AKTÖR-MERKEZLİ SOSYALLEŞME VE BATI-DIŞI NORMATİFLİK ÜZERİNE BİR İNCELEME: TÜRKİYE’NİN ŞİÖ ÜYELİĞİNİ TARTIŞMAK

Öz

Uluslararası İlişkiler’de sosyalleşme çalışmaları sosyalleşme süreçlerinde yapı’nın önceliğine odaklanmış ve özneleri normlar, roller ve ilkelerin pasif kabul edicileri olarak tahayyül etmiştir. Bu ele alış aktörün sosyalleşmedeki etkin müdahilliği ve bilinçli tercih ihtimallerini yok saydığı için eleştirilmektedir. İlgili eleştirel yaklaşımı benimseyerek, bu çalışma, odağı yapı’dan özneye kaydırmanın ve sosyalleşme ortamlarında özneleri normların ve rollerin pasif değil etkin benimseyicileri olarak düşünmenin imkanlarını incelemektedir. Çalışma ayrıca sosyalleşme sürecinde normatif alternatifliklerin inşasını tartışmakta, Batı-dışı normatifliklere yönelik gösterilen yok sayma eğilimini eleştirmektedir. Çalışma, Türkiye’nin Şanghay İşbirliği Örgütü (ŞİÖ)’ne üyelik istekliliği tartışmalarını ve ŞİÖ’nün Batı-dışı bir sosyal ortam olarak normatif alternatifliğinin inşasını vaka incelemesi olarak almaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyalleşme,Normatif Alternatiflik,ŞİÖ,Türkiye,Dış Politika

A Research on Agent-Centred Socialization and Non-Western Normativities - Discussing Turkey’s Membership to SCO

Öz

Socialization research in International Relations is dominated by studies focusing on the structure’s primacy in the socialization process, considering agents as passive recipients of relevant norms, roles and principles. This study elaborates the possibilities of shifting focus in IR research from structure to agent in socialization and of thinking of agents as active adopters of norms and roles other than passive exposees to them in socialization context. The paper moreover discusses the construction of normative alternativities during socialization and raises a critique to the disregard shown to non-Western normativities. The research takes the discussions of Turkey’s willingness to membership to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the relevant political discourses of building it as the normative alternative of Western social environments as a case study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Socialization,Normative alternativity,SCO,Turkey’s foreign policy

Kaynakça

1. “AP’deki kritik oylama bitti! İşte Türkiye kararı”, Milliyet, http://www.milliyet.com.tr/ap-de-sonucu-belli-turkiye-dunya-2350271/, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09.2017).
2. “Azmim sürüyor, umudum azalıyor”, Habertürk, http://www.haberturk.com/gundem/haber/790679-azmim-suruyor-umudum-azaliyor, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09. 2017).
3. “Başbakan Yıldırım: AP’nin kararının bizim için hiçbir önemi yok”, BBC Türkçe, http://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-dunya-38090536, (Erişim Tarihi: 21.09.2017).
4. “Bizi de Şangay Beşlisi’ne alın”, Milliyet, http://www.milliyet.com.tr/bizi-de-sangay-beslisi-ne-alin--siyaset-1571936/, (Erişim Tarihi: 16.08.2017).
5. “China and the SCO: Turkey looks East for security cooperation alternatives”, MERICS, http://blog.merics.org/en/blog-post/2017/07/14/china-and-the-sco-turkey-looks-east-for-security-cooperation-alternatives, (Erişim Tarihi: 31. 09.2017).
6. “Çavuşoğlu, Çin’de: Tek Çin Politikası’na en büyük destek veren ülkelerden biriyiz”, Sputnik, https://tr.sputniknews.com/asya/201708031029547437-cavusoglu-cin-politika-destek/, (Erişim Tarihi: 21.09.2017).
7. “Çin: Türkiye, Şanghay İşbirliği Örgütü’ne üyelik başvurusu yaparsa değerlendiririz”, BBC Türkçe, http://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-dunya-38051010, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09.2017).
8. “Erdoğan-Nazarbayev ortak basın toplantısı”, Habertürk, http://www.haberturk.com/yerel-haberler/haber/9113859-erdogan-nazarbayev-ortak-basin-toplantisi, (Erişim Tarihi: 21.09.2017).

9. “Erdoğan’dan flaş AP açıklaması: Oylamanın kıymeti yok”, Hürriyet, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/erdogandan-flas-ap-aciklamasi-40285800, (Erişim Tarihi: 25.09.2017).
10. “Erdoğan, TBMM açılış konuşmasında konuştu: AB’ye ihtiyacımız kalmadı”, Cumhuriyet, http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/siyaset/835667/Erdogan__TBMM_nin_acilis_toreninde_konustu__AB_ye_ihtiyacimiz_kalmadi.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 31.10.2017).
11. “Erdoğan: ‘Şanghay Beşlisi içerisinde Türkiye niye olmasın?’ diyorum”, Sputnik, https://tr.sputniknews.com/turkiye/201611201025892702-erdogan-ab-sanghay-beslisi/, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09.2017).
12. “Jirinovski: Türkiye ŞİÖ’ye bir an önce üye yapılmalı”, Sputnik, https://tr.sputniknews.com/rusya/201706101028837129-turkiye-sio-jirinovski/, (Erişim Tarihi: 21.09.2017).
13. “Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu’ndan Şangay 5’lisi yorumu: Hayal peşinde koşuyorlar”, Habertürk, http://www.haberturk.com/gundem/haber/1328357-kemal-kilicdaroglundan-sangay-5lisi-yorumu-hayal-pesinde-kosuyorlar, (Erişim Tarihi: 21.09.2017).
14. “Kırgızistan’dan ‘Şanghay’ açıklaması: Türkiye’nin kararı doğru”, Yeni Şafak, http://www.yenisafak.com/dunya/kirgizistandan-sanghay-aciklamasi-turkiyenin-karari-dogru-2568158, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09.2017).
15. “Op/Ed: Turkey’s SCO-bid – different this time?”, AMN, https://mobile.almasdarnews.com/article/oped-turkeys-sco-bid-different-time/, (Erişim Tarihi: 31.09.2017).
16. “Şangay Beşlisi’ne alın AB’yi unutalım”, Hürriyet, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/sangay-beslisine-alin-abyi-unutalim-22448548, (Erişim Tarihi: 20.08. 2017).
17. “Şanghay 5’lisi çıkışı bir şantaj”, BİRGÜN, https://www.birgun.net/haber-detay/sanghay-5-lisi-cikisi-bir-santaj-136380.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09.2017).
18. “Turkey Looks to China for Security Cooperation Alternatives”, GMF, www.gmfus.org/publications/turkey-looks-china-security-cooperation-alternatives, (Erişim Tarihi: 31.09.2017).
19. “Türkiye, Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü’yle diyalog ortağı”, BBC Türkçe, http://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler/2013/04/130426_sio_turkiye_anlasma, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09.2017).
20. “Türkiye’nin AB yolu: Sonun başlangıcı mı?”, BBC Türkçe, http://www.bbc.com/turkce/38061153, (Erişim Tarihi: 09.09.2017).
21. “Türkiye, Şanghay İşbirliği Örgütü’ne girmek istiyor”, Hürriyet, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/turkiye-sanghay-isbirligi-orgutu-ne-girmek-istiyor-288508, (Erişim Tarihi: 15.08.2017).
22. “Генеральный секретарь ШОС встретился с Чрезвычайным и Полномочным Послом Турецкой Республики в КНР А.М.Эрсоем”, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, rus.sectsco.org/news/20161209/169994.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 25.09.2017).
23. ACHARYA, Amitav, “Democratisation and the Prospects for Participatory Regionalism in Southeast Asia”, Third World Quarterly, Cilt: 24, Sayı: 2, 2003, s. 375-390.
24. ACHARYA, Amitav, “How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism,” International Organization, Cilt: 58, 2004, s. 239-275.
25. ACHARYA, Amitav, “Ideas, identity, and institution‐building: From the ‘ASEAN way’ to the ‘Asia‐Pacific way'?”, The Pacific Review, Cilt: 10, Sayı: 3, 1997, s. 319-346.
26. ALAMGIR, J, “Against the Current: The Survival of Authoritarianism in Burma”, Pacific Affairs, Cilt: 70, Sayı: 3, 1997, s. 333-350.
27. AMBROSIO, Thomas, “Catching the ‘Shanghai Spirit’: How the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Promotes Authoritarian Norms in Central Asia”, Europe-Asia Studies, Cilt: 60, Sayı: 8, 2008, s. 1321-1344.
28. ARIS, Stephen, “A new model of Asian regionalism: does the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation have more potential than ASEAN?”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Cilt: 22, Sayı: 3, 2009, s. 451-467.
29. ARIS, Stephen, “The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation: ‘Tackling the Three Evils’. A Regional Response to Non-traditional Security Challenges or an Anti-Western Bloc?”, Europe-Asia Studies, Cilt: 61, Sayı: 3, 2009, s. 457-482.
30. ARIS, Stephen, Eurasian Regionalism: The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Palgrave, London 2011.
31. ARIS, Stephen-Aglaya Snetkov, “Global alternatives, regional stability and common causes: the international politics of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and its relationship to the West”, Eurasian Geography and Economics, Cilt: 54, Sayı: 2, 2013, s. 202-226.
32. ASEAN, http://asean.org/treaty-amity-cooperation-southeast-asia-indonesia-24-february-1976/, (Erişim Tarihi: 31. 08. 2017).
33. ATKINSON, Carol, “Constructivist Implications of Material Power: Military Engagement and the Socialization of States, 1972–2000”, International Studies Quarterly, Cilt: 50, Sayı: 3, 2006, s. 509-537.
34. BA, Alice, “Who’s Socializing Whom? Complex Engagement in Sino-ASEAN Relations”, The Pacific Review, Cilt: 19, 2006, s. 157-179.
35. BAILES, Alyson J. K.-Pál Dunay, “The Shanghai Cooperation Organization as a regional security institution”, Alyson J. K. Bailes vd., der., The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, SIPRI Policy Paper, Sayı: 17, 2007, s. 6.
36. BAILES, Alyson J.K., “The Shanghai Cooperation Organization and Europe,” China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly, Cilt: 5, Sayı: 3: 2007, s. 13-18.
37. BEARCE, David H.-Stacy Bondanella, “Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence”, International Organization, Cilt: 61, Sayı: 4, 2007, s. 703-733.
38. BENNER, Thorstein, “Brazil as a norm entrepreneur: the ‘Responsibility While Protecting’ Initiative”, Global Public Policy, Institute Working Paper, 2013.
39. BJÖRKDAHL, Annika, “Towards a Reflexive Study of Norms, Norm Diffusion and Identity (Re)construction: The Transformative Power of the EU in the Western Balkans”, Canterbury Law Review, Cilt: 18, Sayı: 2, 2012, s. 79-96.
40. BLAKEMORE, Scott, “Chinese regionalism: China’s engagement with ASEAN and SCO”, The Culture Mandala-The Bulletin of the Centre for East-West Cultural and Economic Studies, Cilt: 11, Sayı: 1, 2014, s. 22-28.
41. CHECKEL, Jeffrey T., “International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework”, International Organization, Cilt: 59, Sayı: 4, 2005, s. 801-826.
42. COOLEY, Alexander, The Great Games, Local Rules: The New Great Power Contest in Central Asia, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2012.
43. ÇANDAR, Cengiz, “Türk Dış Politikasında “Eksen” Tartışmaları: Çok Kutuplu Dünya İçin Yeni Bir Vizyon”, SETA Analiz, Cilt: 16, 2010, s. 1-12.
44. EKREM, Erkin, “Türkiye’nin Şanghay İşbirliği Örgütü Üyeliği”, SDE, http://www.sde.org.tr/tr/authordetail/-turkiyenin-sanghay-isbirligi-orgutu-uyeligi/1107, (Erişim Tarihi: 15.08.2017).
45. EPSTEIN, Charlotte, “Stop Telling Us How to Behave: Socialization or Infantilization?”, International Studies Perspectives, Cilt: 13, 2012, s. 134-145.
46. ERŞEN, Emre, “The Shanghai Cooperation Organization: A New Alternative for Turkish Foreign Policy?”, Middle East Institute, http://www.mei.edu/content/shanghai-cooperation-organization-new-alternative-turkish-foreign-policy, (Erişim Tarihi: 31.09.2017).
47. FINNEMORE, Martha, “International Organizations as Teachers of Norms: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and Science Policy”, International Organization, Cilt: 47, Sayı: 4, 1993, s. 565-597.
48. FINNEMORE, Martha-Kathryn Sikkink, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change”, International Organization, Cilt: 52, 1998, s. 887-917.
49. FLOCKHART, Trine, “Masters and Novices’: Socialization and Social Learning through the NATO Parliamentary Assembly”, International Relations, Cilt: 18, 2004, s. 361-380.
50. FLOCKHART, Trine, Socializing Democratic Norms: The Role of International Organizations for the Construction of Europe, Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2005.
51. GHECIU, Alexandra, “Security Institutions as Agents of Socialization? NATO and the ‘New Europe’”, International Organization, Cilt: 59, 2005, s. 982-983.
52. GILLEY, Bruce, “The Spirit of Shanghai: Foreign Policy Coordination Against Democracy Movements within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and Implications for U.S. Policy, Report by Portland State University Taskforce on US Democracy Promotion and Assistance Policies”, 2010, https://www.pdx.edu/sites/www.pdx.edu.hatfieldschool/files/media_assets/poli_sci/Bruce_Gilley_Report_Final_Shanghai.pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 10.10.2017).
53. HENG, Pek Koon, “The ‘ASEAN Way’ and Regional Security Cooperation in the South China Sea”, EUI Working Paper RSCAS, 121, 2014, s. 1-22.
54. IKENBERRY, John G.-Charles A. Kupchan, “Socialization and Hegemonic Power”, International Organization, Cilt: 44, 1990, s. 283-315.
55. İDİZ, Semih, “Are Turks Being Shanghaied”, 2013, www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/04/turkey-shanghai-cooperation-nato-eu.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 20.09.2017).
56. KARDAŞ, Şaban, “Türk Dış Politikasında Eksen Kayması mı?”, Akademik Orta Doğu, Cilt:5, Sayı: 2, 2011, s. 19-42.
57. KELLEY, Judith, “International Actors on the Domestic Scene: Membership Conditionality and Socialization by International Institutions”, International Organization, Cilt: 58, Sayı: 3, 2004, s. 425-457.
58. KUHONTA, E., “Walking a Tightrope: Democracy Versus Sovereignty in ASEAN’s Illiberal Peace”, The Pacific Review, Cilt: 19, Sayı: 3, 2006, s. 337-358.
59. PRANTL, Jochen, “The Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Legitimacy through (Self) Legitimation?”, Dominik Zaum, der., Legitimating International Organizations, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2013.
60. QINGXIN, Wang K., “Hegemony and Socialisation of the Mass Public: The Case of Postwar Japan’s Cooperation with the United States on China Policy”, Review of International Studies, Cilt: 29, 2003, s. 99-119.
61. ROY, Allison, “Virtual Regionalism, Regional Structures and Regime Security in Central Asia”, Central Asian Survey, Cilt: 27, Sayı: 2, 2008, s. 186.
62. SAFIULLIN, Ashkat, “The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and Security in Post-Soviet Central Asia”, Central European Journal of International & Security Studies, Cilt: 4, Sayı: 2, 2010, s. 41-57.
63. SCHIMMELFENNIG, Frank -Ulrich Sedelmeier, The Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe, Cornell University Press, Ithaca 2005;
64. SCHIMMELFENNIG, Frank, “Strategic Calculation and International Socialization”, International Organization, Cilt: 59, 2005, s. 827-860.
65. Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, “About SCO”, http://eng.sectsco.org/about_sco/, (Erişim Tarihi: 15.08.2017).
66. STEINHILPER, Elias, “From ‘the Rest’ to ‘the West’? Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Western Bias in Norm Diffusion Research”, International Studies Review, Cilt: 17, 2015.
67. TABAK, Hüsrev, “Sosyalleşme, Uluslararası İlişkiler ve Dış Politika”, Ertan Efegil, der, Dış Politika’da Sosyolojik Unsurların Rolü, Gündoğan Yayınları, İstanbul, 2017, s. 175-206.
68. T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı, “Şanhay İşbirliği Örgütü”, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/sanghay-isbirligi-orgutu.tr.mfa, (Erişim Tarihi: 15.08.2017).
69. THIES, Cameron G., “State Socialization and Structural Realism”, Security Studies, Cilt: 19, 2010, s. 703-714.
70. TOWNS, Ann, “Norms and Social Hierarchies: Understanding International Policy Diffusion From Below”, International Organization, Cilt: 66, Sayı: 2, 2012, s. 179-209.
71. ÜNGÖR, Çağdaş, “Turkey and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Few Shared Values and No Common Destiny”, Middle East Institute, www.mei.edu/content/turkey-and-shanghai-cooperation-organization-few-shared-values-and-no-common-destiny, (Erişim Tarihi: 10.09.2017).
72. WANG, Lina, “Will Turkey Join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Instead of the EU”, https://thediplomat.com/2016/11/will-turkey-join-the-shanghai-cooperation-organization-instead-of-the-eu/, (Erişim Tarihi: 25.09.2017).
73. WILSON, J.L., “The legacy of the color revolutions for Russian politics and foreign policy”, Problems of Post-Communism, Cilt: 57, Sayı: 2, 2010, s. 21-36.
74. XIAOYU, Pu, “Socialization as a Two-Way Process: Emerging Powers and the Diffusion of International Norms”, Chinese Journal of International Politics, Cilt: 5, 2012, s. 341-367.
75. XINHUANET, Chen Yue, “China welcomes SCO expansion, calls for upholding Shanghai Spirit”, news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-07/11/c_134402081.htm, (Erişim Tarihi: 18.09.2017).
76. ZARAKOL, Ayşe, “What made the modern world hang together: Socialization or stigmatization?”, International Theory, Cilt: 6, Sayı: 2, 2014, s. 311-332.