Bütüncül dengeleme kuramı çerçevesinde Gürcistan'ın ittifak tercihlerini anlamak

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 4, 2426 - 2442, 30.12.2025

Bilal Alper Torun

https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1827138

https://izlik.org/JA42LN54XB

Öz

Uluslararası ilişkilerde neorealist kuram, sistemdeki aktörleri benzer birimler olarak tanımlamış farklılığı yaratan unsurun ise kapasiteleri olduğuna işaret etmiştir. Buna göre güç dağılımındaki farklılıklar aktörlerin ilişkilerini belirlemektedir. Devletler güvenliklerini sağlamak için ise güç dengesi kuramına uygun ittifak ilişkileri kurmaktadırlar. Fakat bu yaklaşım Üçüncü Dünya ülkelerinin ittifak tercihlerini açıklamakta açıkça başarısız olmuştur. David Singer bu başarısızlığa dikkat çekmiş ve 1991’de güç dengesi kuramına meydan okuyan bütüncül dengeleme kuramını (omnibalancing) ortaya atmıştır. Bu çalışma Sovyet sonrası Gürcistan’ın dış politika ve ittifak tercihlerini bütüncül dengeleme kuramı bağlamında anlamayı amaçlamaktadır. Nitel analiz yöntemiyle ele alınan çalışmada neden-sonuç ilişkisine dayalı bir siyasi tarih anlatısı tercih edilmiş, bu analiz Gürcistan’ın ittifak tercihlerinde kırılmalar dikkate alınarak üç ayrı dönemde incelenmiştir. Bağımsızlık sonrası bütüncül dengeleme yaparak varlığını koruyan Gürcistan’ın 2004-2012 yılları arasındaki dönemde bu yaklaşımı terk ettiği ve önemli askeri ve siyasi sonuçlarla karşılaştığı görülmüştür. 2012 sonrası Gürcistan’da yaşanan politik ve idari dönüşüm tekrar bütüncül dengelemeye dönüşü simgelemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Güç Dengesi , İttifak , Bütüncül Dengeleme , Dış Politika , Gürcistan

Understanding the Georgia’s alliance preferences within the framework of Omnibalancing Theory

https://izlik.org/JA42LN54XB

Öz

Neorealist theory in the international relations defined the actors in the system as similar units and pointed out that the factor that creates the difference is their capacities. Accordingly, differences in power distribution determine the relationship of actors. To ensure their security, states establish alliances in accordance with the balance of power theory. But this approach has clearly failed to explain the alliance preferences of Third World countries. David Singer drew attention to this failure and in 1991 put forward the omnibalancing theory that challenged the balance of power theory. This study aims to understand post-Soviet Georgia's foreign policy and alliance preferences in the context of omnibalancing theory. In the study handled with the qualitative analysis method, a political history narrative based on cause-effect relationship was preferred, and this analysis was examined in three separate periods, taking into account the breaks in Georgia's alliance preferences. It was observed that Georgia, which maintained its existence by omnibalancing after independence, abandoned this approach in the period between 2004 and 2012 and faced significant military and political consequences. The political and administrative transformation in Georgia after 2012 symbolizes a return to omnibalancing.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Balance of Power , Alliance , Omnibalancing , Foreign Policy , Georgia

Kaynakça

• Ağacan, K. (2011). Gürcistan: Çok Milletli Yapıda Devlet İnşa Sürecinin Öyküsü. In C. Veliev & A. Aslanlı (Eds.), Güney Kafkasya: Toprak Bütünlüğü, Jeopolitik Mücadeleler ve Enerji. (pp. 57-104). Berikan Yayınevi.
• Akobia, E. (2023). Georgia’s (mis)alignment with the EU Foreign Policy. Civil Georgia. https://civil.ge/archives/542831
• Aprasidze, D., & Siroky, D. (2010). Frozen Transitions and Unfrozen Conflicts, or What Went Wrong in Georgia. Yale Journal of International Relations, 5(2), 121-136.
• Aprasidze, D., & Siroky, D. S. (2020). Technocratic populism in hybrid regimes: Georgia on my mind and in my pocket. Politics and Governance, 8(4), 580-589. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3370
• Ayoob, M. (1995). The Third World Security Predicament: State Making, Regional Conflict, and the International System. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
• Bibilashvili, M. (2022). Towards the “Normal” State: Georgian Foreign Policy between Russia and the West. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Brown, C., & Ainley, K. (2013). Uluslararası İlişkileri Anlamak (M. G. Ayral, Trans.). Sümer Kitabevi.
• Caucasus Watch. (2024). Georgian Dream Leader Warns of “Ukrainization” Threat If Opposition Wins. Caucasus Watch. https://caucasuswatch.de/en/news/georgian-dream-leader-warns-of-ukrainization-threat-if-opposition-wins.html E.T. 01.09. 2025
• Civil Georgia. (2012). Founding Declaration of the Political Coalition Georgian Dream. Civil Georgia. https://civil.ge/archives/121750 E.T. 12.10.2025
• Civil Georgia. (2013). Ivanishvili Speaks on Ties with NATO, Russia. Civil Georgia. https://civil.ge/archives/122540 E.T. 14.10.2025
• Çelikpala, M. (2005). From A Failed State To A Weak One? Georgia And Turkish-Georgian Relations. The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations, 36, 159-199.
• Çelikpala, M. (2012). Başarısız Devlet-Demokratik Model Ülke Sarmalında Gürcistan’ın 20 Yılı. Orta Asya ve Kafkasya Araştırmaları, 14, 1-35.
• David, S. R. (1991). Explaining Third World Alignment. World Politics, 43(2), 233-256.
• Ditrych, O. (2010). Georgia: A State of Flux. Journal of International Relations and Development, 13(1), 3-25.
• Düben, B. A. (2023). Omnibalancing in China-Russia Relations: Regime Survival and the Specter of Domestic Threats as an Impetus for Bilateral Alignment. Post-Soviet Affairs, 39(6), 462-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2023.2223059
• Eurasianet. (2025). Georgia emerges as new outlet for Russian crude. Eurasinet. https://eurasianet.org/georgia-emerges-as-new-outlet-for-russian-crude E.T. 30.10.2025
• Frisch, H. (2011). Why Monarchies Persist: Balancing Between Internal and External Vulnerability. Review of International Studies, 37(1), 167-184.
• George, J. A. (2009a). The Dangers of Reform: State Building and National Minorities in Georgia. Central Asian Survey, 28(2), 135-154.
• George, J. A. (2009b). The Politics of Ethnic Separatism in Russia and Georgia. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gozalishvili, N., & Kilasonia, M. (2025). Rethinking alignment: Framing pragmatism in Georgia’s identity debate. Global Discourse, 20(20), 1-24.
• Haas, E. B. (1953). The Balance of Power: Prescription, Concept, or Propaganda? World politics, 5(4), 442-477.
• Hewitt, G. (2008). Why Independence for Abkhazia is the Best Solution. Abkhaz World. https://abkhazworld.com/aw/analysis/5-independence-best-solution E.T. 12.10.2025
• Kakachia, K. K. (2008). End of Russian Military Bases in Georgia: Social, Political and Security Implications of Withdrawal. Central Asia and the Caucasus, 2(50), 52-62.
• Kakachia, K., Minesashvili, S., & Kakhishvili, L. (2018). Change and Continuity in the Foreign Policies of Small States: Elite Perceptions and Georgia’s Foreign Policy Towards Russia. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(5), 814-831. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2018.1480751
• Kang, D. C. (2004). The Theoretical Roots of Hierarchy in International Relations. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 58(3), 337-352.
• Karasar, H. A. (2008). Saakashvili Pulled the Trigger: Turkey between Russia and Georgia. SETA Policy Brief, 20, 1-9.
• Kaufman, S. J. (1997). The Fragmentation and Consolidation of International Systems. International Organization, 51(2), 173-208.
• Kavadze, A. (2018). The contemporary authoritarianism in the post-Soviet space (case study of Belarus and Georgia under Saakashvili rule). Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2), 7-20.
• Kennedy, P. (2015). Büyük Güçlerin Yükseliş ve Çöküşleri (B. Karanakçı, Trans.). Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
• Keyman, E. F. (2006). Küreselleşme, uluslararası ilişkiler ve hegemonya. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 3(9), 1-20.
• Kobakhidze, O. (2021). Pro-Russian labels: Georgia’s political actors in search of Kremlin agents. In Heinrich Böll Stiftung (Ed.), Georgian–Russian Relations: The Role of Discourses and Narratives (pp. 6-17). Heinrich Böll Stiftung.
• Lazarević, D. (2009). NATO Enlargement to Ukraine and Georgia: Old Wine in New Bottles? Connections, 9(1), 29-66.
• Lebanidze, B. (2014). What makes authoritarian regimes sweat? Linkage, leverage and democratization in post-Soviet South Caucasus. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 14(2), 199-218.
• Matusiak, M. (2014). Georgia-between a dream and reality. OSW Commentary, 133, 1-8.
• Migdal, J. S. (2004). State Building and the Non-Nation-State. Journal of International Affairs, 58(1), 17-46.
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia. (2006). Foreign Policy Strategy 2006-2009. https://gfsis.org.ge/media/download/GSAC/resources/115_1973_997704_Strategy_MFA2006-2009En.pdf E.T . 02.11.2025
• Mitchell, L. A. (2009a). Compromising Democracy: State Building in Saakashvili’s Georgia. Central Asian Survey, 28(2), 171-183.
• Mitchell, L. A. (2009b). Uncertain Democracy: US Foreign Policy and Georgia’s Rose Revolution. University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Morgenthau, H. J. (1985). Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (6. Edition). Alfred A. Knopf Inc.
• Natoli, K. (2010). Weaponizing Nationality: An Analysis of Russia’s Passport Policy in Georgia. Boston University International Law Journal, 28(2), 389-418.
• Nilsson, N. (2009). Georgia’s Rose Revolution: The Break with the Past. In S. E. Cornell & S. F. Starr (Eds.), The Guns of August 2008: Russia’s War in Georgia (pp. 85-121). M.E. Sharpe.
• Nixey, J. (2010). The South Caucasus: Drama on Three Stages. In R. Niblett (Ed.), America and a Changed World: A Question of Leadership (pp. 125-142). The Royal Institute of International Affairs.
• Pektaş, U. (2022). Uluslararası İlişkilerde İnşacılık: Kökeni, Temel Kavramları ve Tartışmaları. Siyasal Kitabevi.
• Rayfield, D. (2012). Edge of Empires: A History of Georgia. Reaktion Books.
• Reuters. (2023). Georgia to resume flights to Russia this week, drawing EU and Ukrainian criticism. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/georgian-airways-resume-direct-flights-russia-may-20-2023-05-16/ E.T . 10.11.2025
• Schweller, R. L. (1994). Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back in. International Security, 19(1), 72-107.
• The Guardian. (2005). Bush hails Georgia as “beacon of liberty”. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/may/10/georgia.usa E.T. 19.10.2025
• Torun, B. A. (2025). Rusya’nın Sona Ermeyen Çatışmaları: Gürcistan ve Ukrayna Örnekleri. Nika Yayınevi.
• Volkan, V. (2009). Kimlik Adına Öldürmek: Kanlı Çatışmalar Üzerine Bir İnceleme. Everest Yayınları.
• Walt, S. M. (1987). The Origins of Alliances. Cornell University Press.
• Waltz, K. N. (1986). Anarchic Orders and Balances of Power. In R. O. Keohane (Ed.), Neorealism and its Critics (pp. 98-130). Columbia University Press.
• Waltz, K. N. (2011). Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis. Columbia University Press.
• Wendt, A. (1994). Collective Identity Formation and the International State. American Political Science Review, 88(2), 384-396.
• Wheatley, J. (2009). Managing Ethnic Diversity in Georgia: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back. Central Asian Survey, 28(2), 119-134.
• Wilhelmsen, J., & Flikke, G. (2005). Evidence of Russia’s Bush Doctrine in the CIS. European Security, 14(3), 387-417.
• Wolfers, A. (1951). The Pole of Power and the Pole of Indifference. World politics, 4(1), 39-63.
• World Bank. (2007). Military expenditure (% of general government expenditure)—Georgia. World Bank. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.ZS?locations=GE E.T. 02.11.2025