Türkiye’nin Yumuşak Güç Tezahürü Olarak Kutuplara Yönelik Bilimsel Araştırmaları

Öz

21. yüzyılın küresel ekonomisinde bilgi ve teknoloji üretimi ile bu üretimin ekonomik faydaya dönüşüm süreci, devletlerarası nispi güç dağılımında en önemli parametre haline gelmiştir. Küresel ekonomi pastasından daha büyük bir pay almayı hedefleyen Türkiye, etkin bir kamu diplomasisi yürütme gayretindedir. Bu görüşe paralel olarak ulusal ve uluslararası akademik ortaklıklarla yürütülen Türkiye’nin kutuplara yönelik bilimsel araştırmaları, çalışma kapsamında yumuşak güç ve kamu diplomasisi bağlamında irdelenecektir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, bilim diplomasisi perspektifinden, başarılı bir kamu diplomasisi faaliyeti olarak söz konusu araştırmaların uluslararası arenada Türkiye’nin yumuşak güç potansiyelini geliştirmeye yönelik olası katkılarını ortaya koymaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilim diplomasisi
• eğitim diplomasisi
• kamu diplomasisi
• Türk Kutup bilim seferleri
• yumuşak güç.

National Polar Research as a Manifestation of Turkey’s Soft Power

Öz

In the global economy of the 21st century, the production of information and technology and the process of its transformation into economic benefit have become the most important parameter in the relative distribution of power among states. Intending to have a larger share of the global economic pie, Turkey has been trying to conduct an efficient public diplomacy process. Turkish Polar Scientific Expeditions and Researches, which are conducted with national and international academic partnerships, are examined in the context of soft power and public diplomacy. The aim of this study is, as a successful public diplomacy case, to present the prospective contributions of these researches to Turkey’s soft power capacity from science diplomacy perspective.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Science diplomacy
• education diplomacy
• public diplomacy
• Turkish Polar Scientific Expeditions
• soft power.

Kaynakça

1. Akyılmaz, Güli. Osmanlı Diplomasisi ve Teşkilatı. Gül Yayınevi, 2000.
2. Anadolu Agency. Turkey’s Journey to the White Continent Antarctic Expeditions. Elma Printing, 2019.
3. Anderson, Alun. After the Ice: Life, Death, and Geopolitics in the New Arctic. Smithsonian, 2009.
4. Bachrach, Peter, and Baratz Morton. “Two Faces of Power.” The American Political Science Review, vol. 56, no.4, 1962, pp. 947-952.
5. Bennett, M. Mia. “How China Sees the Arctic: Reading Between Extraregional and Intraregional Narratives.” Geopolitics, vol. 20, no. 3, 2015, pp. 645-668.
6. Berkman, Paul Arthur et al. (Eds.). Science Diplomacy: Science, Antarctica and the Governance of International Spaces. Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, 2011.
7. Berkman, Paul Arthur et al. “The Arctic Science Agreement Propels Science Diplomacy.” Science, vol.3, no. 358, 2017, pp. 596-598.
8. Brown, Gordon. “Oxford Dersleri.” Romanes Lecture in Oxford. 27.02.2009, podcasts.ox.ac.uk/series/romanes-lecture (Accessed: 05.08.2020).

9. Büyüksağnak, Barbaros. “Kuzey Buz Denizi’ndeki Gelişmelerin Çin Deniz Taşımacılığına Etkisi.” II. International Academic Research Congress, 18-21 October, Antalya, 2017.
10. Carr, Edward Hallett. The Twenty Years’ Crisis. Harper and Row, 1964.
11. Cull, Nicholas. “Public Diplomacy: Taxonomies and Histories.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 616, no.1, 2008, pp. 31-54.
12. Çetinsaya, Gökhan. Büyüme, Kalite, Uluslararasılaşma: Türkiye Yükseköğretimi İçin Bir Yol Haritası. Yükseköğretim Kurulu, 2014.
13. Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Devlet Konseyi. “China’s Arctic Policy.” The State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China January, 2018, english.gov.cn/archive/white_paper/2018/01/26/content_281476026660336.htm (Accessed: 24.11.2020).
14. Dahl, Robert. Who Governs Democracy and Power in An American City. Yale University Press, 1961.
15. Dale, Helle et al. “Challenging America: How Russia, China, and Other Countries Use Public Diplomacy to Compete with the US.” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, no. 2698, 2012, p. 21.
16. Department of Defense (DOD). “Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2019.” media. defense.gov/2019/May/02/2002127082/-1/-1/1/2019_CHINA_MILITARY_POWER_REPORT.pdf (Accessed: 24.11.2020).
17. Ebinger, K. Charles, and Evie Zambetakis. “The Geopolitics of Arctic Melt.” International Affairs, vol. 85, 2009, pp. 1215–1232.
18. Eren, Veysel, ve Aydın Abdullah. “Neo-Liberalizmle Gelen Değişimin Yükseköğretim Sistemine Etkileri.” Route Educational and Social Sciences Journal, vol.3, no.3, 2016, ss. 218-232.
19. Fedoroff, Nina. “Science Diplomacy in the 21st Century.” Cell, vol. 136, no.1, 2009, pp. 9-11.
20. Gluckman, D. Peter et al. “Science Diplomacy: A Pragmatic Perspective from the Inside.” Science & Diplomacy, vol. 6, no. 4, 2017.
21. Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from The Prison Notebooks, ed. ve tran. Quintin Hoare ve Geoffrey Nowell Smith, Lawrence and Wishart, 1971.
22. Hartig, Falk. “Cultural Diplomacy with Chinese Characteristics: The Case of Confucius Institutes in Australia Communication.” Politics & Culture, vol. 45, no. 2, 2012, pp. 256-276.
23. Humrich, Christoph, and Klaus Dieter Wolf. From Meltdown to Showdown? Challenges and Options for Governance in the Arctic. Peace Research Institute Report No.113, 2012.
24. IPCC (The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). “History of the IPCC” 1988: www.ipcc.ch/about/history/ (Accessed: 04.08.2020).
25. Kalın, İbrahim. “Türk Dış Politikası ve Kamu Diplomasisi.” Yükselen Değer Türkiye, MÜSİAD, 2011, www.kamudiplomasisi.org/makaleler/makaleler/100-tuerk-d-politikas-ve-kamu-diplomasisi (Accessed: 01.08. 2020).
26. Koivurova, Timo, and J. Erik Molenaar. International Governance and Regulation of the Marine Arctic: A Proposal for A Legally Binding Regime. WWF International Arctic Programme, 2010.
27. Lawniczak, Ryszard. “Public Relations Role in a Global Competition to Sell Alternative Political and Socio-Economic Models of Market Economy.” Public Relations Review, vol. 33, no. 4, 2007, pp. 377- 386.
28. Lee, Bernice. “Managing the Interlocking Climate and Resource Challenges.” International Affairs, vol. 85, no. 6, 2009, pp. 1101-1116.
29. Lee, Geun. “A Theory of Soft Power and Korea’s Soft Power Strategy.” Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, vol. 2, no. 2, 2009, pp. 205-218.
30. Leonard, Mark. Public Diplomacy. The Foreign Policy Centre, 2002.
31. Lukes, Steven. Power: A Radical View. Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
32. Machiavelli, Niccolo. Hükümdar. Çev. H. Kemal Karabulut, 5. Baskı, Sosyal Yayınları, 1998.
33. Moedas, Carlos. “EU Approach to Science Diplomacy.” (Speech Washington, DC 1 June 2014), 2015, ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2014-2019/moedas/announcements/eu-approach-sciencediplomacy_en (Accessed: 10.12.2020).
34. Nanda, Devikaa. “India’s Arctic Potential”. ORF Occasional Paper, vol. 186, 2019, www.orfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ORF_Occasional_Paper_186_Arctic.pdf (Accessed: 12.12.2020).
35. National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Knowledge and Diplomacy: Science Advice in the United Nations System. The National Academies Press, 2002.
36. National Intelligence Council (NIC). “Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds.” December, 2012, https://globaltrends2030.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/global-trends-2030-november2012.pdf (Accessed: 10.12.2020).
37. National Research Council. U.S. and International Perspectives on Global Science Policy and Science Diplomacy: Report of a Workshop. National Academies Press, 2012.
38. Nye, Joseph. Yumuşak Güç. BB101 Yayınları, 2017.
39. Nye, Joseph. “Public Diplomacy and Soft Power.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 616, no.1, 2008, pp. 94-109.
40. Nye, Joseph. Dünya Siyasetinde Başarının Yolu: Yumuşak Güç. Ankara: Elips Kitap, 2005.
41. Ogawa, Tadashi. “Origin and Development of Japan Public Diplomacy.” The Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy, eds. N. Snow and P. Taylor, Routledge, 2009, pp. 270-281.
42. Öztürk, İlknur. Kuzey Buz Denizi Üzerinde Bölge Ülkelerinin Hakimiyet Mücadelesi ve Türkiye’ye Muhtemel Etkileri. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Harp Akademileri Komutanlığı Stratejik Araştırmalar Enstitüsü, 2011.
43. Purtaş, Fırat. “Türk Dış Politikasının Yükselen Değeri: Kültürel Diplomasi.” Gazi Akademik Bakış, vol. 7, no. 13, 2013, ss. 1-14.
44. Rainwater, Shiloh. “International Law and the “Globalization” of the Arctic: Assessing the Rights of Non-Arctic States in the High North”. Emory International Law Review, vol. 30, no. 1, 2015, pp. 115-153.
45. Resmî Gazete (17 Ocak 2015 Tarihli ve 29239 Sayılı). https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2015/01/20150117.htm (Accessed: 01.07.2020).
46. Rosenberg, Emily. Spreading the American Dream. Hill & Wang, 1982.
47. Shambaugh, David. “China Engages Asia: Reshaping the Regional Order.” International Security, vol. 29, no. 3, 2004, pp. 64-99.
48. Takei, Yoshinobu. “The Role of the Arctic Council from An International Law Perspective: Past, Present and Future”. The Yearbook of Polar Law, no. 6, 2015, pp. 349-374.
49. The Arctic Council, 1996: arctic-council.org/en/ (Accessed: 02.07.2020).
50. The European Commission. Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World- A Vision for Europe. 2016, op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/3213b335-1cbc-11e6-ba9a- 01aa75ed71a1 (Accessed: 10.12.2020).
51. The Research Council of Norway. “Ny-Alesund Research Station Research Strategy.” 2019, www.uio.no/forskning/tverrfak/nordomradene/ny-alesund-research-station-research-strategy.pdf (Accessed: 04.08.2020).
52. The Royal Society. New Frontiers in Science Diplomacy: Navigating the Changing Balance of Power. Science Policy Center, 2010.
53. Tuch, Hans. Communicating with the World: U.S. Public Diplomacy Overseas. St. Martin’s Press, 1990.
54. Turekian, C. Vaughan, and P. Norman Neureiter. “Science and Diplomacy: The Past as Prologue.” Science & Diplomacy, vol. 1, no.1, 2012.
55. TÜBİTAK Marmara Araştırma Merkezi (MAM) bünyesinde Kutup Araştırmaları Enstitüsü (KARE). http://kare.mam.tubitak.gov.tr/tr/kurumsal/biz-kimiz-0 (Accessed: 04.08.2020).
56. Türk Asya Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi (TASAM). “Bilim Diplomasisi Çalıştayı Sonuç Raporu.” 2017, tasam.org/tr-TR/Icerik/38017/bilim_diplomasisi_calistayi_sonuc_raporu (Accessed: 04.08 2020).
57. Türkiye Bursları. www.ytb.gov.tr/uluslararasi-ogrenciler/turkiye-burslari (Accessed: 02.07.2020).
58. United Nations (UN) Environment Programme. “Major Research Stations in Antarctica.” 2008, https://www.grida.no/resources/7148 (Accessed: 04.08.2020).
59. Vaxevanidou, Maria. “Education as Public Diplomacy: How to Build an International Image in Education.” Journal of Media Critiques, vol. 14, no. 4, 2018, pp. 55-70.
60. Waltz, Kenneth. Uluslararası Politika Teorisi. Phoenix Yayınları, 2010.
61. Wang, Jian. “Introduction: China’s Search of Soft Power.” Soft Power in China: Public Diplomacy through Communication, ed. Wang J., Palgrave MacMillan, 2011.
62. Weber, Max. Bürokrasi ve Otorite. Çev. H. B. Akın, 6.Baskı, Adres Yayınları, 2013.
63. Xinzhen, Lan. “Defending China’s Rights in the Arctic.” Beijing Review, (May 30, 2019). www.bjreview.com/Opinion/201905/t20190524_800168964.html (Accessed: 10.12.2020).
64. Young, R. Oran. The Arctic Council: Marking A New Era in International Relations. Twentieth Century Fund, 1996.
65. Young, R. Oran. “Arctic Governance-Pathways to the Future.” Arctic Review on Law and Politics, vol. 1, 2010, pp. 164-185.
66. Yurdusev, Nuri. “Osmanlı Mirası ve Türk Dış Politikası Üzerine.” Yeni Dönemde Türk Dış Politikası, Uluslararası IV. Türk Dış Politikası Sempozyumu Tebliğleri, ed. Osman Bahadır Dinçer, Habibe Özdal ve Hacali Necefoğlu, USAK Yayınları, 2010.