NEOKLASİK REALİST BAKIŞLA AUKUS ANTLAŞMASI: AÇIK DENİZ DENGELEMESİ VE ELİT ALGILAMALARI

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2, 773 - 790, 15.07.2022

Fatih Bayezit

Öz

ABD, İngiltere ve Avusturalya tarafından imzalanmış olan AUKUS antlaşması Hint-Pasifik jeopolitiği içerisinde yeni bir ittifak dinamiğini harekete geçirmiştir. Süprizle karşılanan ve bölgeyle ilgili olan pek çok aktörün tepkisini çeken antlaşma yapısı itibariyle bilinen ittifak antlaşmalarından ayrılmaktadır. Antlaşma Avusturalya’ya herhangi bir güvenlik garantisi vermekten ziyade ülke donanmasına Amerikan üretimi nükleer güç ile çalışan deniz altıların verilmesini garanti etmektedir. Bu yönüyle söz konusu antlaşmanın ABD ve İngiltere’nin bölgesel politikasını destekleyecek bir açık deniz dengeleme stratejisi olduğu anlaşılmaktadır.
Avusturalya donanmasının bu kazanımı bir yandan bölgesel güç dengesi dinamiklerini etkilerken Canberra’nın Fransa ile yapmış olduğu silah satış antlaşmasının da iptaline yol açmıştır. Hiçbir imzacı devletin Çin’e karşı bir ifade kullanmamasına rağmen antlaşma Çin tarafından da tepkiyle karşılanmıştır. Dolayısıyla kazanımları olduğu kadar maliyetleri de olabilecek bir antlaşma olarak imzalanan AUKUS’un ortaya çıkmasındaki yönetici elitlerin mevcut uluslararası sistemdeki kırılma ve fırsatlar ile bölgesel tehdit ortamına ilişkin algılamları önem kazanmaktadır. Bu çalışmada AUKUS ittifakı neoklasik realizmin analitik yöntemleri etrafında değerlendirilmiş ve imzacı ülkeleri AUKUS antlaşmasına taraf olmaya iten gerekçeler yönetici elitlerin algıları çerçevesinde incelenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

AUKUS antlaşması, Hint-Pasifik, Dengeleme, Avusturalya, Elit algılamaları

THE AUKUS DEAL THROUGH A NEOCLASSICAL REALIST LENS: OFFSHORE BALANCING AND ELITE PERCEPTIONS

Öz

The AUKUS deal, signed by the USA, England and Australia has revealed a new alliance dynamic within the Indo-Pacific geopolitics. The deal, which was met with surprise and attracted the reaction of many actors concerning the region, differs from the known alliance treaties in terms of its structure. Rather than giving any security guarantees to Australia, the treaty provides the delivery of American-made nuclear-powered submarines to Australian navy. In this respect, it is understood that the agreement in question is an offshore balancing strategy which will expected to support the regional policies of the USA and the UK.
This acquisition of the Australian navy, while affecting the regional balance of power, also led to the cancellation of the arms sales agreement between Canberra and France. Although none of the signatory states used a statement against China, the treaty was also met with a reaction by China. Therefore, the AUKUS may have costs besides its gains and it is thus important to understand the perceptions of the ruling elites regarding the constraints and opportunities in the current international system and the regional threat environment. In this paper, the AUKUS deal was evaluated through the analytical methods of neoclassical realism which allows analyzing the perceptions of the ruling elites.

Kaynakça

• Alagoz, E. A. (2021). Hint-Pasifik Stratejisi Kapsaminda Hindistan-Japonya Güvenlik İlişkileri. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(2), 591-608. 
• Allison, G. (2017). Destined for war: Can America and China escape Thucydides's trap?. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 
• Bayezit, F. (2021). Amerika’nın Müttefikleri: Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Düzende Türkiye ve Güney Kore’nin İttifak Politikası. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. 
• Bisley, N. (2013). ‘An ally for all the years to come’: why Australia is not a conflicted US ally. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 67(4), 403-418. 
• Blinken, A. (2021, 14 December). A Free and Open Indo-Pacific. Speech at Universities Indonasia. Jakarta. https://www.state.gov/a-free-and-open-indo-pacific/ 
• Brands, H. (2021). China’s Rise is a Threat to US has Faced for a Century. The Bloomberg.
• Brooke-Holland, L. (2021, 11 October). Integrated Rewiev 2021: The defense tilt to Indo-Pacific. Research Briefing Nr 09217, UK Parliament. House of Commons Library. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9217/ 
• Cabestan, J. P. (2020). China’s military base in Djibouti: A microcosm of China’s growing competition with the United States and new bipolarity. Journal of Contemporary China, 29(125), 731-747. 
• Cabinet Office. (2021). Global Britain in a Competitive Age: The Integrated Review of Security, Defense, Development and Foreign Policy.  
• Casey, S. (2011). Obama's Alliances. Lowy Institute for International Policy. 
• Chan, L. H. (2019). Australia's Strategic Hedging in the Indo-Pacific: A'Third Way'Beyond Either China or the US. Australia-China Relations Institute Policy Paper. 
• Clinton, H. (2011). America's Pacific century. Foreign policy, (189), 56. 
• Davidson, J. (2014). The US" Pivot to Asia". American Journal of Chinese Studies, 77-82. 
• Duc Cuong, Le (2018). On the US Indo-Pacific Strategy. National Defense Journal. http://tapchiqptd.vn/en/events-and-comments/on-the-us-indopacific-strategy/12014.html 
• Elhefnawy, N. (2021). The 2021 British Defence Review and the British'Tilt to the Indo-Pacific'. Available at SSRN 3890869. 
• Fathi, R. (2021). Why the Ausralia-France submarine deal collapse was predictable. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/why-the-australia-france-submarine-deal-collapse-was-predictable-168526 
• Hasan, M. (2021, 27 August). The Indo-Pacific Strategy: Promoting Democracy in South Asia. SFS Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/08/27/the-indo-pacific-strategy-promoting-democracy-in-south-asia/ 
• Jain, R. (2019). The South China Sea Issue: A Critical Appraisal of China's Geo-economic Strategy. Indian Journal of Asian Affairs, 32. 
• Khan, Z. (2021). AUKUS: U.S. Offshore balancing strategy to contain China. The Express Tribune.  
• Kolmaš, M., & Kolmašová, Š. (2019). A ‘pivot’that never existed: America’s Asian strategy under Obama and Trump. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 32(1), 61-79. 
• Layne, C. (1997). From preponderance to offshore balancing: America's future grand strategy. International Security, 22(1), 86-124. 
• Major, C. & von Ondarza, N. (2021, 30 September). “Afghanistan, AUKUS and Albion”. International Politik Quarterly. https://ip-quarterly.com/en/afghanistan-aukus-and-albion 
• Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. WW Norton & Company. 
• Mearsheimer, J. (2021). The Inevitable Rivalry America China and the Tragedy of Great Power Politics. Foreign Affairs, November/December 2021. 
• Mearsheimer, J. J., & Walt, S. M. (2016). The Case for Offshore Balancing: A Superior US Grand Stategy. Foreign Aff., 95, 70.
• Media Statement. (2021, 16 September). Prime Minister, Minister for Defence, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Minister for Women of Australia. https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pursue-nuclear-powered-submarines-through-new-trilateral-enhanced-security 
• Nakamura, D. (2016). An incomplete victory lap for Obama on his final presidential trip to Asia. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/no-victory-lap-for-obama-on-his-final-presidential-trip-to-asia/2016/09/08/fb9a56ce-75d2-11e6-b786-19d0cb1ed06c_story.html 
• Nicholson, B. (2021, 17 Nov.) Morrison says AUKUS will strengthen cooperation on critical technologies. The Strategist. ASPI Australian Strategic Policy Institute.  
• NSS. (2017). National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2017, December. Office of the Historian. (2021). French Alliance, French Assistance, and European Diplomacy during the American Revolution, 1778–1782, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1776- 1783/french-alliance)
• Okano-Heijmans, M. (2021, 14 July). The Netherlands and the EU Turn to Indo-Pacific.  Research Paper. Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations. https://www.clingendael.org/publication/netherlands-and-eu-turn-indo-pacific. 
• Overholt, W. H. (2007). Asia, America, and the transformation of geopolitics. Cambridge University Press.  Pant, V. H. & Milford, T. (2021). “The UK Shifts to the Indo-Pacific: An Opportunity for India-UK Ties,” ORF Issue Brief No. 444, February 2021, Observer Research Foundation. 
• Perot, E. (2021). The AUKUS agreement, what repercussions for the European Union? Vrije Universiteit Brussels Robert Schuman Foundation European Issue, (608). 
• Rahman, M. M. (2021). A Review of Neo-Classical Realism and its Assessment of Independent and Intervening Variables in Foreign Policy Analysis. International Journal of Politics and Security, 3(2), 24-47. 
• Rapp-Hooper, M. (2018). The Indo-Pacific Strategy in Limbo: A Foreign Policy Case Study for the Trump Era. IFRI Center for Asian Studies, November 2018 (102). https://www.ifri.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/rapp-hooper_indo_pacific_vision_2018.pdf 
• Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy. World politics, 51(1), 144-172. 
• Ross, R. S. (2012). The problem with the pivot: Obama's new Asia policy is unnecessary and counterproductive. Foreign Aff., 91, 70. 
• Ross, R. S. (2013). US grand strategy, the rise of China, and US national security strategy for East Asia. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 7(2), 20-40. 
• Roy-Chaudhury, R., & de Estrada, K. S. (2018). India, the Indo-Pacific and the Quad. Survival, 60(3), 181-194.  Rudolph, L. I., & Rudolph, S. H. (2006). The making of US foreign policy for South Asia: Offshore balancing in historical perspective. Economic and Political Weekly, 703-709. 
• Roy-Chaudhury, R. & Sullivan de Estrada, K. (2018) India, the Indo- Pacific and the Quad, Survival, 60:3, 181-194, DOI: 10.1080/00396338.2018.1470773 
• Schweller, R. (2018). Opposite but compatible nationalisms: a neoclassical realist approach to the future of US–China relations. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 11(1), 23-48. 
• Schweller, R. L. (1994). Bandwagoning for profit: Bringing the revisionist state back in. International security, 19(1), 72-107. 
• Solingen, E. (Ed.). (2021). Geopolitics, Supply Chains, and International Relations in East Asia. Cambridge University Press. 
• Sullivan, D. (2015, 5 Dec.). Rebalance to Asia calls for 3-prolonged strategy. The Hill.  
• Tao, Z. (2016). Five Challenges to Post-Cold War World Order. China-US Focus. https://www.chinausfocus.com/peace-security/five-challenges-to-post-cold-war-world-order#:~:text=To%20sum%20up%2C%20the%20main,diffusive%2C%20cascading%2C%20and%20unpredictable
• The White House. (2015). Factsheet: Advancing the Rebalance to Asia and the Pacific.https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/16/fact-sheet-advancing-rebalance-asia-and-pacific 
• The White House. (2021). Summit of Democracy Summary of Proceedings. Briefing Room. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/12/23/summit-for-democracy-summary-of-proceedings/ 
• The World Bank. (2022). GDP Current (USD). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD
• The World Bank in China. (2021). Overview. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview#1 
• Tow, W. T., & Stuart, D. (Eds.). (2014). The new US strategy towards Asia: Adapting to the American Pivot. Routledge. 
• Walt, S. (1985). Alliance formation and the balance of world power. International security, 9(4), 3-43. 
• Walt, S. (2018). The world wants you to think like a realist. Foreign Policy, 30. 
• Walt, S. (2020). There’s no such thing as good liberal hegemony. Foreign Policy. 
• Walt, S. (2021). Breaking Up Is Bad for the United States. Foreign Policy.
• Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Waveland Press. 
• Washington, G. (1796). Washington’s farewell address to the People of the United States, 106. Congress, 2nd Session [1796]. SENATE DOCUMENT NO. 106–21, WASHINGTON. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc21/pdf/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc21.pdf 
• Wieslander, A. (2021). AUKUS: A Permanent Divide between Europe and the United Kingdom? In Swanström, N., & Panda, J. (2021). Resetting European Thinking on the Indo-Pacific? Pp. 33-41.
• Wohlforth, W. (1993). The Elusive Balance: Power and Perceptions during the Cold War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 
• Womack, B. (2017). International Crises and China's Rise: Comparing the 2008 Global Financial Crisis and the 2017 Global Political Crisis. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 10(4), 383-401. 
• Yendamuri, P. & Ingilizian, Z. (2019). “In 2020 Asia will have the world’s largest GDP. Here’s what that means”, World Economic Forum Annual Meeting, 20 December 2019. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/12/asia-economic-growth/. 
• Zakaria, F. (1992). Is Realism Finished? The National Interest, (30), 21-32.  
• Zhu, Z. (2006). US-China relations in the 21st century: Power transition and peace. Routledge.