Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Dönemde Orta Asya’da Jeopolitik Değişimler

Yıl 2023, , 75 - 91, 31.01.2023

Mehmet Seyfettin Erol , Şafak Oğuz

https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.1077211

Cited By: 1

Öz

Eurasia has been regarded as the most important region that must be controlled by any power that aims to dominate the world, according to the geostrategists who shaped Eurasian policies for their countries. The UK and Germany have developed their policies for the region based on the views of their geostrategists before the Cold War. The US focused on containing Soviet Union shaping its policy based on the principles of these theories during the Cold War. In the early post-Cold war era, the US intensified its engagement with Central Asian states mainly with economic motivation. September 11 attacks provided an opportunity for the US to increase its influence as well as bolstering military deployment in the Central Asia. Russia led by Putin, especially after the consolidation of its power, however, has changed the balance of power in the region, especially in former Soviet Union territories, and did not lose the control of “Hearthland”. This paper analyses changes in the geopolitics of Central Asia in the post-Cold War era and, argues that theories such as “Hearthland” still keep their importance in Eurasia politics. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Eurasia, Heartland, Rimland, Central Asia, 9/11 Attacks

Changes in the Geopolitics of Central Asia in the Post-Cold War Era

Öz

Kendi devletlerinin politikalarını şekillendiren jeostratejistlere göre, dünyaya hâkim olunması için Avrasya, kontrol edilmesi gereken en önemli bölge olarak tanımlanmıştır. Soğuk Savaş öncesi dönemde Birleşik Krallık ve Almanya, bölgeye yönelik politikalarını kendi vatandaşı olan jeostratejistlerin görüşleri doğrultusunda geliştirmişlerdir. Soğuk Savaş döneminde ABD, bölgeye yönelik politikasını bu prensipler ışığında belirleyerek Sovyetler Birliği’ni çevreleme politikası gütmüştür. Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemin ilk bölümünde ise daha çok ekonomik faktörleri göz önüne alarak Orta Asya devletleri ile ilişkilerini artırmıştır. 11 Eylül saldırıları ABD’ye bölgede etkisini artırma ve Orta Asya devletlerine askeri üsler kurarak askeri varlığını artırma imkanı vermiştir. Ancak Putin liderliğindeki Rusya, Putin’in siyasi gücünü pekiştirmesinden sonra bölgede özellikle de eski Sovyetler Birliği topraklarındaki güç dengesini değiştirmiş ve Kalpgah’ın kontrolünü kaybetmemiştir. Bu çalışma Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemde Orta Asya jeopolitiğindeki değişimleri incelemekte ve Kalpgah gibi teorilerin hala Avrasya politikasında önemini koruduğunu öne sürmektedir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Avrasya, Kalpgah, Kenar Kuşak, Orta Asya, 11 Eylül Saldırıları

Kaynakça

• A National Security Strategy for a New Century, White House, December 1999, https://clintonwhitehouse4.archives.gov/media/pdf/nssr-1299.pdf
• Adams, Valerie L. (2006) Eisenhower's Fine Group of Fellows: Crafting a National Security Policy to Uphold the Great Equation, Oxford, Lexington Books.
• Aris, Ben “Moscow still divided over supporting role”, The Telegraph, 20 September 2001.
• Blouet, Brian W. (2005), “Halford Mackinder and the Pivotal Heartland”, Brian W. Blouet (ed.), Global Geostrategy: Mackinder and the West, London and New York, Frank Cass.
• Brzezinski, Zbigniew (1997) The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, New York, Basic Books.
• Carter, Jimmy The State of the Union Address Delivered Before a Joint Session of the Congress, January 23, 1980, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33079
• Clark-Sestak, Susan L. “U.S. Bases in Central Asia, Institute for Defense Analyses”, September 2003, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a419977.pdf.
• Declaration of Heads of Member States of SCO, 05 July 2005, China Daily, (Unofficial translation by the SCO Secretaritat), http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-06/12/content_6020345.htm
• Erhan, Çağrı “ABD'nin Orta Asya politikası ve 11 Eylül sonrası yeni açılımları”, STRADİGMA, Eylül 2003, Sayı:9, https://istihbaratsahasi.files.wordpress.com/ 2013/10/abdnin-orta-asya-politikasi-ve-11-eyll-sonrasi-yeni-ailimlari.pdf.
• Gaddis, John Lewis (2005), Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of American National Security Policy during the Cold War, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Gorst, Isabel “Kyrgyzstan proposes closure of US airbase as Moscow pledges $2bn in aid”, Financial Times, February 05, 2009. “Kazakhstan’s President Offers U.S. Use of Airfields,” Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) Newsline, September 25, 2001.
• Korosteleva, Elena (2013) "Questioning democracy promotion: Belarus' response to color revolutions”, Evgeny Finkel and Yitzhak M. Brudny (eds.), Coloured Revolutions and Authoritarian Reactions, London and New York, Routledge.
• Krastev Ivan and Mark Leonard “The new European disorder. European council of foreign relations”, November 2014. http://www.ecfr.eu/page/-/ECFR117_TheNewEuropeanDisorder_ESSAY.pdf
• Mackinder, Halford J. (April 1904) "The Geographical Pivot of History", The Geographical Journal, Vol.23, No.4, pp.421-437.
• Mackinder, Halford J. (1919) Democratic Ideals And Reality: A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction, London, Constable And Company Ltd.
• Mearsheimer, John J. (September/October 2001), “The Future of the American Pacifier,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 80 Nu:5, pp. 46-61.
• Mitchell, Lincoln A. (2012) Color Revolutions, Philedelphia, Philedelphia University Press, 2012.
• Pascoe, B. Lynn “The U.S. Role in Central Asia”, Testimony Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Central Asia and the South Caucasus, Washington, DC, June 27, 2002, https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2002/11535.htm
• Patnaik, Ajay (2016) Central Asia: Geopolitics, security and stability, London, Routledge
• President Vladimir Putin's address to the Russian Nation 24 September 2001, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09662830108407518
• Roy, Oliver (2007) The New Central Asia: Geopolitics and the Birth of Nations, New York, New York University Press.
• Rumer, Eugene Richard Sokolsky, and Paul Stronski, “U.S. Policy toward Central Asia 3.0”, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, January 2016, http://carnegieendowment.org/files/CP_259_Central_Asia_Final.pdf.
• Rumer, Eugene (2002) “Flashman’s Revenge: Central Asia after September 11,” Strategic Forum, No. 195, 2002.
• Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, Statement for the Record, House International Relations Committee, February 06, 2002. Schorzman, Douglas “Staging Base for Afghan War Handed Over to Kyrgyzstan”, The New York Times, June 3, 2014
• Šleivyte, Janina (2010) Russia’s European Agenda and the Baltic States, London and New York, Routledge.
• Spykman, Nicholas J. (1944) The Geography of the Peace, New York, Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1944
• Talbottt, Strobe "A Farewell to Flashman: American Policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia", Address at the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, July 21, 1997.
• US Department of State Office of the Historian, "Kennan and Containment 1947", https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/kennan
• Wastell, David “Wary Chinese welcome Bush as US enters their back yard”, The Telegraph, February 17, 2002.
• Watson, Rob "Putin's speech: Back to cold war?", BBC News, February 10, 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6350847.stm
• Wright, Robin and Ann Scott Tyson, “U.S. Evicted From Air Base In Uzbekistan”, The Washington Post, July 30, 2005.
• X (George Kennan), (July 1947) "The Sources of Soviet Conduct", Foreign Affairs, Vol.25, Nu:4, pp. 566–582
• Zagorski, Andrei V. (2015) “Traditional Security Interests in the Caucasus and Central Asia: Perceptions and Realities”, in Rajan Menon, Yuri E. Fedorov and Ghia Nodia (eds.) Russia, the Caucasus and Central Asia: The 21st Century Security Environment, Oxon, Routledge.