Trump’ın Neo-Merkantalist Dış Politikası Karşısında Avrupa Birliği’nin Güvenlik Yanıtı: Dijital Diplomasi ve Stratejik Özerkliğe Ampirik Bir Yaklaşım

Öz

Donald Trump döneminde benimsenen dış politika yaklaşımı, uluslararası iş birliğine dayalı çok taraflı yapıların zayıflatılması ve dış ilişkilerin daha çok tek taraflı stratejik hamlelerle yürütülmesi anlayışıyla şekillenmiştir. Bu doğrultuda neo-merkantalist bir perspektif benimsenmiş; ekonomik korumacılığı ve ulusal çıkarların mutlak önceliğini esas alan bu çizgi, yalnızca ABD’nin dış politika davranışlarında değil, aynı zamanda küresel düzeyde yerleşik düzenin işleyişinde de belirgin etkiler yaratmıştır. Trump’ın bu yönelimi, Avrupa Birliği (AB) içinde savunma alanında daha bağımsız bir yapılanma ihtiyacını gündeme taşımış ve stratejik özerklik (SA) söylemini güçlendirmiştir. Ancak bu söylemin kalıcı ve bütüncül bir yapıya dönüşmesi, üye devletler arasında süregelen güvenlik önceliği farklılıkları nedeniyle mümkün olmamıştır. Bu çalışma, Donald Trump’ın neo-merkantalist dış politikasının AB’nin SA arayışını nasıl etkilediğini ve bu yönelimin ortak bir savunma politikasına dönüşmesini üye devletlerin içsel farklılıklarının nasıl sınırladığını sorgulamaktadır. Bu sav veri kazıma tekniğiyle X platformu üzerinden liderlerin söylemlerinin çıkarılması ve frekans analizine tabi tutulması ile desteklenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Neo-Merkantalizm
• Stratejik Özerklik
• AB Dış Politikası
• Trump Dönemi Dış Politikası
• Dijital Diplomasi
• Söylem ve Frekans Analizi

EU’s Security Response to Trump’s Neo-Mercantilist Foreign Policy: An Empirical Approach to Digital Diplomacy and Strategic Autonomy

Öz

The foreign policy approach adopted in the Donald Trump era has been shaped by the understanding of weakening multilateral structures based on international cooperation and conducting foreign relations mostly through unilateral strategic moves. In this direction, a neo-mercantilist perspective has been adopted; this line, which is based on economic protectionism and the absolute priority of national interests, has had significant effects not only on the foreign policy behavior of the United States, but also on the functioning of the established order at the global level. Trump’s orientation has brought the need for a more independent defense structure within the European Union (EU) to the agenda and strengthened the discourse of strategic autonomy. However, the transformation of this discourse into a permanent and holistic structure has not been possible due to the ongoing differences in security priorities among member states. This study asks how Donald Trump’s neo-mercantilist foreign policy has affected the EU’s pursuit of strategic autonomy and how the internal differences of the member states limit the transformation of this orientation into a common defense policy. This argument is supported by extracting the discourses of the leaders on platform X through data scraping technique and subjecting them to frequency analysis.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Neo-mercantilism
• Strategic Autonomy
• EU Foreign Policy
• Trump Era Foreign Policy
• Digital Diplomacy
• Discourse and Frequency Analysis

Kaynakça

1. Abramson, A. (2018, Mart 2). Trump’s Tariff Talk Spurs EU to Threaten Taxes on Harley’s, Bourbon and Levi’s. Time. https://time.com/5183838/european-union-tariffs-donald-trump-bourbon- levis-harley-davidson/
2. Adesina, O. S. (2017). Foreign policy in an era of digital diplomacy. Cogent Social Sciences, 3(1), 1297175. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2017.1297175
3. Al-Rawi, A. (2021). Political Memes and Fake News Discourses on Instagram. Media and Communication, 9(1), 276-290. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v9i1.3533
4. Balfour, R. (2025, Nisan 30). Europe Tried to Trump-Proof Itself. Now It’s Crafting a Plan B. Emissary. https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/04/europe-trump-ukraine-defense- security-economy-plan?lang=en
5. Becker, S., Bauer, M. W., Connolly, S., & Kassim, H. (2016). The Commission: Boxed in and constrained, but still an engine of integration. West European Politics, 39(5), 1011-1031. https://doi. org/10.1080/01402382.2016.1181870
6. Bhala, R. (2025, Mart 1). The New Age of Global Trade: Aggressive Neo Mercantilism. https:// thediplomat.com/2025/03/the-new-age-of-global-trade-aggressive-neo-mercantilism/
7. Borrell, J. (2020). Why European strategic autonomy matters. EEAS, The Diplomatic Service of the European Union. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/why-european-strategic-autonomy-matters_ en
8. Borrell, J. (2022). The future of Europe is being defined now. EEAS, The Diplomatic Service of the European Union. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/future-europe-being-defined-now-0_en

9. Bull, H. (1980). The Grotian Conception of International Society. İçinde The War System. Routledge.
10. Bull, H. (2012). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (4. bs). Palgrave Macmillan. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=b804fec6fdfe75a496a0604fbecbdb90
11. Bundesministerium der Verteidigung. (2018). Speech by Federal Minister of Defence Dr Ursula von der Leyen on the Occasion of the Opening of the 54th Munich Security Conference in Munich 0n 16 February 2018.
12. https://www.bmvg.de/resource/blob/22180/a4b7d92394e5ff6b7689c79cc71fa 9d9/20180216-download-eroeffnungsrede-englisch-data.pdf
13. Collins, S. D., DeWitt, J. R., & LeFebvre, R. K. (2019). Hashtag diplomacy: Twitter as a tool for engaging in public diplomacy and promoting US foreign policy. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 15(2), 78-96. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-019-00119-5
14. Cox, R. W. (1983). Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 12(2), 162-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298830 120020701
15. Danziger, R., & Schreiber, M. (2021). Digital diplomacy: Face management in MFA Twitter accounts. Policy & Internet, poi3.269. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.269
16. Donath, S. (2009). Strategic Autonomy and the European Union’s Permanent Structured Cooperation [NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA MONTEREY]. Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive.
17. Drent, M. (2018). European strategic autonomy: Going it alone? Clingendael Institute. https://www. jstor.org/stable/resrep21311
18. European Commission. (2017a). European Commission welcomes first operational steps towards a European Defence Union (Press Release IP/17/5205). https://ec.europa.eu/commission/ presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_17_5205/IP_17_5205_EN.pdf European Commission. (2017b). PRESIDENT JEAN-CLAUDE JUNCKER’S State of the Union Address 2017 (Press release SPEECH/17/3165). https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/ api/files/attachment/854659/EN-FR-DE-Speech.pdf
19. Fiott, D. (2018). Strategic autonomy: Towards ‘European sovereignty’ in defence? European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), 1-8.
20. Glasscock, J. (2023). Trump’s appeals to populism in immigration tweets: Immigrants as victims, heroes, and threats. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 39(1), Article 1. https://doi. org/10.58997/fq7heg80
21. Gürkaynak, M. (2004). Avrupa’da savunma ve güvenlik. Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
22. Gürkaynak, M. (2008). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri İle NATO Arasındaki Simbiotik İlişki ve Bu İlişkinin Geleceği. İçinde Prof. Dr. Fahir Armaoğlu’na Armağan (ss. 553-577).
23. Gürsoy, B. (2024). Soğuk Savaş Sonrası ABD Büyük (Grand) Stratejisi ve ABD Dış Politikası (1991- 2001). İçinde İ. Karakaya (Ed.), ABD Büyük (Grand) Stratejisi: Kavram, Temalar ve Tarihsel Süreç Perspektifinden ABD Dış Politikası (ss. 421-444). Nobel Bilimsel.
24. Haavik, P. H. (2024). The Trump Effect on EU Strategic Autonomy and Normative Power Dynamics [Bachelor’s thesis]. Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
25. Habermas, J. (2003). The Theory of Communicative Action: Lifeworld and system: a critique of functionalist reason: C. Volume 2. Beacon Press. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index. php?md5=269c345ba53f94b75b1668161c87b5e7
26. Helwig, N. (2020). EU strategic autonomy: A reality check for Europe’s global agenda (Working Paper 119). Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
27. Hoeffler, C., Hofmann, S. C., & Mérand, F. (2024). The polycrisis and EU security and defence competences. Journal of European Public Policy, 31(10), 3224-3248. https://doi.org/10.1080/135017 63.2024.2362762
28. Howorth, J. (2019). Strategic Autonomy: Why It’s Not About Europe Going it Alone. European View, 18(2), 254-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1781685819883195
29. Huddleston, R. J., Jamieson, T., & James, P. (2022). International relations as interdisciplinary research. Içinde R. J. Huddleston, T. Jamieson, & P. James (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in International Relations.
30. https://www.elgaronline.com/edcollchap/book/9781839101014/book- part-9781839101014-8.xml
31. Hunnicutt, T., & Brunnstrom, D. (2025, Mart 7). Trump: If NATO members don’t pay, US won’t defend them. Reuters.
32. https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-if-nato-members-dont-pay-us- wont-defend-them-2025-03-07/
33. Hyde-Price, A. (2006). ‘Normative’ power Europe: A realist critique. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(2), 217-234. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500451634
34. IAR. (2017, Kasım 10). Poland to join EU’s PESCO defence initiative: Gov’t spokesman. http:// archiwum.thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/334584
35. ICG. (2025). A Moment of Reckoning: The EU and the Second Age of Trump [Multilateral Diplomacy]. https://www.crisisgroup.org/global/moment-reckoning-eu-and-second-age-trump
36. Jang, Y., Park, C.-H., & Seo, Y.-S. (2019). Fake News Analysis Modeling Using Quote Retweet.
37. Electronics, 8(12), Article 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8121377
38. Joint Declaration on European Defence. (1998). [Joint Declaration issued at the British-French Summit]. Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the United Kingdom. https://www.cvce.eu/content/ publication/2008/3/31/f3cd16fb-fc37-4d52-936f-c8e9bc80f24f/publishable_en.pdf Juncos, A. E., & and Pomorska, K. (2021). Contesting procedural norms: The impact of politicisation on European foreign policy cooperation. European Security, 30(3), 367-384. https://doi.org/10.108 0/09662839.2021.1947799 Kimmage, M. (2025). The World Trump Wants: American Power in the New Age of Nationalism. Foreign Affairs.
39. Kurt, S. (2021). A Neo-Mercantilist Analysis of the Political Economy of U.S. Foreign Policy under Trump’s Rule. Codrul Cosminului, 27(1), 259-286. https://doi.org/10.4316/CC.2021.01.013
40. Losev, A. V. (2018). The Formula of Trumponomics. Russia in Global Affairs, 16(3), 66-88. https:// doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2018-16-3-66-88
41. Mader, M., Gavras, K., Hofmann, S. C., Reifler, J., Schoen, H., & Thomson, C. (2024). International threats and support for European security and defence integration: Evidence from 25 countries. European Journal of Political Research, 63(2), 433-454. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12605
42. Matisek, J., & Farwell, J. (2025, Mayıs 2). Trump’s national security strategy: From Pax Americana to Pact Americana. The Strategist — The Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
43. Mogherini. (2017). Remarks by High Representative/Vice-President Federica Mogherini at the press conference following the Foreign Affairs Council (The Diplomatic Service of the European Union). European Union External Action. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/node/35545_en
44. Murray, R. W. (2018). Whither Multilateralism? The Growing Importance of Regional International Societies in an Emerging Multipolar Era (C. Echle, P. Rueppel, M. Sarmah, & Y. L. Hwee, Ed.; ss. 13- 27). Kondrad Adenauer Stiftung.
45. Nováky, N. (2018). The EU’s Permanent Structured Cooperation in defence: Keeping Sleeping Beauty from snoozing. European View, 17(1), 97-104. https://doi.org/10.1177/1781685818764813 Ovalı, A. Ş. (2020). Türkiye-ABD İlişkilerinde Twitter Diplomasisi. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 17(65), Article 65. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.672450
46. Palm, T. (2021). Normative power and EU strategic autonomy. Hague Centre for Strategic Studies. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep34841
47. Pathinayake, N., Kulatileke, L., Hettiarachchi, C., Yapa, S., & Ahangama, S. (2024). Sentiment Analysis of Tweets on the Russia-Ukraine War. 143-148. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICARC61713.2024.10499745
48. Péter, K. (2025). Trump 2.0, the European Union and China – How will Donald Trump’s second term as president affect relations between the EU and China? (Working Paper No.7). China-CEE Institute. ISSN: 2560-1628
49. Phillipe, E. (2018). Speech by French Prime Minister, Edouard Philippe at the 54th Munich Security Conference February 17. https://securityconference.org/assets/02_Dokumente/03_Materialien/ MSC2018_speech_EdouardPhilippe.pdf
50. Podiotis, P. (2020). Towards International Relations Data Science: Mining the CIA World Factbook. http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.05640
51. Polyakova, A., & Haddad, B. (2019). Europe Alone: What Comes after the Transatlantic Alliance. Foreign Affairs, 109(98).
52. Schimmelfennig, F. (2018). European integration (theory) in times of crisis. A comparison of the euro and Schengen crises. Journal of European Public Policy, 25(7), 969-989. https://doi.org/10.108 0/13501763.2017.1421252 Shahin, S., & Huang, Q. E. (2019). Friend, Ally, or Rival? Twitter Diplomacy as “Technosocial” Performance of National Identity. International Journal of Communication, 13(0), Article 0. Strauß, N., Kruikemeier, S., van der Meulen, H., & van Noort, G. (2015). Digital diplomacy in GCC countries: Strategic communication of Western embassies on Twitter. Government Information Quarterly, 32(4), 369-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.08.001
53. The White House. (2025). President Donald J. Trump Adjusts Imports of Automobiles and Automobile Parts into the United States [Fact Sheet]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact- sheet-president-donald-j-trump-adjusts-imports-of-automobiles-and-automobile-parts-into-the- united-states/
54. Tocci, N. (2021). Towards European cooperative autonomy. Içinde R. Roberta Haar, T. Christiansen, S. Lange, & S. Vanhoonacker (Ed.), The Making of European Security Policy (ss. 11-27). Routledge.
55. https://www.academia.edu/70327630/Towards_European_cooperative_autonomy
56. TrumpWhiteHouse. (2019, Eylül 25). Remarks by President Trump to the 74th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. TrumpWhite House Archive. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/ briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-74th-session-united-nations-general-assembly/
57. Uyğun, E. D. (2022). Değişen Avrupa Savunma ve Güvenlik Anlayışı Dinamiği: Fouchet Planı ve Avrupa Birliği Anlaşması. İçinde R. K. Karaca & M. Jane (Ed.), 1. ULUSLARARASI LİSANSÜSTÜ ÖĞRENCİ KONFERANSI: 21. YY’DA GÜVENLİK VE BARIŞIN İNŞASI TAM METİN BİLDİRİ KİTABI (ss. 117-160). İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi.
58. Uyğun, E. D., & Kanat, S. (2024). ABD Dış Politikasında Büyük (Grand) Strateji ve Uluslarası Hukuk. İçinde İ. Karakaya (Ed.), ABD Büyük (Grand) Stratejisi: Kavram, Temalar ve Tarihsel Süreç Perspektifinden ABD Dış Politikası (ss. 83-110). Nobel Bilimsel.
59. Ülger, İ. K. (2002). Avrupa Birliğinde Siyasal Bütünleşme Ortak Dış Politika ve Güvenlik Politikasının Oluşumu. Gündoğan Yayınları.
60. Van den Abeele, E. (2021). Towards a New Paradigm in Open Strategic Autonomy? (SSRN Scholarly Paper 3873798). Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3873798
61. Virtanen, M. (2023). Methods and programs used in data analysis [Bachelor’s thesis]. Häme University of Applied Sciences.
62. Vu, H. L. T., Ngo, L. D., & Nguyen, T. T. (2024). A Spectrum of Autonomy: Towards a Theoretical Framework of Strategic Autonomy. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 79(2), 230-249. https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020241256000
63. Wang, Y., Croucher, S. M., & Pearson, E. (2021). National Leaders’ Usage of Twitter in Response to COVID-19: A Sentiment Analysis. Frontiers in Communication, 6, 732399. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fcomm.2021.732399 Weber, G., & Quencez, M. (2025, Mart 14). Trump, Ukraine, and Europe’s Three Security Priorities.
64. GMF- German Marshall Fund of the United States. https://www.gmfus.org/download/article/24119 Wendt, H., & Henriksson, M. (2020). Building a Selenium-based data collection tool: Used for identification and evaluation of cross-website relationships and information leakage. https://urn.kb.se/ resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-169029
65. Wigell, M. (2016). Conceptualizing regional powers’ geoeconomic strategies: Neo-imperialism, neo-mercantilism, hegemony, and liberal institutionalism. Asia Europe Journal, 14(2), 135-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-015-0442-x
66. Zandee, D., Deen, B., Kruijver, K., & Stoetman, A. (2020). European strategic autonomy in security and defence: Now the going gets tough, it’s time to get going [Clingendael Report]. Netherlands Institute of International Relations. Zappettini, F., & Rezazadah, M. (2024). Communication Strategies on Twitter: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the US Withdrawal from Afghanistan. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 18(2), 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2023.2280555.