Jeoekonomik Perspektiften Türkiye'nin Uluslararası Arabuluculuk Kapasitesi: Stratejik Bağlantısallık ve Uluslararası Uyuşmazlık Çözümü Analizi

Öz

Öz Uluslararası sistemde ekonomik araçların dış politika üzerindeki etkisinin artması, jeoekonomi ile uluslararası arabuluculuk arasındaki ilişkiyi daha görünür hâle getirmiştir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye'nin uluslararası arabuluculuk kapasitesini jeoekonomik bir perspektiften incelemektedir. Çalışmanın temel argümanı, Türkiye'nin arabuluculuk girişimlerindeki başarısının yalnızca diplomatik kapasitesinden kaynaklanmadığı; aynı zamanda enerji koridorları, ulaştırma ağları, ticaret bağlantıları ve stratejik coğrafi konumundan beslendiğidir. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemi benimsenmiş; doküman incelemesi, karşılaştırmalı analiz ve örnek olay (vaka) incelemesi tekniklerinden yararlanılmıştır. Bu kapsamda Karadeniz Tahıl Girişimi, Trans Anadolu Doğal Gaz Boru Hattı (TANAP), Bakü–Tiflis–Kars Demiryolu, Orta Koridor ve Kalkınma Yolu Projesi örnek olay olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, Türkiye'nin jeoekonomik kapasitesinin uluslararası arabuluculuk faaliyetlerinin etkinliğini artıran stratejik bir unsur olduğunu ve ülkenin bölgesel ile küresel uyuşmazlıkların çözümünde önemli bir kolaylaştırıcı rol üstlendiğini göstermektedir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Arabuluculuk, Jeoekonomi, Türk Dış Politikası, Stratejik Bağlantısallık, Orta Koridor, Karadeniz Tahıl Girişimi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Arabuluculuk
• Jeoekonomi
• Türk Dış Politikası
• Stratejik Bağlantısallık
• Orta Koridor
• Karadeniz Tahıl Girişimi.

Destekleyen Kurum

İstanbul Kent Üniversitesi

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışmanın hazırlanması, yürütülmesi ve yayımlanması sürecinde bilimsel araştırma ve yayın etiği ilkelerine uyulmuştur. Çalışmada etik kurul izni gerektiren herhangi bir araştırma yöntemi (anket, görüşme, deney, gözlem vb.) kullanılmamıştır. Araştırmada yararlanılan tüm kaynaklara bilimsel atıf kurallarına uygun olarak yer verilmiştir.

Türkiye's International Mediation Capacity from a Geoeconomic Perspective: An Analysis of Strategic Connectivity and International Dispute Resolution

Öz

Abstract The growing significance of economic instruments in foreign policy has strengthened the relationship between geoeconomics and international mediation. This study examines Türkiye's international mediation capacity from a geoeconomic perspective. It argues that Türkiye's mediation effectiveness is supported not only by its diplomatic initiatives but also by its energy corridors, transportation networks, trade connectivity, and strategic geographical location. Employing a qualitative research design, the study utilizes document analysis and comparative case study methods to examine the Black Sea Grain Initiative, the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP), the Baku–Tbilisi–Kars Railway, the Middle Corridor, and the Development Road Project. The findings demonstrate that Türkiye's geoeconomic capacity significantly enhances the effectiveness of its international mediation efforts and strengthens its diplomatic influence in regional and global conflict resolution processes. Keywords: Mediation, Geoeconomics, Turkish Foreign Policy, Strategic Connectivity, Middle Corridor, Black Sea Grain Initiative.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mediation
• Geoeconomics
• Turkish Foreign Policy
• Strategic Connectivity
• Middle Corridor
• Black Sea Grain Initiative.

Destekleyen Kurum

Istanbul Kent University

Etik Beyan

The authors declare that this study was conducted in accordance with the principles of scientific research and publication ethics throughout its preparation, execution, and publication process. The study did not involve any research methods requiring ethics committee approval (such as surveys, interviews, experiments, or observations). All sources used in the study have been properly cited in accordance with academic citation standards.

Kaynakça

1. Bercovitch, J. (Ed.). (1996). Resolving international conflicts: The theory and practice of mediation. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
2. Bercovitch, J., & Gartner, S. S. (Eds.). (2009). International conflict mediation: New approaches and findings. Routledge.
3. Bercovitch, J., & Houston, A. (1993). Influence of mediator characteristics and behavior on the success of mediation in international relations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 4(4), 297-321. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022730
4. Blackwill, R. D., & Harris, J. M. (2016). War by other means: Geoeconomics and statecraft. Harvard University Press.
5. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
6. Cengiz, Ö. (2023). Rusya-Ukrayna Savaşı'nın Türkiye'den geçen Orta Lojistik Koridora etkileri. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(27), 485-505. https://doi.org/10.36543/kauiibfd.2023.019
7. Cooper, A. F., Higgott, R. A., & Nossal, K. R. (1993). Relocating middle powers: Australia and Canada in a changing world order. UBC Press.
8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.

9. Directorate of Communications of the Republic of Türkiye. (2024, April 22). Türkiye, Iraq, Qatar and UAE sign "Development Road" memorandum of understanding. https://www.iletisim.gov.tr/english/haberler/detay/turkiye-iraq-qatar-and-uae-sign-development-road-memorandum-of-understanding
10. Erdoğan, N. (2017). TANAP Projesinin Türkiye ve Azerbaycan enerji politikalarındaki yeri ve önemi. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 10-26. https://doi.org/10.25287/ohuiibf.319259
11. European Commission. (n.d.). Diversification of gas supply sources and routes. Retrieved August 2, 2026, from https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-security/diversification-gas-supply-sources-and-routes_en
12. 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
13. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2022). The importance of Ukraine and the Russian Federation for global agricultural markets and the risks associated with the war in Ukraine. https://www.fao.org/3/cb9013en/cb9013en.pdf
14. George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press.
15. Güner, R. (2015). Turkey's mediation initiatives between 2002 and 2015: A discourse and content analysis [Master's thesis, Middle East Technical University].
16. Jordaan, E. (2003). The concept of a middle power in international relations: Distinguishing between emerging and traditional middle powers. Politikon, 30(1), 165-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/0258934032000147282
17. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and interdependence: World politics in transition. Little, Brown.
18. Kleiboer, M. (1996). Understanding success and failure of international mediation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 40(2), 360-389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002796040002007
19. Luttwak, E. N. (1990). From geopolitics to geo-economics: Logic of conflict, grammar of commerce. The National Interest, 20, 17-23.
20. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Türkiye. (n.d.-a). Peaceful resolution of conflicts and mediation. Retrieved August 2, 2026, from https://www.mfa.gov.tr/resolution-of-conflicts-and-mediation.en.mfa
21. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Türkiye. (n.d.-b). Türkiye's connectivity and multilateral transportation policy. Retrieved August 2, 2026, from https://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkiye_s-multilateral-transportation-policy.en.mfa
22. Sil, R., & Katzenstein, P. J. (2010). Analytic eclecticism in the study of world politics: Reconfiguring problems and mechanisms across research traditions. Perspectives on Politics, 8(2), 411-431. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592710001179
23. Süleymanoğlu-Kürüm, R. (2011). A new sector in Turkish foreign policy: Mediation. Boğaziçi Journal, 25(2), 189-213.
24. Touval, S., & Zartman, I. W. (1985). International mediation: Conflict resolution and power politics. Journal of Social Issues, 41(2), 27-45.
25. Tümenbatur, A. (2021). Orta Koridor üzerindeki Demir İpekyolu güzergâhı ve lojistik merkez yer seçimi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 30(3), 102-110. https://doi.org/10.35379/cusosbil.977922
26. United Nations. (2022). Initiative on the safe transportation of grain and foodstuffs from Ukrainian ports. https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/default/files/document/files/2024/05/blackseagraininitiativefulltext.pdf
27. United Nations. (2023). The Black Sea Grain Initiative: What was achieved? Why was it important? https://www.un.org/en/black-sea-grain-initiative/achievements
28. United Nations General Assembly. (2011). Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution (A/RES/65/283).
29. United Nations General Assembly. (2012). Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution (A/RES/66/291).
30. United Nations General Assembly. (2014). Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution (A/RES/68/303).
31. Vuković, S. (2014). International mediation as a distinct form of conflict management. International Journal of Conflict Management, 25(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-02-2012-0015
32. Wigell, M., Scholvin, S., & Aaltola, M. (Eds.). (2018). Geo-economics and power politics in the 21st century: The revival of economic statecraft. Routledge.
33. World Bank. (2023). Middle trade and transport corridor: Policies and investments to triple freight volumes and halve travel time by 2030. https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/eca/publication/middle-trade-and-transport-corridor
34. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.