İtidalli Orta Güçler İçin Bir Güvenlik Stratejisi Olarak Risk Dengeleme (Hedging): Türkiye Örneği

Öz

Son yıllarda uluslararası düzenin artan çok kutupluluğu, uluslararası politikada orta güç davranışına olan ilginin yeniden artmasına neden olmuştur. Benzer bir eğilim, bu güçlerin farklı faktörlere göre sınıflandırılmasında da gözlemlenebilir. Bu makale, aşırı hırslı ve itidalli orta güçler arasındaki ayrıma dayanmakta ve risk dengeleme stratejisinin belirgin bir itidalli orta güç kimliği için uygun bir çerçeve sağlayabileceğini savunmaktadır. Çalışmanın odağında, Türkiye'nin Ukrayna'nın işgalinden bu yana Rusya'ya yönelik tutumu yer almaktadır. Analiz, risk dengeleme stratejisinin Türkiye'nin güncel zorluklara yanıt vermesi ve kazanımlarını artırması için uygun bir alternatif sunduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, bu strateji, yükselen gerginlik, çatışma ve giderek daha iddialı bir yerel yükselen büyük güç ile karakterize edilen jeopolitik bir manzara ile karşı karşıya kalan diğer itidalli orta güçler için de güvenilir bir seçenek sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Risk dengeleme
• orta güç
• itidalli orta güç
• Rusya
• Türk dış politikası

Hedging as a Security Strategy for Restrained Middle Powers: The Case of Türkiye

Öz

The growing multipolarity of the international order in recent years has garnered a renewed interest in middle-power behavior in international politics. A similar trend can also be observed in categorizing them based on different factors. This article draws on the distinction between overambitious and restrained middle powers and argues that the hedging strategy can provide a well-suited framework for a distinct restrained middle power identity. The focus will be on Türkiye’s attitude toward Russia since the invasion of Ukraine. The analysis suggests that the hedging strategy offers a viable alternative for Türkiye in responding to contemporary challenges and increasing its gains. Moreover, it is also reliable for other restrained middle powers facing a geopolitical landscape characterized by tension, conflict, and an increasingly assertive local rising great power.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hedging
• middle power
• restrained middle power
• Russia
• Turkish foreign policy

Kaynakça

1. Aksu-Ereker, F. & Akgül-Açıkmeşe, S. (2021) The Transatlantic Link in Turkey’s Middle-Power Identity. In E. Kuşku-Sönmez & Ç. Üstün (eds.), Turkey’s Changing Transatlantic Relations (93–115). Lanham: Lexington Books.
2. Alim, E. (2022) Strategic Hedging in the Black Sea: The Case of Turkey versus Russia. Comparative Strategy 41(5), 459–482.
3. Ant, O., & Yılmaz, U. (2022) What Erdogan’s Unusual Economic Ideas Mean for Turkey. The Washington Post, September 27. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what-erdogans-unusual-economic-ideas-mean-for-turkey/2022/09/23/9c5e8374-3b3d-11ed-b8af-0a04e5dc3db6_story.html (Accessed: 02.05.2024).
4. Aydın, U. (2021) Emerging Middle Powers and the Liberal International Order. International Affairs 97(5), 1377–1394.
5. Burton, G. (2021) Middle Power Behavior under Multipolarity: Indonesia and Malaysia in the Middle East since the Arab Uprisings. Asian Politics & Policy 13(2), 228–247.
6. Can, M. (2021) Is NATO Brain Dead? Turkey’s Position and the Effects of “Patronal Politics” on Foreign Policy. In C. S. Christensen & V. Maisaia (eds.), Advances in Information Security, Privacy, and Ethics (16–32). Hershey: IGI Global.
7. Ciorciari, J. D. & Haacke, J. (2019) Hedging in International Relations: An Introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 19(3), 367–374.
8. Cooper, A. F., Higgott, R. A. & Nossal, K. R. (1993) Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. Vancouver: UBC Press.

9. Cooper, A. F. & Parlar Dal, E. (2016) Positioning the Third Wave of Middle Power Diplomacy: Institutional Elevation, Practice Limitations. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis 71(4), 516–528.
10. Daily Sabah (2022) Russian Military Offensive Against Ukraine Unacceptable, Turkey Says. February 24. https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/diplomacy/russian-military-offensive-against-ukraine-unacceptable-turkey-says (Accessed: 01.05.2024).
11. Daniel, R. & Lindenstrauss, G. (2023) Walking a Fine Line: Turkey’s Mediation between Russia and Ukraine, and Relations with the West. INSS. https://www.inss.org.il/publication/turkey-russia-ukraine (Accessed: 20.05.2024).
12. DeBardeleben, J. (2014) New EU-Russian Borders after Enlargement: From Local to Transnational Linkages? In R. E. Kanet & R. Piet (eds.), Shifting Priorities in Russia’s Foreign and Security Policy (73–94). Farnham: Ashgate.
13. Efstathopoulos, C. (2015) Middle Powers in World Trade Diplomacy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
14. Erşen, E. & Köstem, S. (2019) Introduction: Understanding the Dynamics of Turkey’s Pivot to Eurasia. In E. Erşen & S. Köstem (eds.), Turkey’s Pivot to Eurasia: Geopolitics and Foreign Policy in a Changing World Order (17–38). London: Routledge.
15. Giles, C. (2021) Why Erdogan’s Unorthodox Turkish Economic Experiment is not Working. Financial Times, December 21.
16. Gilley, B. (2015) Turkey, Middle Powers, and the New Humanitarianism. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs 20(1), 37–58.
17. Gilley, B. & O’Neil, A. (2014) China’s Rise through the Prism of Middle Powers. In B. Gilley & A. O’Neil (eds.), Middle Powers and the Rise of China (1–22). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
18. Glinski, S. (2023) Turkey’s Balancing Act between Putin and the West. Foreign Policy, March 6. https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/03/06/turkey-elections-russia-erdogan-putin-nato/ (Accessed: 22.04.2024).
19. Higgott, R. A. & Cooper, A. F. (1990) Middle Power Leadership and Coalition Building: Australia, the Cairns Group, and the Uruguay Round of Trade Negotiations. International Organization 44(4), 589–632.
20. Holbraad, C. (1971) The Role of Middle Powers. Cooperation and Conflict 6(2), 77–90.
21. Holbraad, C. (1984) Middle Powers in International Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
22. Ikenberry, G. J. (2016) Between the Eagle and the Dragon: America, China, and Middle State Strategies in East Asia. Political Science Quarterly 131(1), 9–43.
23. Jackson, V. (2014) Power, Trust, and Network Complexity: Three Logics of Hedging in Asian Security. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 14(3), 331–356.
24. Jordaan, E. (2003) The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing Between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers. Politikon 30(1), 165–181.
25. Jordaan, E. (2017) The Emerging Middle Power Concept: Time to Say Goodbye? South African Journal of International Affairs 24(3), 395–412.
26. Kara, M. (2024) Hedging Strategy of Turkey in Great Power Competition. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2024.2352894
27. Karim, M. F. (2018) Middle Power, Status-seeking and Role Conceptions: The Cases of Indonesia and South Korea. Australian Journal of International Affairs 72(4), 343–363.
28. Korolev, A. (2019) Shrinking Room for Hedging: System-Unit Dynamics and Behavior of Smaller Powers. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 19(3), 419–452.
29. Kubilay, M. M. (2022) The Turkish Economy under the Presidential System. Middle East Institute, October 13. https://www.mei.edu/publications/turkish-economy-under-presidential-system (Accessed: 10.05.2024).
30. Kuik, C.-C. (2008) The Essence of Hedging: Malaysia and Singapore’s Response to a Rising China. Contemporary Southeast Asia 30(2), 159–185.
31. Kuik, C.-C., & Rozman, G. (2016) Light or Heavy Hedging: Positioning Between China and the United States. In Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies 2015 (Vol. 26, 1–9). Washington DC: Korea Economic Institute of America.
32. Kutlay, M., & Öniş, Z. (2021a) Turkish Foreign Policy in a Post-Western Order: Strategic Autonomy or New Forms of Dependence? International Affairs 97(4), 1085–1104.
33. Kutlay, M., & Öniş, Z. (2021b) Understanding Oscillations in Turkish Foreign Policy: Pathways to Unusual Middle Power Activism. Third World Quarterly 42(12), 3051–3069.
34. Lazar, A. (2021) Turkey between NATO and Kremlin: The Impact of Russian-Turkish Cooperation on the Relationship between Ankara and NATO. United Europe 17, 92–107.
35. Lee, S. J. (2015) South Korea’s Middle Power Activism and the Retooling of Its Public Diplomacy. In J. Melissen & Y. Sohn (eds.), Understanding Public Diplomacy in East Asia (107–129). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
36. Lee, S. J. (2016) South Korea Aiming to Be an Innovative Middle Power. In S. J. Lee (ed.), Transforming Global Governance with Middle Power Diplomacy: South Korea’s Role in the 21st Century (1–14). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
37. Lim, D. J., & Cooper, Z. (2015) Reassessing Hedging: The Logic of Alignment in East Asia. Security Studies 24(4), 696–727.
38. Mares, D. R. (1988) Middle Powers under Regional Hegemony: To Challenge or Acquiesce in Hegemonic Enforcement. International Studies Quarterly 32(4), 453–471.
39. Mead, W. R. (2014) The Return of Geopolitics: The Revenge of the Revisionist Powers. Foreign Affairs 93(3), 69–79.
40. Medeiros, E. S. (2005) Strategic Hedging and the Future of Asia‐Pacific Stability. The Washington Quarterly 29(1), 145–167.
41. Moeni, A., Mott, C., Paikin, Z. & Polansky, D. (2022) Middle Powers in the Multipolar World [White Paper]. The Institute for Peace and Diplomacy. https://peacediplomacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Middle-Powers-in-the-Multipolar-World-2.pdf (Accessed: 22.04.2024).
42. Müftüler, M. & Yüksel, M. (1997) Turkey: A Middle Power in the New Order. In A. F. Cooper (ed.), Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers After the Cold War (184–196). London: Macmillan.
43. Oğuzlu, H. T. (2023) Turkey as a Restrained Middle Power. Turkish Studies 24(3-4), 1–18.
44. Öniş, Z. & Kutlay, M. (2017) The Dynamics of Emerging Middle-Power Influence in Regional and Global Governance: The Paradoxical Case of Turkey. Australian Journal of International Affairs 71(2), 164–183.
45. Parlar Dal, E. & Kurşun, A. M. (2016) Assessing Turkey’s Middle Power Foreign Policy in MIKTA: Goals, Means, and Impact. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis 71(4), 608–629.
46. Parlar Dal, E. (ed.) (2018a) Middle Powers in Global Governance: The Rise of Turkey. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
47. Parlar Dal, E. (2018b) Profiling Middle Powers in Global Governance and the Turkish Case: An Introduction. In E. Parlar Dal (ed.), Middle Powers in Global Governance (1–31). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
48. Posen, B. R. (2009) Emerging Multipolarity: Why Should We Care? Current History 108(721), 347–352.
49. Ravenhill, J. (1998) Cycles of Middle Power Activism: Constraint and Choice in Australian and Canadian Foreign Policies. Australian Journal of International Affairs 52(3), 309–327.
50. Sari, B. & Sula, İ. E. (2024) Turkish Foreign Policy in a Transforming World Order: Middle Power Strategies and Prospects. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs 29(1), 4–23.
51. Schweller, R. L. (2014) Maxwell’s Demon and the Golden Apple: Global Discord in the New Millennium. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
52. Shichor, Y. (2014) Turkey and China in the Post–Cold War World. In B. Gilley & A. O’Neil (eds.), Middle Powers and the Rise of China (192–223). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
53. TASS (2022) Turkey Abstains from Voting on Russia’s Suspension from Council of Europe. February 26. https://tass.com/world/1411871 (Accessed: 10.05.2024).
54. Tessman, B. F. (2012) System Structure and State Strategy: Adding Hedging to the Menu. Security Studies 21(2), 192–231.
55. Walt, S. M. (1990) The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
56. Woo, B. (2021) Empirical Categorization of Middle Powers and How Different Middle Powers are Treated in International Organizations: The Case of India and South Korea. International Area Studies Review 24(2), 149–165.
57. You, C. (2022) Unpacking the Domestic Political Foundation of Middle Powers: Cases from South Korea and Turkey. In S. Lee & S. Kim (eds.), Korea’s Middle Power Diplomacy (141–156). Cham: Springer.