Ortadoğu Uluslararası İlişkilerini Uİ Teorileriyle Çalışmak

Yıl 2011, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 9 - 32, 14.07.2016

Brent E. Sasley

Öz

Uluslararası İlişkiler (Uİ) disiplini ve Ortadoğu çalışmaları genellikle birbirleri arasında az sayıda ortak nokta bulunan, farklı dünyalara ait alanlar olarak kabul edilirler. Günümüzde böyle bir nitelendirme çok katı olsa da, bu iki alanı biraraya getirmek, özellikle de Ortadoğu’yu Uİ teori gelişiminin odak noktasına getirmek konusunda daha fazla çalışma yapılması gerektiği iterek bu ikisini bir araya getirmek için daha çok çalışma yapılması gerektiği açıktır. Bu makalede, Uİ biliminin bölgeye yeterince olmasa da biraz ilgi gösterdiği ancak bu konuda Uİ eğitimi bağlamında neredeyse hiçbir çaba sarf edilmediği fikri savunulmaktadır. Lisans derslerinde, Uİ yaklaşımları ve modellerinin Ortadoğu’yla ilişkilendirilmesi konusunda daha fazla çaba gösterilmeli ve öğrencilere Uİ yaklaşımları öğretilirken Ortadoğu’nun nasıl bir katkı yapabileceği gösterilmelidir. Bu makalede bu amaç doğrultusunda kullanılabilecek dört paradigma sunulmuştur; bunun içinde hem bizim söz konusu bölgeye yönelik bakışımızı hem de Uİ teorisini geliştirme çabalarımızı daha ileriye götürmek adına bu iki alanın niçin ve nasıl birleştirilebileceğini göstermeleri konusunda öğrencileri düşünmeye itebilecek sorular da sunulmaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Uİ Teorisi, Ortadoğu Çalışmaları, Eğitim

Studying Middle Eastern International Relations Through IR Theory

Öz

The discipline of International Relations (IR) and the field of Middle East studies are often considered worlds apart, with little common ground between them. Today this characterization is too stark, but it is true that more work needs to be done to bring the two together, and particularly to bring the Middle East more into the center of IR theory development. This article argues that although IR scholarship does pay some—if not enough—attention to the region, it is in pedagogy that almost no effort is made to do so. Our university and college courses must do more to apply IR approaches and models to the Middle East, to show students how the former work and what the latter can contribute to it. Below four paradigms are suggested as ways to do so, including questions students can be made to think about to demonstrate why and how the two areas can be combined to further both our understanding of the region and our efforts to develop IR theory

Anahtar Kelimeler

IR Theory, Middle East Studies, Pedagogy

Kaynakça

• Anderson, Lisa, Scholarship, Policy, Debate, and Conflict: Why We Study the Middle East and Why It Matters. Middle East Studies Association Bulletin 38, 1
• (June 2004). Available at http://fp.arizona.edu/mesassoc/bulletin/Pres%20Addresses/Anderson.htm. Ayubi, Nazih N, Over-stating the Arab State: Politics and Society in the Middle East. (London: I.B. Tauris, 1995).
• Barnett, Michael, Dialogues in Arab Politics: Negotiations in Regional Order, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998).
• Bar-Simon-Tov, Yaacov, Israel, the Superpowers, and the War in the Middle East, (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1987).
• Bilgin, Pinar, “What Future for Middle Eastern Studies?”, Futures, Vol. 38, No. 5, (June 2006), pp. 575-85.
• __________, “Thinking Past ‘Western’ IR?”, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 1, (February 2008), pp. 5-12.
• Bill, James A, “The Study of Middle East Politics, 1946-1996: A Stocktaking” Middle East Journal, Vol. 50, No. 4, (Autumn 1996), pp. 501-512.
• Booth, Ken, “Human Wrongs and International Relations” International Affairs, Vol. 71, No. 1, (January 1995), pp. 103-126.
• Breuning, Marijke, Joseph Bredehoft, and Eugene Walton, “Promise and Performance: An Evaluation of Journals in International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives, Vol. 6, No. 4, (November 2005), pp. 447-61.
• Brynen, Rex, “Palestine and the Arab State System: Permeability, State Consolidation and the Intifada”, Canadian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 24, No. 3, (September 1991), pp. 595-621.
• ___________, “Between Parsimony and Parochialism: Comparative Politics, International Relations, and the Study of Middle East Foreign Policy” Paper presented at the Annual Convention, American Political Science Association. Washington, D.C. (September 1993).
• Campbell, David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, Rev. ed. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998).
• David, Steven R, “Explaining Third World Alignment”, World Politics, Vol. 43, No. 2, (January 1991), pp. 233-56.
• Dawisha, Adeed, “Arab Regimes: Legitimacy and Foreign Policy” in Giacomo Luciani (ed.), The Arab State, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), pp. 284-99.
• Fanon, Frantz, The Wretched of the Earth, Trans. by Richard Philcox, (New York: Grove Press, 1963).
• Fattah, Khaled and K.M. Fierke, “A Clash of Emotions: The Politics of Humiliation and Political Violence in the Middle East”, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 15, No. 1, (March 2009), pp. 67-93.
• Fawcett, Louise (ed.), International Relations of the Middle East, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
• Friedrichs, Jörg, European Approaches to International Relations Theory: A House with Many Mansions, (London: Routledge, 2004).
• Gause, F. Gregory, III, “Systemic Approaches to Middle East International Relations.” International Studies Review, Vol. 1, No. 1, (Spring 1999), pp. 11-31.
• ____________, “Ortadoğu Uluslararası İlişkilerine Sistemik Yaklaşımlar – 10
• Yıl Sonra (Systemic Approaches to Middle East International Relations—Ten
• Years After”, Ortadoğu Etütleri, Vol. 1, No. 1, (2009), pp. 41-68. Gelvin, James, The Modern Middle East: A History. 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008)
• Gerges, Fawaz A, “The Study of Middle East International Relations: A Critique.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 18, No. 2, (1991), pp. 208-220.
• Halliday, Fred, The Middle East in International Relations: Power, Politics and Ideology, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
• Hansen, Lene, Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War, (London: Routledge, 2006).
• Hinnebusch, Raymond, The International Politics of the Middle East, (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003).
• Hinnebusch, Raymond and Anoushiravan Ehteshami, (eds), The Foreign Polities of Middle East States, (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002). Hobson, Christopher, “A Forward Strategy of Freedom in the Middle East: US
• Democracy Promotion and the ‘War on Terror’” Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 59, No. 1, (March 2005), pp. 39-53.
• Hudson, Michael C, Arab Politics: The Search for Legitimacy, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977).
• Irwin, Robert, Dangerous Knowledge: Orientalism and Its Discontents, (Woodstock, New York: The Overlook Press, 2006).
• Jacoby, Tami Amanda and Brent E. Sasley, eds. Redefining Security in the Middle East, (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002).
• Jordan, Richard, Daniel Maliniak, Amy Oakes, Susan Peterson, and Michael
• J. Tierney, “One Discipline or Many? TRIP Survey of International Relations Faculty in Ten Countries”, (Williamsburg, Virginia: The College of William and Mary, February 2009). Available at http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/ projects/trip/Final_Trip_Report_2009.pdf.
• Kaufman, Stuart J, “Narratives and Symbols in Violent Mobilization: The Palestinian-Israeli Case.” Security Studies, Vol. 18, No. 3, (July 2009), pp. 400-434.
• Korany, Bahgat, “International Relations Theory: Contributions from Research in the Middle East” in Mark Tessler with Jodi Nachtwey and Anne Banda (ed.), Area Studies and Social Science: Strategies for Understanding Middle East Politics, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999), pp. 148-158.
• Korany, Bahgat and Ali E. Hillal Dessouki (ed.), The Foreign Policies of Arab States: The Challenge of Change, (Boulder: Westview Press, 1991). Kramer, Martin, Ivory Towers on Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America, (Washington, D.C.: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2001).
• Legro, Jeffrey W. and Andrew Moravcsik, “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” International Security, Vol. 24, No. 2, (Fall 1999), 5-55.
• Lesch, David W. (ed.), The Middle East and the United States: A Historical and Political Reassessment, 4th ed., (Boulder: Westview Press, 2007).
• Lockman, Zachary, Contending Visions of the Middle East: The History and Politics of Orientalism, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
• Löwenheim, Oded and Gadi Heimann, “Revenge in International Politics” Security Studies, Vol. 17, No. 4, (October 2008), pp. 685-724.
• Moravcsik, Andrew, “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics” International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 4, (Autumn 1997), pp. 513-553.
• Nandy, Ashis, The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
• Noble, Paul, “Systemic Factors Do Matter, But... Reflections on the Uses and Limitations of Systemic Analysis” in Bassel F. Salloukh and Rex Brynen (ed.), Persistent Permeability? Regionalism, Localism, and Globalization in the Middle East, (Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2004), pp. 29-64.
• Özkececi-Taner, Binnur, “The Impact of Institutionalized Ideas in Coalition Foreign Policy Making: Turkey as an Example, 1991-2002”, Foreign Policy Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 3, (November 2005), pp. 249-278.
• Pripstein Posusney, Marsha and Michele Penner Angrist, eds. Authoritarianism in the Middle East: Regimes and Resistance, (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2005).
• Putnam, Robert D, “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games.” International Organization, Vol. 42, No. 3, (Summer 1998), pp. 427-60.
• Risse, Thomas, “Constructivism and International Institutions: Toward Conversations across Paradigms” in Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner (ed.), Political Science: The State of the Discipline, (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2002).
• Rubin, Barry, The Arab States and Palestine, (New York: Syracuse University Press, 1981).
• Said, Edward W, Orientalism, (New York: Vintage Books, 1979).
• Salloukh, ,Bassel F, “Regime Autonomy and Regional Foreign Policy Choices in the Middle East: A Theoretical Exploration,” in Bassel F. Salloukh and Rex Brynen (ed.), Persistent Permeability? Regionalism, Localism, and Globalization in the Middle East, (Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2004).
• Salzman, Philip Carl and Donna Robinson Divine (ed.), Postcolonial Theory and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, (London: Routledge, 2008).
• Sasley, Brent E, “Affective Attachments and Foreign Policy: Israel and the 1993 Oslo Accords” European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 16, No. 4, (December 2010), pp. 687-709.
• ___________, “Turkish Identity as Enabler or Impediment: Turkey in Central Asia” in Emilian Kavalski (ed.), The “New” Central Asia: The Regional Impact of International Actors, (Singapore: World Scientific, 2010), pp. 191-214.
• al-Sayyid, Mustapha Kamel, “Legitimacy and Security in Arab Countries, 1989-1996” in Lenore G. Martin (ed.), New Frontiers in Middle East Security, (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999), pp. 47-77.
• Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty, “Can the Subaltern Speak?” in Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg (ed.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988), pp. 271-313. , Steele, Brent J, Ontological Security in International Relations: Self-Identity and the IR State, (New York: Routledge, 2008).
• Sucharov, Mira M, The International Self: Psychoanalysis and the Search for IsraeliPalestinian Peace, (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005).
• Telhami, Shibley, Power and Leadership in International Bargaining: The Path to the Camp David Accords, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990). Telhami, Shibley and Michael Barnett, eds. Identity and Foreign Policy in the Middle East, (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2002).
• Tessler, Mark, with Jodi Nachtwey and Anne Banda, eds. Area Studies and Social Science: Strategies for Understanding Middle East Politics, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999).
• Teti, Andrea, “Bridging the Gap: IR, Middle East Studies and the Disciplinary Politics of the Area Studies Controversy”, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 13, No. 1, (March 2007), pp. 117-145.
• Tickner, Arlene B. and Ole Wæver, eds. International Relations Scholarship Around the World, (London: Routledge, 2009).
• Tieku, Thomas Kwasi, “Explaining the Clash and Accommodation of Interests of Major Actors in the Creation of the African Union” African Affairs, Vol. 103, No. 411, (April 2004), pp. 249-267.
• Valbjørn, Morten, “The Meeting of the Twain: Bridging the Gap between International Relations and Middle East Studies”, Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 38, No. 2, (June 2003), pp. 163-173.
• Valbjørn, Morten, “Towards a ‘Mesopotamian Turn’? The Study of Middle Eastern International Relations within International Relations and Middle East Studies” Journal of Mediterranean Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, (2004), pp. 47-75.
• Walt, Stephen M, The Origins of Alliances, (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1987).
• Wæver, Ole, “The Sociology of a Not So International Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations”, International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, (Autumn 1998), pp. 687-727.
• Weldes, Jutta, Mark Laffey, Hugh Gusterson, and Raymond Duvall, eds. Cultures of Insecurity: States, Communities, and the Production of Danger, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999).
• Wendt, Alexander E, Social Theory of International Politics, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).
• Wendt, Alexander, “Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics” International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2, (Spring 1992), pp. 391-425.
• Wohlforth, William C, “Realism and the End of the Cold War”, International Security, Vol. 19, No. 3, (Winter 1994/95), pp. 91-129.