21. Yüzyılla Tek Kutupluluk Tartışmaları

Öz

The fact that balance of power -a crucial concept for realism in international relations theory has failed to actualize in world politics continues to undermine the theoretical validity of realism. In other words, ever since the emergence of the unipolar power structure in the 1989-1991 era, and despite the anticipations of the balance of power theory, no major power or bloc has emerged to challenge America’s hegemonic power. This article critically analyzes American hegemony of the past twenty years from both theoretical and empirical perspectives, while at the same time trying to account for the seemingly failed expectations of the balance of power theory. In the final segment this analysis argues that these expectations failed due to the overwhelming power capabilities and divergent perceptions of American policies in various regions of the world; American hegemony has been accepted as a naturally peaceful and problem-solving catalyst in the Balkans and Europe, whereas in the Middle East the same policies are characterized as destructive and instability inducing approaches.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Unipolarity, American hegemony, realism, balance of power, American foreign policy, Chinese soft power.

21. YÜZYILDA TEK KUTUPLULUK TARTIŞMALARI

Öz

Uluslararası ilişkiler teorileri arasında etkili bir yere sahip realizmin en önemli kavramlarından biri olan güç dengesi (balance of power) politikası, büyük güçlere karşı ittifaklar kurulmasını veya yükselen devletlerin hegemon güce karşı dengeleme politikasını devreye sokmasını öngörmektedir. Ancak Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin tek kutup olarak ortaya çıktığı 1989-1991’den günümüze kadar diğer güçlü devletler tarafından böyle bir dengeleme politikası uygulanmamış olması, diğer bir deyişle, Amerikan liderliğine karşı başka rakip büyük güçlerin ortaya çıkmaması, bu teorinin beklentilerinin aksine bir durum olarak görülebilir. Bu durumu, Amerika’nın güç unsurlarının büyük kapasitesi ile politikalarını değişik bölgelere göre şekillendirme becerisinden kaynaklandığını söyleyebiliriz. Şöyle ki, Avrupa’da, özellikle Balkanlar’da, ABD yatıştırıcı ve sorun çözücü politikalar izlemiş, Orta Doğu’daki siyasi kararlarının ise, böyle planlamamış olsa da, düzen bozucu ve istikrarsızlaştırıcı sonuçları olmuştur. Bu makale son yirmi senedir devam etmekte olan Amerikan hegemonyasını teorik ve ampirik olarak kritik bir gözle analiz edecek ve teorinin beklentilerinin neden gerçekleşmediğini ortaya koymaya çalışacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tek Kutupluluk, Amerikan hegemonyası, realizm, güç dengesi, Amerikan dış politikası, Çin’in yumuşak gücü.

Kaynakça

1. Albright, Madeleine. Madam Secretary: A memoir. New York: MacMillan, 2003.
2. Aron, Raymond. The Imperial Republic: The United States and the World, 1945- 19 Endlewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1973.
3. Art, Robert ve Robert Jervis. International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Con- temporary Issues. New York, Longman, 2003.
4. Barnett, Thomas. The Pentagon’s New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century. New York: Berkley Books, 2004.
5. Brooks, Stephen ve William Wohlforth. World out of Balance: International Re- lations and the Challenge of American Primacy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008.
6. Bromley, Simon “The limits to balancing”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Cilt. 24, No. 2, (2011).
7. Brown, Michael, Owen Cote, Sean Lynn-Jones ve Steven Miller (derleyenler). Primacy and its Discontents: American Power and International Stability. Camb- ridge, Massaschusetts: MIT Press, 2008.
8. Brown, Michael, Owen Cote, Sean Lynn-Jones ve Steven Miller (derleyenler). Theories of War and Peace. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000.

9. Brown, Michael, Sean Lynn-Jones ve Steven Miller (derleyenler). East Asian Se- curity. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT, 1998.
10. Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership. New York: Basic Books, 2004.
11. Chomsky, Noam. Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominan- ce, Londra, Penguin, 2003.
12. Elsig, Manfred, Karolina Milewicz, Nikolas Stürcher, “Who is in love with mul- tilateralism? Treaty commitment in the post-Cold War era”, European Union Po- litics, Cilt. 12, No. 4, (2011).
13. Ferguson, Niall. Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire. Londra: Penguin, 2005.
14. Fukuyama, Francis. America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neo- conservative Legacy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006.
15. Haass, Richard. The Opportunity: America’s Moment to Alter History’s Course. New York: Public Affairs. Ignatius, David. “Obama closes the book on the 9/11 era”, Washington Post, 7 Ocak 2012.
16. Ikenberry, John. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011.
17. Johnson, Chalmers. Blowback: The costs and consequences of American Empire. New York: Owl Books, 2004.
18. Kennedy, Paul. Preparing for the Twenty-First Century. New York: Vintage, 1993.
19. Kennedy, Paul. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000. New York: Vintage Books, 1987.
20. Krauthammer, Charles. “The Unipolar Moment”, Foreign Affairs Cilt.70 No.1, (1990-1991).
21. Kupchan, Charles. “The false promise of unipolarity: constraints on the exercise of American power”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Cilt. 24, No. 2, (2011).
22. Layne, Christopher. “The unipolar exit: beyond the Pax Americana”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Cilt. 24, No. 2, (2011).
23. MacMillan, Margaret. Peacemakers: The Paris Conference of 1919 its attempt to end war. Londra: John Murray, 2002.
24. Mearsheimer, John. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: Norton, 200 Niebuhr, Reinhold. The Irony of American History. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008. (ilk basım 1952).
25. Nye, Joseph. Soft Power: The means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs, 2004.
26. Powaski, Ronald. The Cold War: The United States and the Soviet Union, 1917- 19 New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
27. Schweller, Randall. “The future is uncertain and the end is always near”, Camb- ridge Review of International Affairs, Cilt. 24, No. 2, (2011).
28. Simms, Brendan. “Introduction: World out of Balance”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Cilt. 24, No. 2, (2011).
29. Voeten, Erik. “Unipolar politics as usual”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Cilt. 24, No. 2, (2011).
30. Walt, Stephen. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca:Cornell University Press, 1987
31. Yalvaç, Faruk. “Uluslararası İlişkiler Kuramında Yapısalcı Yaklaşımlar”, Devlet, Sistem ve Kimlik: Uluslararası İlişkilerde Temel Yaklaşımlar. Ed. Atila Eralp, İs- tanbul: İletişim, 1996.