Ters Kissinger Doktrini: Trump Yönetiminin Rusya ile Yakınlaşma ve Çin’i Çevreleme Politikası

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 17, 91 - 128, 28.12.2025

Khaladdin İbrahimli , Elnur Paşa

https://doi.org/10.53791/imgelem.1681551

https://izlik.org/JA39KW94ZG

Öz

Bu makale, 2017-2021 yılları arasında ABD’de başkanlık görevini ifa eden Trump yönetiminin dış politikasını, “Ters Kissinger Doktrini” olarak adlandırılan yaklaşım çerçevesinde incelemektedir. Bu doktrin, Çin’i çevrelemek ve izole etmek amacıyla Rusya ile ilişkileri normalleştirme yönündeki stratejik girişimi ifade etmektedir. 1970’lerde ABD’nin Sovyetler Birliği’ni dengelemek için Çin’le yakınlaştığı Henry Kissinger’ın üçlü diplomasi hamlesiyle tarihsel bir karşılaştırma yapan çalışma, Trump’ın yaklaşımının bilinçli ve tutarlı bir stratejik doktrin mi yoksa kişisel dış politika reflekslerinin bir yansıması mı olduğunu araştırmaktadır. Tarihsel analiz, ikincil kaynak incelemesi ve neo-klasik realizm ile inşacılık (constructivism) temelli kuramsal çerçeve aracılığıyla yapılan değerlendirme sonucunda, Trump’ın eylemlerinin “Ters Kissinger” modeline bazı yönlerden benzese de kurumsal koordinasyon, stratejik tutarlılık ve uzun vadeli uygulama açısından yetersiz olduğu görülmektedir. Trump yönetimi Çin’i izole etmeyi hedefledi, fakat Çin bunun yerine Rusya ile daha yakın bir stratejik ortaklık kurdu. Ayrıca, Trump’ın NATO’ya ve kilit Avrupa müttefiklerine yönelik çatışmacı tutumu transatlantik ilişkileri zayıflattı. Bu çalışma, lider merkezli dış politika ile yapısal kısıtlar arasındaki gerilimi ortaya koymakta; Trump’ın kişisel içgüdülerinin çoğu zaman yerleşik dış politika kurumlarıyla çatıştığını göstermektedir. “Ters Kissinger” yaklaşımı pratikte bir doktrin olarak başarısız olmuş olsa da Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin (ABD) büyük stratejisinin değişen dinamiklerini anlamak açısından faydalı bir analitik çerçeve sunmaktadır. Trump’ın 2025 sonrası söylemlerinde gözlenen bazı süreklilik işaretleri – NATO’ya yeniden yöneltilen eleştiriler, Çin’e karşı sert duruş ve Rusya ile diyaloga açık olma gibi – bu yaklaşımın bazı unsurlarının halen sürdüğünü, ancak henüz yapılandırılmış bir doktrin haline gelmediğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ters Kissinger Doktrini , Üçgen Diplomasisi , Lider Etkisi , Stratejik Denge , Neoklasik Realizm.

The Reverse Kissinger Doctrine: The Trump Administration’s Policy of Rapprochement with Russia

https://izlik.org/JA39KW94ZG

Öz

This article examines the Trump administration’s foreign policy through the idea of a “Reverse Kissinger Doctrine,” which aimed to improve relations with Russia while confronting and isolating China. Drawing a historical comparison with Henry Kissinger’s triangular diplomacy of the 1970s-where the United States approached China to contain the Soviet Union-this study investigates whether Trump’s approach represents a deliberate and coherent strategic doctrine or a series of personal foreign policy reflexes. Based on an evaluation conducted through historical analysis, secondary source review, and a theoretical framework grounded in neoclassical realism and constructivism, it is observed that although Trump’s actions resembled the “Reverse Kissinger” model in certain aspects, they lacked institutional coordination, strategic consistency, and long-term implementation. Attempts to normalize relations with Russia faced domestic opposition and legislative constraints, while China, far from being isolated, forged a deeper strategic partnership with Russia. Moreover, Trump’s confrontational stance toward NATO and key European allies weakened transatlantic relations. This study highlights the tension between leader-centric foreign policy and structural constraints, illustrating how Trump’s personal instincts often clashed with the established foreign policy apparatus. While the "Reverse Kissinger" approach failed as a practical doctrine, it provides a useful analytical framework for understanding the evolving dynamics of U.S. grand strategy. Signs of continuity in Trump’s post-2025 rhetoric-such as renewed criticism of NATO, a tough stance on China, and openness to engaging Russia-suggest that some elements of this approach persist, though not yet in the form of a structured doctrine.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Reverse Kissinger Doctrine , Triangular Diplomacy , Leadership Impact , Strategic Balance , Neoclassical Realism.

Kaynakça

• Atkinson, R. D. (2020). Big is Beautiful: Debunking the Myth of Small Business, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
• Aydın, M. (2001). Uluslararası Sistem ve Dış Politika: Realist Kuram Bağlamında Kissinger'ın Yaklaşımı, Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 1(1), 203-220.
• Baev, P. K. (2021). The US–Europe Disconnect under Trump: From Policy Gaps to Strategic Rift, European Security, 30(2), 159-170.
• BBC News. (2016, December 3). Donald Trump and Taiwan: What just happened?. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38191711
• Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, New York: Basic Books.
• Çakı, F. (2021). Türkiye'de yerli sosyoloji çağrısına karşıt eleştirilere bakış, İmgelem, 5(9), 155-186.
• Callahan, W. A. (2008). Chinese Visions of World Order: Post-hegemonic or a New Hegemony?, International Studies Review, 10(4), 749-761. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2486.2008.00829.x
• Chubaryan, A. O. (2006). Sovetskaya vneshnyaya politika v gody razryadki [Sovet harici siyaseti yumşalma illerinde]. Nauka.
• Congressional Research Service. (2020). U.S.-Taiwan Relationship: Overview of Policy Issues (CRS Report No. R44996). https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44996
• Economy, E. C. (2021). The World According to China, Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Erlanger, S. (2019, November 7). Macron Warns Europe: NATO is becoming brain-dead. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/world/europe/macron-nato-brain-dead.html
• Farrell, H., Newman, A. L. (2019). Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion, International Security, 44(1), 42-79.
• Garthoff, R. L. (1994). Détente and Confrontation: American-Soviet Relations from Nixon to Reagan (2nd ed., p. 327), Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
• George, A. L. (1980). Presidential Decision making in Foreign Policy: The Effective Use of Information and Advice, New Jersey: Westview Press.
• Hermann, M. G. (2001). How Decision Units Shape Foreign Policy: A Theoretical Framework. International Studies Review, 3(2), 47-81. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1521-9488.00234
• Hill, C. (2003). The changing politics of foreign policy, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Hill, F. (2021). There is Nothing for You Here: Finding Opportunity in the 21st Century, Boston: Mariner Books.
• Hill, F., Gaddy, C. L. (2019). Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin (2nd ed.), Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
• Kissinger, H. A. (1994). Diplomacy, Simon & Schuster.
• Kissinger, H. A. (2011). On China, London: Penguin Books.
• Köni, H., Kardaş, Ş. ve Balcı, A. (2020). Uluslararası Güç Mücadelesi: Çin, ABD ve Türkiye, Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
• Mattis, J. (2019). Call Sign Chaos: Learning to Lead, New York: Random House.
• Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet, G. (2020). Transatlantic Relations in Turmoil: Europe’s Strategic Response to Trumpism, Journal of Common Market Studies, 58(1), 73-88.
• Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics, PublicAffairs.
• Oltermann, P. (2017, May 28). Angela Merkel: Europe Must Take Fate into Own Hands. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/28/angela-merkel-europe-must-take-its-fate-into-its-own-hands
• Renshon, S. A. (2009). National Security in the Obama Administration: Reassessing the Bush Doctrine, London: Routledge.
• Rogov, S. (2004). Geopolitika i Bezopasnost Rossii v XXI veke [21-ci esrde Rusiyanın Geopolitikası və Tehlükesizliyi], Moscow: IMEMO RAN.
• Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy, World Politics, 51(1), 144-172. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100007814
• Rosenberg, E. (2018). Congressional Control over Russia Policy: The Role of CAATSA, Brookings Institution Report, 15(4), 183-197.
• Sanger, D. E. (2018). The Perfect Weapon: War, Sabotage, and Fear in the Cyber Age, New York: Crown Publishing.
• Saunders, E. N. (2018). The Outsider President: Trump and the Foreign Policy Bureaucracy, Brookings Institution Paper, 16(2), 38-52.
• Speck, U. (2020). Germany’s Search for a New Strategic Posture. Carnegie Europe. https://carnegieeurope.eu
• Suslov, D. (2020). U.S.–Russia Relations under Trump: A Missed Opportunity or a Strategic Pause?, Russia in Global Affairs, 18(1), 85-98.
• Trenin, D. (2020). What is Russia up to in the Middle East?, Polity Press.
• U.S. Department of Commerce. (2020, September 18). Commerce Department Prohibits WeChat and TikTok Transactions to Protect the National Security of the United States. https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2020/09/commerce-department-prohibits-wechat-and-tiktok-transactions
• U.S. Department of State. (1972). Joint Communiqué of the United States of America and the People’s Republic of China (Shanghai Communiqué). https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76v17/d203
• Wang, D. (2020). China–Russia Relations in the Shadow of U.S. Strategic Pressure, East Asian Policy, 12(2), 115-124.
• White House. (2017). National Security Strategy of the United States of America. Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf.
• White House. (2019). Executive Order on Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-securing-information-communications-technology-services-supply-chain/
• Wu, X. (2020). U.S.–China Strategic Competition and the Role of Russia, Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 13(1), 71-81.
• Yu, J. (2021). China’s strategic perception of US tech sanctions, China International Studies, 89(2), 60-72.
• Zhang, Q. (2016). China's Strategic Narratives in the Cold War and Beyond, Beijing: Beijing University Press.
• Zhao, M. (2021). Fragmented Strategy: U.S. Foreign Policy under Trump and China’s Response, China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 7(1), 89-110.
• Zhao, S. (2015). Rethinking the Chinese world order: The imperial cycle and the rise of China, Journal of Contemporary China, 24(96), 961-982. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2015.1030913