Kazakistan’ın Riskten Korunma Stratejisi Bağlamında Ticaret Koridorlarına Yaklaşımı

Öz

Bu makale, ticaret koridorlarının sadece ekonomik araçlar olarak değil, aynı zamanda stratejik diplomasi araçları olarak da nasıl hizmet ettiğine odaklanarak, Kazakistan’ın Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti (Çin), Rusya Federasyonu (Rusya) ve Batılı güçlerle olan karmaşık ilişkilerini yönetmesine olanak tanıdığını ele almaktadır. Daha büyük komşularına bağımlı olmasına rağmen, Kazakistan ekonomik ve siyasi bağlarını çeşitlendirirken egemenliğini korumayı amaçlamaktadır. Kazakistan, ekonomik ve ticari çıkarlarını ilerletmek için Çin, Rusya, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri (ABD), Avrupa Birliği (AB) ve Türk Devletleri Teşkilatı (OTS) ile ilişkilerini geliştirirken, aynı zamanda güvenlik endişelerini ele alan ve bölgesel ve küresel güçler arasında denge sağlayan ortaklıklar ve işbirlikleri aramaktadır. Makale, Kazakistan’a yönelik riskten korunma stratejisinin uyarlanmasını incelemek için tanımlayıcı vaka çalışması yöntemini kullanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, Kazakistan’ın riskleri ve fırsatları yönetme stratejisi, ticaret koridorları ve dış politika arasındaki bağlantı ışığında incelenmektedir. Çalışma, Kazakistan’ın jeopolitik riskleri azaltma, büyük güçler arasında dengeyi koruma ve bölgesel istikrarı güçlendirme çabalarının, ekonomik koridorlar aracılığıyla riskten korunma stratejisini önemli ölçüde güçlendirdiği sonucuna varmıştır. Ayrıca Kazakistan’ın çok aktörlü uluslararası sistem içinde manevra alanını genişleterek stratejik özerkliğini artırdığı görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hedging Stratejisi
• Kazakistan
• Ticaret Koridorları
• Dış Politika
• Orta Asya

Kazakhstan’s Approach to Trade Corridors in the Context of Hedging Strategy

Öz

This article focuses on how trade corridors serve not only as economic instruments, but also as strategic diplomacy tools, allowing Kazakhstan to manage its complex relations with the People’s Republic of China (China), the Russian Federation (Russia), and Western powers. Despite its reliance on its larger neighbors, Kazakhstan aims to maintain its sovereignty while diversifying its economic and political ties. Kazakhstan is fostering relations with China, Russia, the United States (US), the European Union (EU), and the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) to advance its economic and commercial interests, while simultaneously seeking partnerships and cooperation that address security concerns and balance regional and global powers. The paper employs a descriptive case study method to examine the adaptation of the hedging strategy to Kazakhstan. In this context, Kazakhstan’s strategy to managing risks and opportunities is examined in light of the connection of trade corridors and foreign policy. The study concluded that Kazakhstan’s efforts to reduce geopolitical risks, maintain balance among major powers, and strengthen regional stability have significantly strengthened its hedging strategy through economic corridors. Furthermore, it has been observed that Kazakhstan has increased its strategic autonomy by expanding its maneuvering space within the multi-actor international system.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hedging Strategy
• Kazakhstan
• Trade Corridors
• Foreign Policy
• Central Asia

Kaynakça

1. Aitzhanova, A. (2019). The Belt and Road Initiative: The case of Kazakhstan. In Kohli, Harinder S., Linn, Johannes F. and Zucker, Leo M. (Eds.), China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Potential Transformation of Central Asia and the South Caucasus, (pp. 63–81). SAGE Publications India.
2. Ambrosio, T. & Lange, W. A. (2014). Mapping Kazakhstan’s geopolitical code: An analysis of Nazarbayev’s presidential addresses, 1997–2014. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 55(5), 537-559. https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2015.1024272
3. Ash, T. G. et al. (2023). Living in an à la Carte World: What European Policymakers Should Learn From Global Public Opinion. European Council on Foreign Relations, Policy Brief 515.
4. Bağbaşlıoğlu, A. (2024). Rethinking the implications of NATO’s Afghanistan Operation and its partnership for peace in Central Asia: Is it the end of NATO’s presence in Central Asia? bilig, no. 108, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.12995/bilig.10801
5. Biryukov, S. V. & Mamanova, A. (2023). Kazakhstan-China cooperation in the field of economy: Current state and development prospects. Bulletin of Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(2), 74–78.
6. Bukeyeva, A. (2022). How Kazakhstan’s oil exports ended up in one basket Russian. Forbes Kazakistan, Retrieved from: https://forbes.kz/process/energetics/prinujdenie_kalternative_1667747133/ (Accessed on: 15.09.2024)
7. Castillo, J. J. & Downes, A. B. (2023). Loyalty, hedging, or exit: How weaker alliance partners respond to the rise of new threats. Journal of Strategic Studies, 46(2), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2020.1797690
8. Ciorciari, J. D. & Haacke, J. (2022). Hedging as Risk Management: Insights from Works on Alignment, Riskification, and Strategy. International Policy Center.

9. Çelik, Y. & Jayawickrama, J. (2024). A win-win relationship between China and Kazakhstan: Thinking beyond dependency. International Journal of Economics, Business and Politics, 8(2), 421-441.
10. Dekanozishvili, M. (2004). The EU in the South Caucasus: By what means, to what ends?, GFSIS Occasional Paper, no. 6, 1-15.
11. Dumoulin, M. (2023). Steppe Change: How Russia’s War On Ukraine Is Reshaping Kazakhstan. European Council on Foreign Relations, Policy Brief 490.
12. Dunford, M. (2021). China’s Belt and Road Initiative and its implications for global development. Acta Via Serica, 6(1), 91–118. https://doi.org/10.22679/avs.2021.6.1.004
13. Ferdinand, P. (2016). Westward ho—the China dream and ‘one belt, one road’: Chinese foreign policy under Xi Jinping, International Affairs, 92(4), 941-957. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12660
14. Golod, V. (2023). The “Uyghur Issue” from the Kazakhstan perspective. Cultural and Religious Studies, 11(9), 429-443. https://doi.org/10.17265/2328-2177/2023.09.004
15. Gorshkov, T. & Bagaturia, G. (2001). TRACECA-Restoration of Silk Route. Japan Railway & Transport Review, 28, 50-55.
16. Guzansky, Y. (2015). Strategic hedging by non-great powers in the Persian Gulf. In Aharon Klieman (Ed.) Great Powers and Geopolitics International Affairs in a Rebalancing World, (pp. 231-252). Springer.
17. Guzansky, Y. (2015). The foreign-policy tools of small powers: Strategic hedging in the Persian Gulf. Middle East Policy, 22(1), 112-122. https://doi.org/10.1111/mepo.12117
18. Harutyunyan, A. A. (2022). China-Kazakhstan: Cooperation within The Belt and Road and Nurly Zhol. Asian Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, 16(3), 281-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/25765949.2022.2128135
19. Hoering, U. (2018). China’s Long March 2.0-The Belt and Road Initiative as Development Model. VSA: Verlag.
20. Hopf, T. (1998). The promise of constructivism in international relations theory. International Security, 23(1), 171-200. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539267
21. International Trade Centre. (2024). List of supplying markets for a product imported/exported by Kazakhstan. Retrieved from: https://www.trademap.org/Country_SelProductCountry_TS.aspx. (Accessed on: 10.03.2025)
22. Joshi, Y. & Pant, H. V. (2015). Indo-Japanese strategic partnership and power transition in Asia. India Review, 14(3), 312-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2015.1066215
23. Kanapıyanova, Z. (2019). History of the energy sector development and Kazakhstan’s energy potential. Eurasian Research Journal, 1(2), 25-38.
24. Karataş, Ç. Ç. & Oral, E. Z. (2007). Uluslararası ulaştırma koridorlarında Türkiye’nin stratejik rolü. Stratejik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(9), 55-65.
25. Kazantsev, A. et al. (2021). Between Russia and China: Central Asia in greater Eurasia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 12(1), 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1879366521998242
26. Keliwaal, N. A. & Mubariz, A. S. (2024). International North-South Transport Corridor opportunities, challenges, and the role of Afghanistan. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(11), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i11.8208
27. Keskin Köylü, M. (2018). Türkiye Kazakistan ticari ilişkilerinin geliştirilmesi ve önemi. Social Sciences Studies Journal (SSSJournal), 4(19), 2381-2386. http://dx.doi.org/10.26449/sssj.631
28. Khan, S. (2021). INSTC (International North South Transport Corridor) connecting Eurasia and India. EURAS Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), 43-60.
29. Konopelko, A. (2018). Eurasian Economic Union: a challenge for EU policy towards Kazakhstan. Asia Europe Journal, 16(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-017-0480-7
30. Koga, K. (2018). The concept of “Hedging” revisited: The case of Japan’s foreign policy strategy in East Asia’s power shift. International Studies Review, 20(4), 633-660. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/vix059
31. Kuchins, A. et al. (2015). Central Asia in a reconnecting Eurasia: Kazakhstan’s evolving foreign economic and security interests. Center for Strategic and International Studies.
32. Kuik, C. (2008). The essence of hedging: Malaysia and Singapore’s response to a rising China. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 30(2), 159-185. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41220503
33. Kuik, C. & Gilbert, R. (2015). Facing Reality in East Asia: Tough Decisions on Competition and Cooperation. Korea Economic Institute of America.
34. Laruelle. M. (2019). Untangling the puzzle of “Russia’s influence” in Kazakhstan. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 60(2), 211-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2019.1645033
35. Leng, T. (2017). Small state diplomacy: Cambodia’s foreign policy towards Vietnam.” The Pacific Review, 30(3), 328-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2016.1239128
36. Liu, W. & Dunford, M. (2016). Inclusive globalization: unpacking China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Area Development and Policy, 1(3), 323-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/23792949.2016.1232598
37. Medeiros, E. S. (2005). Strategic hedging and the future of Asia‐Pacific stability.” The Washington Quarterly, 29(1), 145-167. https://doi.org/10.1162/016366005774859724
38. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (Rev. ed.). Jossey-Bass.
39. Middle Corridor. (2025). General Meeting of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR) Association Held in Baku. Middle Corridor, Retrieved from: https://middlecorridor.com/en/press-center/news/04-03-2025 (Accessed on: 08.05.2025)
40. Nurgaliyeva, L. (2016). Kazakhstan’s economic soft balancing policy vis-à-vis Russia: From the Eurasian Union to the economic cooperation with Turkey. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 7(1), 92-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2015.10.008
41. Outzen, R. (2023). Strategic Depths: The Russia-Iran Relationship and Its Implications for U.S. Policy in the Middle East. The Central Asia-Caucasus.
42. Ovalı, S. & Çelik K. (2007). Türk Dünyası ve TRACECA Projesi. Journal of Azerbaijani Studies, 12(1), 153-179.
43. Pape, R. A. (2005). Soft Balancing against the United States. International Security, 30(1), 7-45. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4137457
44. Raimbekov, Z.et al. (2019). The effectiveness of logistics development and its impact on the economies of the countries along the Silk Road passing through Kazakhstan. Transport Problems. 13(4), 127–142. DOI: 10.20858/tp.2018.13.4.12
45. Rakipoğlu, M. (2023). Dış Politikada Korunma (Hedging) Stratejisi: Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Suudi Arabistan’ın ABD, Çin Ve Rusya ile İlişkileri. NEÜ Yayınları.
46. Satubaldina, A. (2024). Close-Up look at Kazakhstan’s foreign trade: China becomes top trade partner, as non-commodity exports to Asia rise.” The Astana Times, Retrieved from: https://astanatimes.com/2024/02/close-up-look-at-kazakhstans-foreign-trade-china-becomes-top-trade-partner-as-non-commodity-exports-to-asia-rise/ (Accessed on: 10.09.2024)
47. Schindler, S. & Kanai, J. M. (2021). Getting the territory right: Infrastructure-led development and the re-emergence of spatial planning strategies. Regional Studies, 55(1), 40-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1661984
48. Shamshiyev, Y. (2019). “«Initsiativa Poyasa i putI» Kak Faktor Formirovaniya Tsentral’noy Yevrazii: Mesto i Rol’ Kazakhstana (The Belt and Road Initiative as a factor in the formation of Central Eurasia: The place and role of Kazakhstan).” Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 3(3), 137–151.
49. Smith, N. R. (2018). Strategic Hedging by Smaller Powers: What can Neoclassical Realism Add?. Re-Appraising Neoclassical Realism Workshop, London School of Economics.
50. Tessman, B. F. & Wolfe, W. (2011). Great powers and strategic hedging: The case of Chinese energy security strategy. International Studies Review, 13(2), 214-240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2486.2011.01022.x
51. The Russian News Agency (TASS). (2014). Railway line linking Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to Iran opened. The Russian News Agency (TASS). Retrieved from: https://tass.com/world/764933 (Accessed on: 10.09.2024)
52. The Astana Times. (2024). President Tokayev: Kazakhstan Continues Constructive, Balanced Foreign Policy Considering National Interests. The Astana Times, Retrieved from: https://astanatimes.com/2024/01/president-tokayev-kazakhstan-continues-constructive-balanced-foreign-policy-considering-national-interests/ (Accessed on: 22.08.2025)
53. The National Bank. (2024). Balance of payments and external debt of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Retrieved from: https://www.nationalbank.kz/ru/news/platezhnyy-balans (Accessed on: 19.03.2025)
54. TRACECA. (2024). Kazakhstan aims to develop priority areas of the strategy of TRACECA. TRACECA, Retrieved from: https://traceca-org.org/tj/countries/azerbaijan/news-detail/n/kazakhstan_nacelen_na_razvitie_prioritetnykh_napravlen/ (Accessed on: 26.01.2025)
55. UNCTAD. (2023). World Investment Report 2023. United Nations Publications.
56. UN News Global Perpective Human Stories. (2016). Sweden, Bolivia, Ethiopia and Kazakhstan elected to Security Council.” UN News Global Perpective Human Stories, Retrieved from: https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/533342-sweden-bolivia-ethiopia-and-kazakhstan-elected-security-council (Accessed on: 10.08.2024)
57. Uslu, N. (2024). Central Asia in regional and global policies of Russia and China. bilig, no. 111, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.12995/bilig.11101
58. Ussenov, Z. (2016). Europe and Kazakhstan: A trade link made in heaven.” The Astana Times, Retrieved from: https://astanatimes.com/2016/09/europe-and-kazakhstan-a-trade-link-made-in-heaven/ (Accessed on: 30.08.2024)
59. Üzümcü, A. & Akdeniz, S. (2014). Yeni İpek Yolu: TRACECA ve Bakü-Tiflis-Kars Demiryolu Projesi. Avrasya Etüdleri, 45(1), 171-199.
60. Wang, D. (2015). Is China trying to push the US out of East Asia?, China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 1(1), 59-84. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2377740015500049
61. Wani, A. (2024). The Middle Corridor: Reviving Connectivity for EU-Central Asia Trade and India’s Strategic Imperative. Occasional Paper, no. 449.
62. Vinokurov, E. et al. (2021). The International North–South Transport Corridor: Promoting Eurasia’s Intra and Transcontinental Connectivity. Eurasian Development Bank. Report 21/5.
63. Vinokurov, E. et. al. (2022). International North–South Transport Corridor: Boosting Russia’s “pivot to the South” and TransEurasian connectivity. Russian Journal of Economics, 8(2), 159–173. https://doi.org/10.32609/j.ruje.8.86617
64. Yermekbayev, A. et al. (2024). Trans-Caspian International Transport Route: A Kazakhstani perspective on challenges, opportunities, and prospects. International Journal, 79(2), 312–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020241257636
65. Zhumanov, A. et al. (2024). Trans-Caspian International Transport Route infrastructure assessment using simulation modelling. Transport and Telecommunication, 25(1), 11–19. DOI: 10.2478/ttj-2024-0002
66. Zhunısbek, A. (2019). Russia’s Policy in Central Asia during the Putin era. Eurasian Research Journal, 1(2), 39-50