarak bölgedeki etkinliğini arttırması ile sonuçlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda çalışmanın konusu, NATO’nun Arktik’te Rusya karşısında barışın ve istikrarın korunmasında etkili olup olmadığının incelenmesi olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu kapsamda çalışmada, “NATO, Rusya’ya karşı bölgedeki varlığı ile istikrarın korunmasında ve çatışmaların önlenmesinde etkili bir aktör müdür?” sorusuna yanıt aranması amaçlanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Arktik
• NATO
• Rusya
• Silahlanma
• Askerileşme.

Kaynakça

1. ARCTIC PORTAL. (2008). The Ilulissat Declaration. Erişim Adresi: https://arcticportal.org/images/stories/pdf/Ilulissat-declaration. pdf.
2. ARCTIC PORTAL. (2010). Russian Federation’s Policy for the Arctic to 2020. Erişim Adresi: https://icr.arcticportal.org/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1791%3.
3. ATEŞ, A. (2017). Arktika Bölgesi’nin Enerji Kaynakları ve ABD’nin Arktika Politikası”. İçinde Harun Gümrükçü vd. (Ed.), Küresel Bakışla Kutup Çağı-3, (ss. 60-85). Ankara: Efil Yayınevi.
4. BENDER, J. (14 Ocak 2015). Russia Is Reinforcing 3 Crucial Geopolitical Frontlines. Business Insider. Erişim Adresi: https:// www.businessinsider.com.au/russia-reinforcing-geopolitical-frontlines-2015-1#:~:text=Russian%20President%20 Vladimir%20Putin%20signed,for%20the%20country%20on%20Dec.&text=The%20new%20doctrine%2C%20beyond%20 explicitly,part%20of%20its%20existential%20security.
5. BIRD, K. J. ve diğerleri. (2008). Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal: Estimates of Undiscovered Oil and Gas North of the Arctic Circle. USGS. Erişim Adresi: https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/fs2008-3049.pdf.
6. BOULÉGUE, M. (2019). Russia’s Military Poture in the Arctic: Managing Hard Power in a “Low Tension” Environment. Chantham House. Erişim Adresi: https://www.chathamhouse.org/publication/russia-s-military-posture-arctic-managing-hard-power-lowtension- environment.
7. BREITENBAUCH, H., KRISTENSEN, K. S. ve GROESMEYER, J. (28 Kasım 2019). Military and Environmental Challenges in the Arctic. Carnegie Europe. Erişim Adresi: https://carnegieeurope.eu/2019/11/28/military-and-environmental-challenges-inarctic- pub-80424.
8. BYERS, M. (2017). Crises and International Cooperation: An Arctic Case Study. International Relations, 31(4), 375-402.

9. CHIVERS, C. J. (3 Ağustos 2007). Russians Plant Flag on the Arctic Seabed. The New York Times. Erişim Adresi: https://www.nytimes. com/2007/08/03/world/europe/03arctic.html.
10. CROWLEY, K. (1 Mart 2018). Exxon to Quit Russian Oil Ventures Frozen by U.S. Sanctions. Bloomberg. Erişim Adresi: https://www. bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-28/exxon-quitting-russian-oil-ventures-frozen-by-u-s-eu-sanctions.
11. ÇALIK, A. G. (2021). Arktik Bölgesi’nde Yaşanan Güncel Sorunlar ve İkili Anlaşmazlıklar. International Journal of Politics and Security, 3(1), 99-128.
12. DAL, A. (2020a). Jeoekonominin Yükselişi: Enerji Kaynakları Bağlamında Arktika ve Doğu Akdeniz Bölgelerinin Analizi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (65), 66-84.
13. DAL, A. (2020b). Kuzeydeki Asırlık Çatışma: Arktik Bölgesi’ndeki Çıkarlar Algılaması ve Egemenlik Tartışmaları Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 30(2). 287-304.
14. DALAKLIS, D., DREWNIAK, M.L. ve SCHRÖDER-HINRICHS, J. (2018). Shipping Operations Support in the “High North”: Examining Availability of Icebreakers Along the Northern Sea Route. WMU J Marit Affairs, 17, 129–147. https://doi. org/10.1007/s13437-018-0142-7.
15. DANILOV, P. B. (10 Mart 2020). Cold Response 2020 Exercise is On. High North News. Erişim Adresi: https://www.highnorthnews. com/en/cold-response-2020-exercise.
16. DAVIS, C. M. (2016). The Ukraine Conflict, Economic-Military Power Balances and Economic Sanctions. Post-Communist Economies, 28(2). 167-198.
17. DE BUITROGO, S. R. (2019). Risk Representation and Confrontational Actors in the Arctic. Journal of Strategic Security, 12 (3), 13- 36. https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.12.3.1739.
18. DEVYATKIN, P. (2018). Russia’s Arctic Strategy: Military and Security (Part II). The Arctic Institute. Erişim Adresi: https://www. thearcticinstitute.org/russias-arctic-military-and-security-part-two/.
19. EMBASSY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND. (2009). National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation to 2020. Erişim Adresi: http://thailand.mid.ru/en/national-security-strategy-of-the-russianfederation#:~: text=The%20national%20security%20strategy%20of,term%20development%20of%20the%20state.
20. EXNER-PIROT, H. (2019). Between militarization and disarmament: Constructing peace in the Arctic. Arctic Year Book. Erişim Adresi: https://arcticyearbook.com/images/yearbook/2019/Briefing-Notes/1_AY2019_COM_ExnerPirot.pdf.
21. FAULCONBRIDE, G. (2 Ağustos 2007). Russian sub plants flag under North Pole. Reuters. Erişim Adresi: https://www.reuters. com/article/idINIndia-28784420070802#:~:text=MOSCOW%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20Russian%20explorers,energy%20 riches%20of%20the%20Arctic.
22. GUY, E. ve LASSERRE, F. (2016). Commercial Shipping in the Arctic: New Perspectives, Challenges and Regulations. Polar Record. 1(3), 1-11.
23. GÜÇLÜ AKPINAR, B. (2018). Uluslararası Hukuk Çerçevesinden Arktik Güvenliği Politikalarının Analizi: Rusya ve ABD Örneği. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(2), 83-118.
24. HEINIEN, L., SERGUNIN, A. ve YAROVOY, G. (2014). Russian Strategies in the Arctic: Avoiding A New Cold War. Valdai Discussion Club Grantees Report. Erişim Adresi: https://arcticyearbook.com/images/yearbook/2019/Briefing-Notes/1_AY2019_COM_ ExnerPirot.pdf.
25. HUEBERT, R. (2019). A New Cold War in the Arctic?! The old one never ended!. Arctic Year Book 2019. Erişim Adresi: https:// arcticyearbook.com/images/yearbook/2019/Briefing-Notes/2_AY2019_COM_Huebert.pdf.
26. HUND, A. J. (2014). Arctic, Definitions of. İçinde A. J. Hund (Ed.), Antarctica and the Arctic Circle: A Geographic Encyclopedia of the Earth’s Polar Regions (ss. 54-55). California: ABC-Clio.
27. JOHNSON, D. (20 Aralık 2018). VOSTOK 2018: Ten Years of Russian Strategic Exercises and Warfare Preparation. NATO Review. Erişim Adresi: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2018/12/20/vostok-2018-ten-years-of-russian-strategic-exercisesand- warfare-preparation/index.html.
28. KAVAS, A. Y. (2019). Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Arktika Bölgesi Jeopolitiği ve Bölgesel İş Birliği Potansiyeli. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 2019 Özel Sayısı, 25-44.
29. KEFFERPÜTZ, R. (2010). On Thin Ice? (Mis)interpreting Russian Policy in the High North. CEPS Policy Brief, (405), 1-10. Erişim Adresi: https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/PB205%20Kefferputz%20on%20Russia%20Arctic%20e-version. pdf.
30. KILIÇBEYLİ, E. H., SOCHNEVA, I. ve SOCHNEVA, O. (2021). Russia’s Arctic Policy: Economic Development, Regional Priorities and Territorial Sea. International Journal of Politics and Security, 3(1), 218- 243.
31. KLIMENKO, E. (2016). Russia’s Arctic Security Policy: Still Quiet in the High North, Stocholm International Peace Research Institute, (45), 29-33. Erişim Adresi: https://www.sipri.org/publications/2016/sipri-policy-papers/russias-arctic-security-policy-stillquiet- high-north.
32. KLIMENKO, E. (2019). The Geopolitics of a Changing Arctic. SIPRI Background Paper. Erişim Adresi: https://www.sipri.org/sites/ default/files/2019-12/sipribp1912_geopolitics_in_the_arctic.pdf.
33. KONYSHEV, V. ve SERGUNIN, A. (2014). Is Russia a revisionist military power in the Arctic?. Defense & Security Analysis, 30(4), 323- 335.
34. KRISTENSEN, K. S. ve SAKSTRUP, C. (2016). Russian Policy in the Arctic After the Ukraine Crisis. Centre for Military Studies University of Copenhagen. Erişim Adresi: https://cms.polsci.ku.dk/english/publications/russian-policy-in-the-arctic/Russian_ Policy_in_the_Arctic_after_the_Ukraine_Crisis.pdf.
35. KUERSTEN, A. (2016). The Arctic Five Versus the Arctic Council. Arctic Year Book 2016. Erişim Adresi: https://arcticyearbook.com/ arctic-yearbook/2016/2016-briefing-notes/205-the-arctic-five-versus-the-arctic-council.
36. KULESA, L. (2016). Towars a New Equilibrium: Minimising the Risks of NATO and Russia’s New Military Postures. European Leadership Network. Erişim Adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep06727?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.
37. LINDSEY, R. (2012). Arctic Sea Ice: 2012 Record Low Was 18% Smaller Than Previous Record, Nearly 50 Percent Below Average. NOAA. Erişim Adresi: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/arctic-sea-ice-2012-record-low-was-18- smaller-previous-record-nearly.
38. MATZ-LÜCK, N. (2009). Planting the Flag in Arctic Waters: Russia’s Claim to the North Pole. Göttingen Journal of International Law, 1(2), 235-255.
39. NATIONAL SNOW & ICE DATA CENTER. Arctic Sea Ice at Minimum Extent for 2019. Erişim Adresi: https://nsidc.org/news/ newsroom/arctic-sea-ice-minimum-extent-2019#:~:text=Arctic%20sea%20ice%20likely%20reached,the%20University%20 of%20Colorado%20Boulder.
40. NATO. (2017). NATO and Security in the Arctic. NATO Parliamentary Assembly Political Committe Report. Erişim Adresi: https:// www.nato-pa.int/download-file?filename=sites/default/files/2017-11/2017%20-%20172%20PCTR%2017%20E%20rev.1%20 fin%20-%20NATO%20AND%20SECURITY%20IN%20THE%20ARCTIC.pdf.
41. NATO. (2018). Trident Juncture 2018. Erişim Adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/157833.htm.
42. NORTH SEA ROUTE INFORMATION OFFICE. (2020). NSR Shi pping Traffic – Activities in June 2020. Erişim Adresi: https://arcticlio. com/nsr-shipping-traffic-activities-in-june-2020/.
43. NORWEGIAN ARMED FORCES. (2020). Facts About Exercise Cold Response 2020. Erişim Adresi: https://www.evenes.kommune. no/selvbetjening/dokumentarkiv/informasjon/1249-fakta-cold-response-eng/file.html.
44. NUTTALL, M. (2005). Arctic Definitions and Boundaries. İçinde M. Nuttal (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Arctic (ss. 117-121). New York ve Londra: Routledge.
45. O’DWYER, G. (31 Mayıs 2015). Tensions High as Russia Responds to Exercise. Defense News. Erişim Adresi: https://www. defensenews.com/global/europe/2015/05/31/tensions-high-as-russia-responds-to-exercise/.
46. PARNEMO, L. K. (2019). Russia’s Naval Development — Grand Ambitions and Tactical Pragmatism, The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 32(1), 41-69.
47. PEDROZO, P. P. (2013). Arctic Climate Change and U.S. Accession to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. International Law Journal, 89. 757-775. Erişim Adresi: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1021&context=ils.
48. PETTERSEN, T. (15 Ekim 2016). Cargo record on Northern Sea Route. Barents Observer. Erişim adresi: https://barentsobserver.com/ en/business/cargo-record-northern-sea-route-15-10.
49. PETTERSEN, T. (5 Mart 2014). USA Cancels Joint Exercises with Russia. Barents Observer. Erişim Adresi: https://barentsobserver. com/en/security/2014/03/usa-cancels-joint-exercises-russia-05-03.
50. PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA (17 Eylül 2008). Speech at Meeting of the Russian Security Council on Protecting Russia’s National Interests in the Arctic. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/48304.
51. PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA. (5 Mart 2020). Vladimir Putin Approved Basic Principles of State Policy in the Arctic. Erişim Adresi: http:// atpu.ru/en/news/putin-approved-the-basics-of-state-policy-in-the-arctic/.
52. ROBERTS, K. (2010). Jets, Flags, and a New Cold War? Demystifying Russia’s Arctic Intentions. International Journal, 65(4), 957– 976.
53. RUSSIA MARITIME STUDY INSTITUTE. (2015). Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation. Erişim Adresi:https://dnnlgwick.blob.core.windows.net/portals/0/NWCDepartments/Russia%20 M a r i t i m e % 2 0 S t u d i e s % 2 0 I n s t i t u t e / M a r i t i m e % 2 0 D o c t r i n e % 2 0 T r a n s E N G r u s _ F I N A L . pdf?sr=b&si=DNNFileManagerPolicy&sig=fqZgUUVRVRrKmSFNMOj%2FNaRNawUoRdhdvpFJj7%2FpAkM%3D.
54. RYWKIN, M. (2015). Russia: An Adventure to Restore the Empire. American Foreign Policy Interest, 37, 95-99.
55. SANCAK, K. (2019). Deniz Hukukuna İlişkin Temel Egemenlik Alanları Bağlamında Arktik’teki İhtilaflı Alanlar ve Hukuki Durum. International Journal of Economics and Administrative Studies, (23), 17-34.
56. SAVAŞ CAZALA, M. (2016). Rusya’dan Arktik Güvenliğine Bakışlar: Yeni Bir Soğuk Savaşı Tartışmak. Orta Asya ve Kafkasya Araştırmaları, 10(21). 163-185.
57. SHEA, N. (2019). A Thawing Arctic Heating up a New Cold War. National Geographic. Erişim Adresi: https://www.nationalgeographic. com/adventure/2019/08/how-climate-change-is-setting-the-stage-for-the-new-arctic-cold-war-feature/.
58. SINGIL, N. (2020). Arktik Bölgesi’nin 1982 Tarihli Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi Çerçevesi’nde Değerlendirilmesi. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, 40(2), 1023-1051.
59. SNOW, S. ve CORELL, D. S. (11 Mart 2020). On Major Arctic Military Exercise Canceled Over Coronavirus Fears. Military Times.
60. Erişim Adresi: https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/03/11/major-arctic-exercise-canceled-over-coronavirus-fears/.
61. TDK. (2021). Erişim Adresi https://sozluk.gov.tr/.
62. THE ARCTIC INSTITUTE. Russia. Erişim Adresi: https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/countries/russia/.
63. THE EMBASSY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION TO THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAİN AND NORTHERN
64. IRELAND. (2014). The Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation. Erişim Adresi: https://rusemb.org.uk/press/2029.
65. TRENIN, D. (2010). The Arctic: A Front for Cooperation not Competition. İçinde Dimitri Trenin ve Pavel K. Baev (Ed.) The Arctic: A View From Moscow, (ss. 3-12). Washington: Carnegie Endowment. Erişim Adresi: https://carnegieendowment.org/files/ arctic_cooperation.pdf.
66. UNITED NATIONS OCEANS & LAW OF THE SEA. (2020). Chronological lists of Ratifications of, Accessions and Successions to the Convention and the Related Agreements. Erişim Adresi: https://www.un.org/depts/los/reference_files/chronological_lists_ of_ratifications.htm.
67. USGS. (2010). Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas Resources of the West Siberian Basin Province, Russia, 2010. Erişim Adresi: https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2011/3050/pdf/fs2011-3050.pdf.
68. VARDAR TUTAN, E. ve ARPALIER, S. (2020). Uluslararası İlişkilerde Yeni Rekabet Alanı Olarak Arktik. Barış Araştırmaları ve Çatışma Çözümleri Dergisi, 8(1), 21-59.
69. WİLHELMSEN, J., GJERDE, K. L. (2018). How the New Cold War Travelled North (Part I): Norvegian and Russian Narratives. Norvegian Institute of International Affairs, (14), 1-4, Erişim Adresi: https://nupi.brage.unit.no/nupi-xmlui/handle/11250/2576536.
70. WOODY, C. (28 Ağustos 2018). Russia is getting ready for its biggest war games since the Cold War — a potential sign they’re worried about NATO. Business Insider. Erişim Adresi: https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-preps-for-vostok-2018-militaryexercise- amid-tensions-with-nato-2018-8.
71. WORLD WİLD LİFE. How Big is the Arctic Ocean? And eight other Arctic facts. Erişim Adresi: https://www.worldwildlife.org/ stories/how-big-is-the-arctic-ocean-and-eight-other-arctic-facts.
72. YILDIZ, G. ve ÇELİK, H. (2019). Yeni Bir Egemenlik Mücadelesi Alanı Olarak Arktika: ABD-Rusya Rekabeti. Güvenlik Çalışmaları Dergisi, 21(1), 57-77.
73. YILMAZ, N. ve ÇİFTÇİ, A. (2013). Arktika Bölgesi’nin Siyasal Önemi ve Siyasal ve Hukuksal Statüsünün Karşılaştırmalı Değerlendirmesi. Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (31), 1-16