Uluslararası Arabuluculuğa Dair Değişen Yaklaşımlar ve Türkiye’nin Arabuluculuğun Dönüşümündeki Rolünün İncelenmesi

Öz

Bir çatışma yönetimi formu olarak uluslararası arabuluculuk, eski çağlardan bu yana yaygın biçimde kullanılan bir üçüncü taraf müdahalesidir. 21. yüzyılla birlikte, çatışmaların değişen nitelikleri, aktörlerin çeşitlenmesi ve artan uluslararası bilinç gibi nedenlerle uluslararası arabuluculuğa dair geleneksel yöntemler etkinliğini kaybetmeye başlamıştır. Bu süreçte, uluslararası arabuluculuk kuramsal ve kurumsal bazda yeniden ele alınmış ve başta çok aktörlü arabuluculuk olmak üzere, yeni yaklaşımlar, uluslararası arabuluculuğa dahil edilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, değişen arabuluculuk anlayışı incelenmekte ve bu süreçte Türkiye’nin yeni yaklaşımların kurumsal düzenlemelere dahil edilmesindeki rolü analiz edilmektedir. Çalışma, Türkiye’nin bölgesel ve küresel çapta etkin arabuluculuğun kurumsallaşması hususunda önemli bir etkiye sahip olduğunu ileri sürmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çatışma yönetimi
• Uluslararası arabuluculuk
• Çok aktörlü arabuluculuk
• Etkin arabuluculuk
• Türkiye

Changing Perspectives on International Mediation and Assesment of the Turkey’s Role of the Transformation of Mediation

Öz

International mediation as a form of conflict management is a third-party intervention that has been widely used since ancient times. With the 21st century, traditional methods of international mediation began to lose their effectiveness due to reasons such as changing characteristics of conflicts, diversification of actors and increased international awareness. In this process, international mediation is reconsidered on a theoretical and institutional basis and new approaches, especially multi-actor mediation, are included in international mediation. In this study, the changing concept of mediation is examined and the role of Turkey in including new approach into institutional arrangements in this process is analyzed. The study argues that Turkey has a significant impact on institutionalization of effective mediation processes in regional and global scale.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Conflict management
• International mediation
• Multi-actor mediation
• Effective mediation
• Turkey

Kaynakça

1. Akçapar, B. (2019). “Policy Entrepreneurship in International Peace Mediation: A Study of Turkey's Role at the UN, OSCE, and OIC”. Center on International Cooperation, New York University.
2. Akyeşilmen, N. (2014). “Çatışma Yönetimi: Kavramsal ve Kuramsal bir Analiz”, N. Akyeşilmen (Ed.), Barışı Konuşmak: Teori ve Pratikte Çatışma Yönetimi. Ankara: Odtü Yayıncılık, 18-44.
3. Anadolu Ajansı. “Çavuşoğlu: Türkiye ara buluculuk gündemini zenginleştirmeye devam edecek”, 01.11.2019, https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/politika/cavusoglu-turkiye-ara-buluculuk-gundemini-zenginlestirmeye-devam-edecek/1632602 (erişim tarihi:23.04.2020).
4. Aras, B. (2012). “Turkey’s Mediation and Friends of Mediation Initiative”, SAM Papers. No. 4.
5. Assefa, H. (1987). Mediation of civil wars: Approaches and strategies-The Sudan conflict. Boulder, CO: Westview.
6. Azhar, H. (2019). “The OIC and Conflict Resolution: Norms and Practical Challenges”, M. J. Petersen ve T. Kayaoğlu. (Ed.). The Organization of Islamic Cooperation and Human Rights, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
7. Barnes, B. E. (2016). “The Roles of Culture: Muslim Country Leaders, NGOs, and European Small-Country Leaders as International Mediators in Southeast Asia”. I. Macduff. (Ed.). Essays on Mediaton: Dealing with Disputes in the 21st Century. Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer.
8. Beardsley, K. (2008). “Agreement without peace? International mediation and time inconsistency problems”. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4): 723-740.

9. Beardsley, K. (2011). The Mediation Dilemma. New York: Cornell University Press.
10. Beber, B. (2012). “International Mediation, Selection Effects, and the Question of Bias”. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 29(4): 397-424.
11. Bercovitch, J. (1984). Social conflicts and third parties: Strategies of conflict resolution. Boulder, CO: Westview.
12. Bercovitch, J. (1991). “International mediation and dispute settlement: Evaluating the conditions for successful mediation”. Negotiation Journal, 7(1):17-30.
13. Bercovitch, J. ve Gartner, S. (ed.). (2009). International Conflict Mediation: New Approaches and Findings, New York: Routledge.
14. Bercovitch, J. Ve Rubin, J. Z. (ed.). (1992). Mediation in international relations: Multiple approaches to conflict management. London: St. Martin's.
15. Bercovitch, J., Anagnoson, J. T. ve Wille, D. (1991). “Some conceptual issues and empirical trends in the study of successful mediation in international relations”. Journal of Peace Research, 28(1):7-17.
16. Beriker, N. (2016). “United States's Grand Strategy and the Middle Power Policy: Turkey as a Mediator”, D. U. Eralp (Ed.) Turkey as a Mediator: Stories of Success and Failure. Maryland: Lexington Books, 1-24.
17. Burton, J. W. (1969). Conflict and communication: The use of controlled communication in international relations. London: MacMillan.
18. Chataway, C. J. (1998). “Track II Diplomacy: From a Track I Perspective”. Negotiation Journal, 14(3): 269-287.
19. Crocker, C.A., Hampson, F.O. ve Aall, P.R. (1999). Herding Cats: Multiparty Mediation in a Complex World, Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
20. Cunningham, D.E. (2010). “Blocking Resolution: How External States Can Prolong Civil Wars”, Journal of Peace Resolution, 47(2):115-127.
21. Davutoğlu, A. (2013). “Turkey’s Mediation: Critical Reflections from the Field”, Middle East Policy, 20 (1):83-90.
22. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. (2019). “BM Arabuluculuk Dostlar Grubunun 10. Bakanlar Toplantısı Hk.”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/no_278_-bm-arabuluculuk-dostlar-grubunun-onuncu-bakanlar-toplantisi-hk.tr.mfa (erişim tarihi:03.01.2020).
23. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. “17 Mayıs 2010 tarihli Türkiye, İran ve Brezilya Dışişleri Bakanları Ortak Deklarasyonu”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/17-mayis-2010-tarihli-turkiye_-iran-brezilya-disisleri-bakanlari-ortak-deklarasyonu.tr.mfa (erişim tarihi:26.04.2020).
24. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. “Summary report of the Sixth Istanbul Conference on Mediation”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/site_media/html/uyusmazliklarin-cozumu-ve-arabuluculuk/6._Istanbul_Arabuluculuk_Konferansi_Sonuc_%20Raporu_EK7-EN.pdf (erişim tarihi:04.01.2020).
25. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. “Summary report of the Third OIC Member States Conference on Mediation”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/site_media/html/uyusmazliklarin-cozumu-ve-arabuluculuk/IIT_Uyesi_Ulkeler_Ucuncu_Arabuluculuk_Konferansi_Sonuc_Raporu_EK10-EN.pdf (erişim tarihi:05.01.2020).
26. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. “Temel Dış Politika Konuları”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/sub.tr.mfa?eddda31b-595f-4e2d-b1d7-78ef1d689583 (erişim tarihi:01.01.2020).
27. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. “Türkiye-Filipinler İlişkileri”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkiye-kanada-siyasi-iliskileri_.tr.mfa (erişim tarihi:24.04.2020).
28. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. “Türkiye'nin Girişimci ve İnsani Dış Politikası”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/dis-politika-genel.tr.mfa (erişim tarihi:06.01.2020).
29. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. “Uyuşmazlıkların Çözümü ve Arabuluculuk”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/uyusmazliklarin-cozumu-ve-arabuluculuk.tr.mfa (erişim tarihi: 02.01.2020).
30. Duursma, A. (2014). “A current literature review of international mediation”, International Journal of Conflict Management, 25(1):81-98.
31. Eralp, D. U. (ed.). (2016). "Turkey as a Mediator: Stories of Success and Failure", Maryland: Lexington Books.
32. Gent, S. E. ve Shannon, M. (2011). “Bias and effectiveness of third-party conflict management mechanisms”, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 28(2):124-144.
33. Greig, J.M. ve Regan, P.M. (2008), “When do they say yes? An analysis of the willingness to offer and accept mediation in civil wars”, International Studies Quarterly, 52(4):759-781.
34. Hansen, M. (2012). “Parallel Mediation: Ordering the Chaos of Multiparty Mediation”, International Negotiation, 17(2):237-263.
35. Heemsbergen, L. ve Siniver, A. (2011). “New Routes to Power: Towards a Typology of Power Mediation”, Review of International Studies, 37(3):1169–1190.
36. Iji, T. (2017). “The UN as an International Mediator: From the Post-Cold War Era to the Twenty-first Century”, Global Governance, 23(1):83-100.
37. İstanbul Mediation. http://www.istanbulmediation.org/ (erişim tarihi:23.04.2020).
38. Jabri, V. 1990. Mediating conflict. Decision-making and western intervention in Namibia. New York: Manchester University Press.
39. Kaldor, M. (2012). New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era, Cambridge: Polity Press.
40. Kleiboer, M. (1996). “Understanding Success and Failure of International Mediation”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 40(2):360-389.
41. Kydd, A. (2006). “When can mediators build trust?”, The American Political Science Review, 100(3):449-462.
42. Lederach, J. P. (2005). The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace. Cambridge: Oxford University Press.
43. Mitchell, C . R., ve Webb, K. (ed.). (1988). New approaches to international mediation. New York: Greenwood.
44. Moore, C. W. (1987). The mediation process. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
45. OIC. “Report of the First Meeting of the OIC Contact Group of Friends of Mediation”, September 2018, https://www.oic-oci.org/docdown/?docID=3342&refID=1167 (erişim tarihi:23.04.2020).
46. OIC. “Summary Report The Third OIC Member States Conference On Mediation”, 2019, http://3iitarabuluculukkonferansi.istanbulmediation.org/upload/files/OIC-Conference-Report-.pdf (erişim tarihi:23.04.2020).
47. Özdemirci, A. S. (2014). Türk Basınına Göre İran-Irak Savaşında Türkiye’nin Arabuluculuk Faaliyetleri (1980-1988). Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi Ortadoğu Araştırmaları Enstitüsü.
48. Parlar Dal, E. (2018). “Assessing Turkey’s changing conflict management role after the Cold War: actorness, approaches and tools”, Third World Quarterly, 39(12):2291-2314.
49. Princen, T. (1992). Intermediaries in international conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
50. Rauchhaus, R. (2006). “Asymmetric information, mediation, and conflict management”, World Politics, 58(2):207-241.
51. Raymond, G . A. (1994). “Democracies, disputes, and third-party intermediaries”. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 38(1):24-42.
52. Raymond, G . A., ve C. W. Kegley, Jr. (1985). “Third party mediation and international norms: A test of two models”, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 9(1):33-51.
53. Richmond, O. (1998). “Devious objectives and the disputants’ view of international mediation: a theoretical framework”, Journal of Peace Research, 35(6):707-722.
54. Rocha, J. P. (2019). “The Changing Nature of International Mediation”. Global Policy, 10(2):101-107.
55. Rubin,J . Z. (ed.). (1981). Dynamics of third party intervention: Kissinger in the Middle East. New York: Praeger.
56. Savun, B. (2008). “Information, Bias, and Mediation Success”. International Studies Quarterly, 52(1):25-47.
57. Sazak, O. ve Woods, A. E. (2017). “Breaking with Convention: Turkey’s New Approach to Peacebuilding”, C. T. Call ve C. Coning (Ed.). Rising Powers and Peacebuilding: Breaking the Mold?. New york: Palgrave Macmillan, 93-106.
58. Sisk, T. (2009). International Mediation in Civil Wars: Bargaining with Bullets, New York: Routledge.
59. Smith, W. P. (1985). “Effectiveness of the biased mediator”, Negotiation Journal, 1:363-372.
60. Stein, J. (1985). “Structures, strategies and tactics of mediation: Kissinger and Carter in the Middle East”, Negotiation Journal, 1:331-347.
61. Stenelo, L. (1972). Mediation in international negotiations, Malmo: Nordems Boktryckeri.
62. Svensson, I. (2007). “Mediation with muscles or minds? Exploring power mediators and püre mediators in civil wars”, International negotiation, 12(2):229-248.
63. Touval, S. ve Zartman I. W. (2006). “International Mediation in the Post- Cold War Era,” C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson ve P. R. Aall. (Ed.). Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflicts, Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
64. Touval, S. ve Zartman, I. W. (ed.). (1985). International mediation in theory and practice. Boulder, C O: Westview.
65. UN Peacemaker. “Co-Chairs’ Summary United Nations Group of Friends of Mediation 10th Ministerial Meeting New York”, September 2019, https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UNGroupOfFriendsOfMediation-10thMinisterialMeeting.pdf (erişim taihi:23.04.2020).
66. UN Peacemaker. “Statement on Behalf of the Group of Friends of Mediation”, September 2012a, https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/20120913_FoM%20Statement_SG%20Report%20and%20Guidance%20on%20Effective%20Mediation.pdf (erişim tarihi:23.04.2020).
67. UN Peacemaker. “UN Guidance for Effective Mediation”, July 2012b, https://www.peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/EtkinArabuluculukRehberi_UNDPA2012_0.pdf (erişim tarihi:07.01.2020).
68. UN. (2011). “Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly at its 65th session”, A/RES/65/283, https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/65/283. (erişim tarihi:06.01.2020).
69. UN. (2012). “Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly at its 66th session”, A/RES/66/291, https://undocs.org/en/%20A/RES/66/291 (erişim tarihi:06.01.2020).
70. UN. (2014). “Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly at its 68th session”, A/RES/68/303, https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/68/303 (erişim tarihi:06.01.2020).
71. UN. (2016). “Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly at its 70th session”, A/RES/70/3034 https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/70/304 (erişim tarihi:06.01.2020).
72. Vukovic, S. (2015). International Multiparty Mediation and Conflict Management: Challenges of Cooperation and Coordination. London: Routledge.
73. Vukovic, S. (2019). “International Multiparty Mediation: Prospects for a Coordinated Effort”. Global Policy, 10(2):76-83.
74. Wall, J. (1981). “Mediation: An analysis, review and proposed research”. Journal of Conflict Resolution 25(1):157-180.
75. Wall, J., Stark, J. ve Standifer, R. (2001). “Mediation: a current review and theory development”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45(3):370-391.
76. Werner, S. ve Yuen, A. (2005). “Making and Keeping Peace”, International Organization, 59(2):261-292.
77. Young, R. (1967). Intermediaries: Third parties in international crises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
78. Zartman, I. W. ve Alfredson, T. (2010). “Negotiating with Terrorists and the Tactical Question”, R. Reuveny ve W. R. Thompson (Ed.), Coping with Terrorism: Origins, Escalation, Counterstrategies, and Responses. New York: SUNY Press, 247-286.
79. Zartman, I. W. ve S. Touval. (1985). “International mediation: Conflict resolution and power politics”. Journal of Social Issues, 41(2):27-45.
80. Zartman, W. (2008). “The timing of peace initiatives: hurting stalemates and ripe moments”, J. Darby ve R. MacGinty (Ed.), Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict, Peace Processes and Post-War Reconstruction, New York: Palgrave MacMillan.