BAĞIMLILIK İÇİNDE AYRIŞMA: KARŞILIKLI BAĞIMLILIK, TİCARET SAVAŞLARI VE KAMU MALİYESİNİN STRATEJİK DÖNÜŞÜMÜ

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1 , 85 - 100 , 23.03.2026

Yunus Emre Özayrancı

https://doi.org/10.71284/jpepfm.2026616

https://izlik.org/JA65ZH67XJ

Öz

Bu çalışma, küresel ekonomide artan ticaret savaşlarını kapitalizmin tarihsel gelişimi içinde analiz ederek, karşılıklı bağımlılık ile ayrışma arasındaki diyalektik ilişkiyi kamu maliyesi perspektifinden incelemektedir. Literatürde ticaret savaşları çoğunlukla dış ticaret politikaları ve güç dengesi bağlamında ele alınırken, bu çalışma söz konusu çatışmaların mali ve kurumsal boyutlarını merkeze almaktadır. Araştırmanın temel sorusu, ticaret savaşlarının kapitalizmin evrimi içinde hangi mali araçlar aracılığıyla yeniden üretildiği ve kamu maliyesinin bu süreçte nasıl stratejik bir işlev üstlendiğidir. Yöntem olarak tarihsel-karşılaştırmalı analiz ve ekonomi politik yaklaşımı benimsenmiştir. Merkantilist rekabetten Bretton Woods düzenine, neoliberal küreselleşmeden ABD–Çin ticaret savaşına uzanan süreç incelenmiştir. Bulgular, ticaret savaşlarının yalnızca gümrük tarifeleriyle sınırlı olmadığını; kamu harcamaları, sübvansiyonlar, borçlanma politikaları ve sanayi teşvikleri gibi mali enstrümanlar aracılığıyla kurumsal bir nitelik kazandığını göstermektedir. Çalışma, karşılıklı bağımlılığın ortadan kalkmadığını; aksine kamu maliyesi araçları üzerinden yeniden biçimlendirildiğini ortaya koymakta ve kamu maliyesinin küresel ayrışma süreçlerinde artan ölçüde stratejik bir politika alanı olarak konumlandığını analiz etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ticaret Savaşları , Karşılıklı Bağımlılık , Ayırma Stratejisi , Kamu Maliyesi , Mali Egemenlik

DECOUPLING WITHIN INTERDEPENDENCE: TRADE WARS AND THE STRATEGIC TRANSFORMATION OF PUBLIC FINANCE

https://izlik.org/JA65ZH67XJ

Öz

This study analyzes the increasing trade wars in the global economy within the historical evolution of capitalism, examining the dialectical relationship between interdependence and separation from a public finance perspective. While the existing literature primarily addresses trade wars in terms of trade policy instruments and power politics, this study centers on their fiscal and institutional dimensions. The main research question investigates through which fiscal instruments trade wars are reproduced across different phases of capitalism and how public finance assumes a strategic function in this process. Methodologically, the study adopts a historical-comparative analysis grounded in political economy. It traces the transformation of trade conflicts from mercantilist rivalry to the Bretton Woods order, from neoliberal globalization to the contemporary U.S.–China trade war. The findings indicate that trade wars extend beyond tariff measures and acquire an institutional character through fiscal instruments such as public expenditures, subsidies, borrowing policies, and industrial incentives. The study further demonstrates that interdependence has not disappeared; rather, it has been reconfigured through public finance instruments, positioning public finance as an increasingly strategic policy domain in contemporary processes of global separation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Trade Wars , Interdependence , Strategy of Separation , Public Finance , Fiscal Sovereignty

Kaynakça

• Arrighi, G. (1994). The long twentieth century: Money, power, and the origins of our times. Verso.
• Block, F. (1977). The ruling class does not rule: Notes on the Marxist theory of the state. Socialist Revolution, 7(3), 6–28.
• Blyth, M. (2013). Austerity: The history of a dangerous idea. Oxford University Press.
• Bown, C. P. (2022). The 2018–2020 US–China trade war and phase one agreement. Peterson Institute for International Economics.
• Bown, C. P. (2023). Industrial policy for clean energy and the WTO. Peterson Institute for International Economics.
• Brewer, J. (1989). The sinews of power: War, money and the English state, 1688–1783. Harvard University Press. Congressional Budget Office. (2024). The budget and economic outlook: 2024 to 2034. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59710
• Congressional Research Service. (2023). China’s industrial policies and U.S.–China trade tensions. U.S. Congress.
• Cosbey, A., Droege, S., Fischer, C., & Munnings, C. (2019). Developing guidance for implementing border carbon adjustments. Energy Policy, 127, 84–94. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1093/reep/rey020
• Eichengreen, B. (1996). Globalizing capital: A history of the international monetary system. Princeton University Press.
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press.
• European Commission. (2023). Carbon border adjustment mechanism. https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu
• Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). Weaponized interdependence: How global economic networks shape state coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42–79. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351
• Findlay, R., & O’Rourke, K. H. (2007). Power and plenty: Trade, war, and the world economy in the second millennium. Princeton University Press.
• Fung, A., & Wright, E. O. (2003). Deepening democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance. Verso.
• Gabor, D. (2021). The Wall Street consensus. Development and Change, 52(3), 429–459. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12645
• Gilpin, R. (1987). The political economy of international relations. Princeton University Press.
• Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.
• Heckscher, E. F. (1935). Mercantilism (Vols. 1–2). George Allen & Unwin.
• Helleiner, E. (1994). States and the reemergence of global finance. Cornell University Press.
• Hobsbawm, E. (1975). The age of capital, 1848–1875. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
• Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and interdependence. Little, Brown.
• Kindleberger, C. P. (1973). The world in depression, 1929–1939. University of California Press.
• Marx, K. (2013). Kapital: Ekonomi politiğin eleştirisi (Cilt 1). Yordam Kitap. (Orijinal eser 1867)
• Mehling, M. A., van Asselt, H., Das, K., Droege, S., & Verkuijl, C. (2019). Designing border carbon adjustments. American Journal of International Law, 113(3), 433–481.
• Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China. (2023). Fiscal subsidies for strategic industries. http://www.mof.gov.cn
• Musgrave, R. A., & Musgrave, P. B. (1989). Public finance in theory and practice (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
• O’Brien, P. K. (1988). The political economy of British taxation, 1660–1815. Economic History Review, 41(1), 1–32.
• OECD. (2023). Climate policy and carbon pricing developments 2023. OECD Publishing.
• Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press.
• Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation. Beacon Press. (Orijinal eser 1944)
• Rodrik, D. (2011). The globalization paradox. W. W. Norton.
• Saraç, Ö. (2006). Küresel vergi rekabeti ve ulusal vergi politikaları. Maliye ve Hukuk Yayınları.
• SIPRI. (2024). Trends in world military expenditure 2023. https://www.sipri.org
• Strange, S. (1996). The retreat of the state. Cambridge University Press.
• Tørsløv, T. R., Wier, L. S., & Zucman, G. (2023). The missing profits of nations. Review of Economic Studies, 90(3), 1499–1534. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdac049
• U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2025). Major foreign holders of treasury securities. https://home.treasury.gov
• U.S. Geological Survey. (2023). Mineral commodity summaries: Rare earths. https://www.usgs.gov
• U.S. Trade Representative. (2020). Findings of the Section 301 investigation into China’s acts, policies, and practices. https://ustr.gov
• Wallerstein, I. (1974). The modern world-system I. Academic Press.
• Wampler, B., & Avritzer, L. (2004). Participatory publics: Civil society and new institutions in democratic Brazil. World Development, 32(2), 291–312.
• White House. (2022a). CHIPS and Science Act fact sheet. https://www.whitehouse.gov
• White House. (2022b). Inflation Reduction Act guidebook. Executive Office of the President.