Covid-19 Salgınında Çok Taraflılık ve ABD Liderliği Sorunu

Öz

COVID-19 tüm dünyayı etkiledi ve sınırları dahi dikkate almadan küresel olarak yayıldı. Pandeminin küresel ekonomi, uluslararası politika ve toplumlar üzerinde büyük etkileri vardır. Bu süreç, küresel bir sorun olarak karşımıza çıksada, devletler içe döndüler, ulusal çözümler önerdiler ve küresel bir tepkiyi koordine etmekte başarısız oldular. Potansiyel güç kapasitesi olarak uluslararası sistemdeki en güçlü devlet olan Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin pandemi sürecinde kolektif uluslararası çabalara önderlik etmesi ve bunun yanı sıra kolektif eylem sorununu da çözmesi beklenmektedir. Fakat Trump yönetimi küresel liderlik rolünü yerine getirememiştir. Egemen liderlik teorileri ve Egemen İstikrar Teorisi’nden yola çıkarak, bu çalışma Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin COVID-19 sürecindeki küresel rolüne odaklanmaktadır. Her ne kadar klasik realizm ulusal çıkarların devletlerin dış politikalarının belirleyici unsuru olduğunu belirtse de, egemen güçlerin kendi sınırlarının ötesinde sorumlulukları vardır. Pandemi süreci, egemen gücün ana sorumluluğunu üstlenmesini ve COVID-19’un etkilerini azaltmak için kolektif bir yanıta liderlik etmesini gerektirmektedir. Bu iddiaya dayanarak, bu çalışma ABD Başkanı Donald Trump’ın Önce Amerika (America First) doktrininin dış politikada çok taraflılığa bağlı kalmasını ve kolektif bir eylemi organize etmesini başarısız kılmıştır, bu da Amerikan küresel liderliğini riske atmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çok taraflılık
• Küresel Yönetişim
• Dış Politika
• Amerikan Küresel Liderliği
• COVID-19

Multilateralism and The Question of U.S. Leadership Amid The Covid-19 Pandemic

Öz

The COVID-19 pandemic has had major implications on the global economy, international politics and societies. Even though the pandemic is a global issue, states have turned inwards, proposed national solutions and have failed to coordinate a global response. The United States, as the predominant global power with its leading material capabilities has been expected to lead collective international effort and to solve collective action problems during the current pandemic. However, the Trump administration has been showing a lack of global leadership. Drawing on theories of hegemonic leadership and Hegemonic Stability Theory, this article focuses on the global role has been played by the United States during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Whereas classical realism emphasizes that national interests are determinant of states’ foreign policies, dominant powers have responsibilities beyond their nations. The pandemic demands the dominant power to bear the main responsibility and lead a collective response to mitigate impacts of COVID-19. Based on this claim, this paper argues that U.S President Donald Trump’s America First approach failed the United States to commit to multilateralism and to organize a collective action in response to the pandemic which in turn has put U.S. global leadership at stake.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• U.S. Global Leadership
• COVID-19
• Multilateralism, International Governance
• Foreign Policy
• U.S. Global Leadership
• COVID-19

Kaynakça

1. Allison, G. (2018). The myth of the liberal order: From historical accident to conventional wisdom. Foreign Affairs, 97, 124. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/
2. BBC. (2020a, April 15). Coronavirus: US to halt funding to WHO, says Trump. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52289056
3. BBC. (2020b, May 1). Coronavirus: Trump stands by China lab origin theory for virus. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52496098
4. Bollyky, T. J. and Bown, C. P. (2020). The tragedy of vaccine nationalism: Only cooperation can end the pandemic. Foreign Affairs, 99, 96. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/
5. Caporaso, J. A. (1992). International relations theory and multilateralism: the search for foundations. International Organization, 46(3) 599-632. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
6. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Holloway, S. (2000). US unilateralism at the UN: Why great powers do not make great multilateralists. In A. Lyon, K. Stiles, A. Edgar, K. Mills and P. Romaniuk (Eds.), Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations (pp. 361-381). https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-00603005
8. Ikenberry, G. J. (2001). After victory: Institutions strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

9. Ikenberry, G. J. (2003). “Is American multilateralism in decline?” Perspectives on Politics 1(3), 533-550. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
10. Ikenberry, G. J. (2011). Liberal leviathan: The origins, crisis, and transformation of the American world order. New Jersey: Princeton University Press
11. Ikenberry, G. J. (2018). The end of liberal international order?. International Affairs, 94(1), 7-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iix241
12. Ingram, A. (2005). The new geopolitics of disease: between global health and global security. Geopolitics, 10(3), 522-545. doi: 10.1080/14650040591003516
13. Kindleberger, C. (1973). The world in depression, 1929-39. Berkeley. CA: University of California.
14. Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
15. Keohane, R.O. (1990). Multilateralism: An agenda for research. International Journal, 45(4): 731- 764. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
16. Keohane, R. O. and Nye, J. Y. (1985). Two cheers for multilateralism. Foreign Policy, (60), 148-167. doi:10.2307/1148896
17. Krasner, S. D. (1982). Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, 36(2)185-205. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
18. Lake, D. (1993). Leadership, hegemony, and the international economy: Naked emperor or tattered Monarch with potential? International Studies Quarterly, 37(4) 459-489. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600841
19. Layne, C. (2007). The peace of illusions: American grand strategy from 1940 to the present. New York: Cornell University Press.
20. Martín, F. (2006). Militarist peace in South America: conditions for war and peace. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
21. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). Bound to fail: The rise and fall of the liberal international order. International Security, 43(4), 7-50. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00342
22. Nabers, D. (2010). Power, leadership, and hegemony in international politics: the case of East Asia. Review of International Studies, 36(4), 931-949. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
23. Norrlöf, C. (2020). Is COVID-19 the end of US hegemony? Public bads, leadership failures and monetary hegemony. International Affairs, 96(5), 1281-1303. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiaa134
24. Nye, J. S. (2011). The future of power. New York: Public Affairs.
25. Nye, J. S. (2019a). Do morals matter. Presidents and foreign policy from FDR to Trump. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Nye, J. S. (2019b). The rise and fall of American hegemony from Wilson to Trump. International Affairs, 95(1), 63-80. doi:10.1093/ia/iiy212
27. Reuters. (2020, September 22). Trump to tell U.N. it ‘must hold China accountable for their actions’ on virus. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-un-assembly-trump/trump-to-tell-u-n-it-must-hold-china accountable-for-their-actions-on-virus-idUKKCN26D1WA
28. Ruggie J.G. (1992). Multilateralism: The anatomy of an institution. International Organization, 46(3), 561-598. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/
29. Smith, M. (2018). The EU, the US and the crisis of contemporary multilateralism. Journal of European Integration, 40(5), 539-553. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2018.1488836
30. Stewart-Ingersoll, R. and Frazier, D. (2012). Regional powers and security orders: A theoretical framework. London: Routledge.
31. 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
32. The Guardian. (2020a, August 7). Global report: WHO warns against dangers of ‘vaccine nationalism’. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/07/global-report-who-warns-against-dangers-of-vaccine-nationalism
33. The Guardian. (2020b, September 1). US refuses to join international effort to develop COVID-19 vaccine. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/01/us-covid-19-vaccine-refuses-international-effort-coronavirus
34. The New York Times. (2016, April 27). Transcript: Donald Trump’s foreign policy speech. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/28/us/politics/transcript-trump-foreign-policy.html
35. The New York Times. (2017, May 26). Trump says NATO allies don’t pay their share. Is that true?. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/26/world/europe/nato-trump-spending.html
36. The New York Times. (2020a, March 13). China spins tale that the U.S. Army started the coronavirus epidemic. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/world/asia/coronavirus-china-conspiracy-theory.html
37. The New York Times. (2020b, March 18). Its coronavirus cases dwindling, China turns focus outward. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/world/asia/coronavirus-china-aid.html
38. The White House. (2014). Fact sheet: U.S. response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/16/fact-sheet-us-response-Ebola-epidemic-west-africa
39. The White House. (2018). Remarks by President Trump to the 73rd Session of the United Nations General Assembly New York, NY. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-73rd-session-united-nations-general-assembly-new-york-ny/
40. Trump, D. (2017). National security strategy of the United States of America. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf
41. United Nations. (2020a). Global cooperation must adapt to meet biggest threat since Second World War, Secretary-General says on International Day, as COVID-19 transcends borders. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/sgsm20058.doc.htm.
42. United Nations. (2020b). 5 reasons the world needs WHO, to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. Retrieved from: https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/04/1061412
43. World Health Organization. (2020). 172 countries and multiple candidate vaccines engaged in COVID-19 vaccine Global Access Facility. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/
44. Young, O. R. (1991). Political leadership and regime formation: on the development of institutions in international society. International organization, 45(3), 281-308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033117
45. Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of international relations. Reading, Mass: Addison-Webley.