THE CONCEPT AND IMPORTANCE OF STRATEGIC AUTONOMY IN MULTIPOLAR INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM

Öz

Developments on the international political scene have led to the emergence of debates on the structure of the international system. After World War II, it is accepted that the liberal international system, which was established under the hegemony of the USA, won an absolute victory with the end of the Cold War, and the international system expressed a unipolar. However, developments in the historical process and the existence of new rising powers have led to the acceptance that the international system corresponds to a multipolar structure. Especially during the coronavirus pandemic and the Ukraine-Russia war, international organisations, which are the building blocks of the liberal international system, were ineffective. This situation has led to the re-emergence of nation-states as the main actors in international politics, which is also a confirmation of multipolarity. On the other hand, multipolarity has also turned the principle of self-help into a necessity. The concept of strategic autonomy can be defined as the balancing behaviour of states in order to overcome their dependencies and determine the most appropriate option. At this point, this study focuses on the question of whether the concept of strategic autonomy is an appropriate behaviour for states' foreign policy choices in the multipolar international system.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Strategic Autonomy
• International System
• Multipolarity
• Foreign Policy

ÇOK KUTUPLU ULUSLARARASI SİSTEMDE STRATEJİK OTONOMİ KAVRAMI VE ÖNEMİ

Öz

Uluslararası siyaset sahnesinde yaşanan gelişmeler, uluslararası sistemin yapısının ne olduğu konusunda tartışmaların ortaya çıkmasına yol açmıştır. 2.Dünya Savaşı ile birlikte ABD hegemonyasında kurulan liberal uluslararası sistemin, Soğuk Savaş’ın bitişiyle birlikte mutlak zafer kazandığı ve uluslararası sistemin tek kutuplu bir hali ifade ettiği kabul edilmektedir. Ancak tarihsel süreç içerisinde yaşanan gelişmeler ve yeni yükselen güçlerin varlığı, uluslararası sistemin çok kutuplu bir yapıya karşılık geldiği kabulünü ortaya çıkarmıştır. Özellikle Koronavirüs pandemisi ve Ukrayna-Rusya savaşında liberal uluslararası sistemin yapıtaşlarından olan uluslararası örgütler etkisiz kalmıştır. Bu durum çok kutupluluğun da tescili olacak biçimde ulus-devletlerin yeniden uluslararası siyasetin temel aktörleri haline gelmesine yol açmıştır. Diğer yandan çok kutupluluk kendi kendine yardım ilkesini de bir zorunluluk haline dönüştürmüştür. Stratejik otonomi kavramı devletlerin bağımlılıklarını gidermek ve en uygun seçeneği belirleyebilmek için dengeleme davranışı olarak tanımlanabilir. Bu noktada bu çalışma, stratejik otonomi kavramının çok kutuplu uluslararası sistemde devletlerin dış politika tercihlerinde uygun bir davranış olup olmadığı sorusunu merkeze almaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Stratejik Otonomi
• Uluslararası Sistem
• Çok Kutupluluk
• Dış Politika

Kaynakça

1. A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy. (t.y.). 23 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.coe-civ.eu/kh/a-global-strategy-for-the-european-unions-foreign-and-security-policy adresinden erişildi.
2. Acharya, A. (2018). Constructing Global Order Agency and Change in World PoliticsAc. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Alcaro, R. (2018). The Liberal Order and its Contestations. A Conceptual Framework. The International Spectator, 53 (1), 1-10. doi:10.1080/03932729.2018.1397878
4. Anadolu Ajansı. (2020, 17 Mart). Çin’den Trump’ın “Çin Virüsü” ifadesine tepki. 1 Ağustos 2022 tarihinde https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/cinden-trumpin-cin-virusu-ifadesine-tepki/1768935 adresinden erişildi.
5. Angela Merkel: Europe must take ‘our fate’ into own hands. (2017, 28 Mayıs).POLITICO. 26 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-europe-cdu-must-take-its-fate-into-its-own-hands-elections-2017/ adresinden erişildi.
6. BBC. (2018, 14 Ekim). How chemical weapons have helped bring Assad close to victory. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-45586903 adresinden erişildi.
7. Biscop, S. (2018, 6 Temmuz). Letting Europe Go Its Own Way. Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/france/letting-europe-go-its-own-way adresinden erişildi.
8. Borell, J. (t.y.). How to revive multilateralism in a multipolar world? | EEAS. 9 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/how-revive-multilateralism-multipolar-world_en adresinden erişildi.

9. Brattberg, E. (2021). Middle Power Diplomacy in an Age of US-China Tensions. The Washington Quarterly, 44 (1), 219-238. doi:10.1080/0163660X.2021.1896136
10. Brooks, S. G. ve Wohlforth, W. C. (2023, 18 Nisan). The Myth of Multipolarity. Foreign Affairs, 102 (3). https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/china-multipolarity-myth adresinden erişildi.
11. Buzan, B. ve Lawson, G. (2013). The Global Transformation: The Nineteenth Century and the Making of Modern International Relations 1: The Global Transformation. International Studies Quarterly, 57 (3), 620-634. doi:10.1111/isqu.12011
12. Cohen, R. (2016). Opinion | The Death of Liberalism. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/14/opinion/the-death-of-liberalism.html adresinden erişildi.
13. Colgan, J. D. ve Keohane, R. O. (2017). The Liberal Order Is Rigged, 96(3), 36-44. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2017-04-17/liberal-order-rigged adresinden erişildi.
14. Cox, M. (2019). Nationalism, nations and the crisis of world order. International Relations, 33(2), 247-266. doi:10.1177/0047117819842306
15. Çakırca, B. (2021). Yoksulluk, Adaletsizlik ve BAskıya Bir Darbe Olarak Arap Baharı. DARBELER.COM. http://darbeler.com/yoksulluk-adaletsizlik-ve-baskiya-bir-darbe-olarak-arap-bahari-burak-cakirca/ adresinden erişildi.
16. Daban, C. (2024). Uluslararası Güvenliği Sağlama Açısından Bir Yol Haritası: Sambi-Mandara Güvenlik Eylem Planı Örneği. Hitit Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17 (1), 114-133. doi:10.17218/hititsbd.1434743
17. de Graaff, N. ve van Apeldoorn, B. (2011). Varieties of US Post-Cold War Imperialism: Anatomy of a Failed Hegemonic Project and the Future of US Geopolitics. Critical Sociology, 37 (4), 403-427. doi:10.1177/0896920510379446
18. Duncombe, C. ve Dunne, T. (2018). After liberal world order. International Affairs, 94, 25-42. doi:10.1093/ia/iix234
19. Foot, R. (2019). Remembering the past to secure the present: Versailles legacies in a resurgent China. International Affairs, 95 (1), 143-160. doi:10.1093/ia/iiy211
20. Franke, U. (2021, 9 Aralık). The Power Atlas. ECFR. 20 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://ecfr.eu/special/power-atlas/ adresinden erişildi.
21. Fukuyama, F. (2003). Tarihin Sonu mu? İstanbul: Vadi Yayınları.
22. Fukuyama, F. (2012, 1 Ocak). The Future of History. Foreign Affairs, 91 (1). https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2012-01-01/future-history adresinden erişildi.
23. Glaser, C. L. (2019). A Flawed Framework: Why the Liberal International Order Concept Is Misguided. International Security, 43 (4), 51-87. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00343
24. Haass, R. (2017). World Order 2.0. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2016-12-12/world-order-20 adresinden erişildi.
25. Hu, F. ve Spence, M. (2017). Why Globalization Stalled: And How to Restart It. Foreign Affairs, 96 (4), 54-63. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44823891 adresinden erişildi.
26. Ikenberry, G. J. (2009). After victory. After Victory içinde . Princeton University Press.
27. Ikenberry, G. J. (2011). The future of the liberal world order: Internationalism after America. Foreign affairs, 56-68.
28. Ikenberry, G. J. (2013). The Liberal International Order and Its Discontents. R. Friedman, K. Oskanian ve R. P. Pardo (Ed.), After Liberalism? The Future of Liberalism in International Relations içinde , Palgrave Studies in International Relations Series (ss. 91-102). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. doi:10.1057/9781137303769_6
29. Ikenberry, G. J. (2018). The end of liberal international order? International Affairs, 94 (1), 7-23.
30. Ikenberry, G. J., Mastanduno, M. ve Wohlforth, W. C. (2009). Introduction: Unipolarity, State Behavior, and Systemic Consequences. World Politics, 61 (1), 1-27. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40060219 adresinden erişildi.
31. Jahn, B. (2018). Liberal internationalism: Historical trajectory and current prospects. International Affairs, 94 (1), 43-61. doi:10.1093/ia/iix231
32. Kaarbo, J. (2019). A foreign policy analysis perspective on After Victory. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 21 (1), 29-39. doi:10.1177/1369148118791717
33. Kaplan Morton A. (1968). Systems Theory and Political Science. Social Research, 35 (1), 30-47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40969897 adresinden erişildi.
34. Kaura, V. (2019). Deepening Relationship between Russia and China: Implications for India in an Era of Strategic Uncertainty. Indian Journal of Asian Affairs, 32 (1/2), 49-66. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26902685 adresinden erişildi.
35. Lippert, B., Ondarza, N. von ve Perthes, V. (Ed.). (2019). European strategic autonomy: Actors, issues, conflicts of interests. SWP Research Paper (C. 4/2019). Berlin: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik -SWP- Deutsches Institut für Internationale Politik und Sicherheit. doi:https://doi.org/10.18449/2019RP04
36. Luuk, M. ve Luc, K. (t.y.). How to ‘open’ Strategic Autonomy. Clingendael. 23 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.clingendael.org/publication/how-open-strategic-autonomy adresinden erişildi.
37. Macikenaite, V. (2020). China’s economic statecraft: The use of economic power in an interdependent world. Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, 9 (2), 108-126. doi:10.1080/24761028.2020.1848381
38. Mapping a Multipolar World. (2023).Morgan Stanley. 7 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/multipolar-world-global-strategy adresinden erişildi.
39. Martin, F. (2023, 17 Kasım). Breakingviews—Multipolar world opens up surprising safe havens. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/global-markets-breakingviews-2023-11-17/ adresinden erişildi.
40. Mazarr, M. J. (2017). The Once and Future Order. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2016-12-12/once-and-future-order adresinden erişildi.
41. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order. International Security, 43(4), 7-50. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00342
42. Mukherjee, R. (2020). Chaos as opportunity: The United States and world order in India’s grand strategy. Contemporary Politics, 26 (4), 420-438. doi:10.1080/13569775.2020.1777040
43. Narendra Modi’s illiberalism may imperil India’s economic progress. (t.y.).The Economist. https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/18/narendra-modis-illiberalism-may-imperil-indias-economic-progress adresinden erişildi.
44. Nato alliance experiencing brain death, says Macron. (2019, 7 Kasım). https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50335257 adresinden erişildi.
45. NATO Press Release NAC-S(99)64—24 April 1999. (t.y.). 26 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.nato.int/docu/pr/1999/p99-064e.htm adresinden erişildi.
46. Niblett, R. (2016). Liberalism in Retreat. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2016-12-12/liberalism-retreat adresinden erişildi.
47. Nye, J. S. (2010). The Future of American Power: Dominance and Decline in Perspective. Foreign Affairs, 89 (6), 2-12. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20788711 adresinden erişildi.
48. Nye, J. S. (2017). Will the Liberal Order Survive? https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2016-12-12/will-liberal-order-survive adresinden erişildi.
49. Nye, J. S. (2019). The rise and fall of American hegemony from Wilson to Trump. International Affairs, 95 (1), 63-80. doi:10.1093/ia/iiy212
50. Odeh, N. (2021). ABD’nin Afganistan’dan Çekilmesi: Liberal Düzenin Düşüşünün Son Kanıtı. Al Sharq Stratejik Araştırma. https://research.sharqforum.org/tr/2021/10/12/abdnin-afganistandan-cekilmesi-liberal-duzenin-dususunun-son-kaniti/ adresinden erişildi.
51. Patrick, S. M. (2017). Trump and World Order: The Return of Self-Help. Foreign Affairs, 96 (2), 52-57. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44821706 adresinden erişildi.
52. Pinheiro, L. ve Lima, M. R. S. de. (2018). Between Autonomy and Dependency: The Place of Agency in Brazilian Foreign Policy. Brazilian Political Science Review, 12, e0003. doi:10.1590/1981-3821201800030003
53. Posen, A. S. (2022, 17 Mart). The End of Globalization? Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2022-03-17/end-globalization adresinden erişildi.
54. Posen, B. R. (2018). The Rise of Illiberal Hegemony. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-02-13/rise-illiberal-hegemony adresinden erişildi.
55. Rosenberg, J. ve Boyle, C. (2019). Understanding 2016: China, Brexit and Trump in the history of uneven and combined development. Journal of Historical Sociology. doi:10.1111/JOHS.12217
56. Russell, R. ve Tokatlian, J. G. (2003). From Antagonistic Autonomy to Relational Autonomy: A Theoretical Reflection from the Southern Cone. Latin American Politics and Society, 45(1), 1-24. doi:10.1111/j.1548-2456.2003.tb00230.x
57. Singer, J. D. (1961). The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations. World Politics, 14 (1), 77-92. doi:10.2307/2009557
58. Speech at Davos 2022 by Olaf Scholz, Chancellor of Germany. (2022, 26 Mayıs).World Economic Forum. 9 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/05/olaf-sholzs-speech-to-davos-2022-in-full/ adresinden erişildi.
59. Stokes, D. (2018). Trump, American hegemony and the future of the liberal international order. International Affairs, 94 (1), 133-150. doi:10.1093/ia/iix238
60. Taggart, J. ve Abraham, K. J. (2024). Norm dynamics in a post-hegemonic world: Multistakeholder global governance and the end of liberal international order. Review of International Political Economy, 31 (1), 354-381. doi:10.1080/09692290.2023.2213441
61. The Economist. (2009, 26 Şubat). Barack Obama’s ambitious budget is unveiled. The Economist. 25 Temmuz 2022 tarihinde https://www.economist.com/united-states/2009/02/26/a-credible-budget adresinden erişildi.
62. The White House. (2021a, 20 Şubat). Remarks by President Biden at Pfizer Manufacturing Site. The White House. 19 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/02/19/remarks-by-president-biden-at-pfizer-manufacturing-site/ adresinden erişildi.
63. The White House. (2021b, 31 Ağustos). Remarks by President Biden on the End of the War in Afghanistan. The White House. 5 Ağustos 2022 tarihinde https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/08/31/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-end-of-the-war-in-afghanistan/ adresinden erişildi.
64. Tickner, A. B. (2014). Autonomy and Latin American International Relations Thinking. Routledge Handbook of Latin America in the World içinde . Routledge.
65. Tocci, N. (t.y.). European Strategic Autonomy: What It Is, Why We Need It, How to Achieve It.
66. Wagdy, A. (2022, 17 Ekim). A “Multipolar World”: A Transformation in the Global System. Modern Diplomacy. 7 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2022/10/17/a-multipolar-world-a-transformation-in-the-global-system/ adresinden erişildi.
67. Walt, S. M. (2020). The Realist’s Guide to the Coronavirus Outbreak. Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/09/coronavirus-economy-globalization-virus-icu-realism/ adresinden erişildi.
68. Waltz, K. N. (2015). The origins of war in neorealist theory. Conflict After the Cold War içinde (ss. 110-116). Routledge.
69. Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
70. Why European strategic autonomy matters | EEAS. (t.y.). 26 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/why-european-strategic-autonomy-matters_en adresinden erişildi.
71. World Development Indicators | DataBank. (2019). 20 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators adresinden erişildi.
72. Wulf, H. ve Debiel, T. (2015). India’s ‘Strategic Autonomy’ and the Club Model of Global Governance: Why the Indian BRICS Engagement Warrants a Less Ambiguous Foreign Policy Doctrine. Strategic Analysis, 39 (1), 27-43. doi:10.1080/09700161.2014.980550
73. Yurdusev, A. N. (1993). “Level of Analysis” and’Unit of Analysis’: A Case for Distinction. Millennium, 22 (1), 77-88.
74. Zaed, A. (t.y.). ORSAM-Ortadoğu Araştırmaları Merkezi. ORSAM-Ortadoğu Araştırmaları Merkezi. 24 Temmuz 2024 tarihinde https://orsam.org.tr/tr/brics-ortadoguda-genisliyor-kutuplasma-mi-ekonomik-rekabet-mi/ adresinden erişildi.
75. Zubaida, S. (2011). The “Arab spring” in historical perspective. openDemocracy. 27 Temmuz 2022 tarihinde https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/arab-spring-in-historical-perspective/ adresinden erişildi.