Glokal Sistemik Kutupluluğun Bölgesel İstikrara Etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışma glokal sistemik kutupluluğun bölgesel istikrara etkisi hakkındadır. Kutupluluk ve istikrar üzerindeki çalışmalar genellikle global sistemik kutupluluk ve istikrar veya bölgesel sistemik kutupluluk ve istikrar arasındaki ilişkiye odaklanmaktadır. Bu çalışmalarda, global sistemik kutupluluk yapısının dünyadaki tüm bölgelere aynı oranda nüfuz ettiği ya da bölgesel sistemik kutupluluğun global sistemik kutupluluktan bağımsız işlediği varsayılmaktadır. Ancak, bu varsayımlar kutupluluk ve istikrar arasındaki ilişkinin açıklanmasında bazı boşluklara yol açmaktadır. Bu çalışma glokal sistemik kutupluluk kavramını ortaya atarak bu boşluğu doldurmaya çalışmaktadır. Bu kavram, kutupluluk ve istikrar arasındaki ilişkide, global sistemik kutupluluğun bölgelere etkisinin farklı derecelerde olduğunu ve bu farklılığın da bölgesel istikrarı etkilediğini savunur. Dolayısıyla, bütün global sistemlerde, kutup-başı devlet ya da devletlerin tek başlarına üzerinde hegemonik ilişki geliştirdiği bölgelerin istikrarlı veya bir kutup-başı devletin tek başına üzerinde hegemonik ilişki geliştiremediği bölgelerin istikrarsız olduğunu iddia eder. Bu iddia, dünyada 1947-2020 tarihleri arasında meydana gelen çatışma sayılarının yoğunluğunun bölgesel dağılımlarına bakılarak test edilecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sistem
• Glokal Sistem
• Kutupluluk
• İstikrar
• Çatışma

The Effect of Glocal Systemic Polarity on Regional Stability

Öz

This study is about the effect of glocal systemic polarity on regional stability. Studies on polarity and stability often focus on the relationship between global systemic polarity and stability or regional systemic polarity and stability. In these studies, it is assumed that the global systemic polarity structure penetrates all regions of the world at the same rate or the regional systemic polarity operates independently from the global systemic polarity. However, these assumptions lead to some gaps in the explanation of the relationship between polarity and stability. This study attempts to fill this gap by introducing the concept of glocal systemic polarity. This concept argues that in the relationship between polarity and stability, global systemic polarity has different degrees of influence on regions, and these different degrees affect regional stability. Therefore, it argues that in all global systems, regions on which a pole-state or pole-states develop hegemonic relations by themselves are stable, or regions on which a pole-state cannot develop hegemonic relations alone are unstable. This claim will be tested by looking at the regional distribution of the conflicts’ intensity that occurred between 1947 and 2020 in the world.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• System
• Glocal System
• Polarity
• Stability
• Conflict

Kaynakça

1. BLATTER, J. (2013, 05 21). Britannica. Retrieved 10 11, 2021, from Britannica Web site: https://www.britannica.com/topic/glocalization
2. BUZAN, B., & WÆVER, O. (2003). Regions and Powers The Structure of International Security. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). (2021). Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Retrieved from Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Web site: https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/map-references
4. DEUTSCH, K. W., & SINGER, J. D. (1964). Multipolar Power Systems and International Stability. World Politics, 16(3), 390-406.
5. FOX, W. T. (1944). The Super-powers: The United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union-Their Responsibility for Peace. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
6. HOPF, T. (1991). Polarity, The Offense Defense Balance, and War. The American Political Science Review, 85(2), 475-493.
7. IKENBERRY, G. J., MASTANDUNO, M., & WOHLFORTH, W. C. (2009). Introduction: Unipolarity, State Behavior, and Systemic Consequences. World Politics, 61(1), 1-27.
8. JAMES, P., & BRECHER, M. (1988). Stability and Polarity: New Paths for Inquiry. Journal of Peace Research, 25(1), 31-42.

9. KENNEDY, P. (1987). The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000. New York: Random House.
10. LAKE, D. A. (2009). Regional Hierarchy: Authority and Local International Order. Review of International Studies, 35, 35-58.
11. MEARSHEIMER, J. J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
12. MIDLARSKY, M. I. (1988). The Onset of World War. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
13. MIDLARSKY, M. I., & HOPF, T. (1993). Polarity and International Stability. The American Political Science Review, 87(1), 171-180.
14. MILLER, B. (2004). The International System and Regional Balance in the Middle East. In T. V. Paul, J. J. Wirtz, & M. Fortmann, Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century (pp. 239-266). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
15. ROBERTSON, R. (1995). Glocalization: Time-Space and Homogeneity-Heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson, Global Modernities (pp. 25-44). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
16. ROSS, R. S. (2004). Bipolarity and Balancing in East Asia. In T. V. Paul, J. J. Wirtz, & M. Fortmann, Balance of Power Theory and Practice in the 21st Century (pp. 267-304). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
17. STEWART-INGERSOLL, R., & FRAZIER, D. (2012). Regional Powers and Security Orders: A Theoretical Framework. Oxfordshire: Routledge.
18. Uppsala University, Department of Peace and Conflict Research. (2020). Uppsala University Department of Peace and Conflict Research. Retrieved from Uppsala University Department of Peace and Conflict Research Web site: https://ucdp.uu.se/downloads/
19. WALT, S. M. (2009). Alliances in a Unipolar World. World Politics, 61(01), 86-120.
20. WALTZ, K. N. (1964). The Stability of a Bipolar World. Daedalus, 93(3), 881-909.
21. WALTZ, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
22. WOHLFORTH, W. C. (1999). The Stability of a Unipolar World. International Security, 24(1), 5-41.