KÜÇÜK DEVLET, BÜYÜK ETKİ: SINIRLARIN DIŞINA TAŞAN STRATEJİLER

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 1 - 27, 31.12.2019

Ersin Yılmaz

Öz

Bu çalışmada çok dikkat çekmese de, uluslararası sistemin çoğunluğunu oluşturan küçük devletler üzerine bir inceleme yapılacaktır. Birleşmiş Milletlere üye ülkelerin yarısından fazlası küçük devlet olmasına rağmen, bu ülkelerin varlığı göz ardı edilmektedir. Oysa bu devletler çeşitli dinamikler baz alınarak incelendiğinde, uyguladıkları stratejilerle hem kendi dış politikalarını hem de uluslararası politikayı önemli ölçüde etkileyebilmektedirler. Bu stratejiler kimi zaman uluslararası sistemin farklı bir yöne evirilmesine de yol açmaktadır. Kavramsal olarak bu devletleri tek çatı altında toplamak oldukça zor olsa da, dış politika ve güvenlik stratejileri ekseninden küçük devletleri anlamak uluslararası sistemi kavramsallaştırmak açısından oldukça önemli olacaktır. Küçük devletler aslında dış politika açısından yeni kıtaların yeniden keşfedilebileceği bir alandır. Çünkü bu devletlerin dış politika üretim süreçleri büyük güçlere nazaran belli stereotiplerden oldukça uzaktır. Küçük devletler bu yüzden madalyonun öteki yüzü ya da aynanın arka tarafı olarak tanımlanabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Küçük Devletler, Uluslararası Sistem, Yeni Strateji, Yükselen Güçler

Kaynakça

• Alesina, A. E. Spalore, The Size of Nations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.
• Armstrong, H.W.. R. Read. “Comparing The Economic Performance of Dependent Territories And Sovereign Microstates”. Economic Development and Cultural Change. c. 48, s. 2 (2000): 285–306.
• Arreguin-Toft, I. “How The Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict”, International Security. c. 26. s. 1 (2001): 93–128.
• Berthelon, M., C. Freund. “On The Conservation of Distance In International Trade”. Journal of International Economics. c. 75. s. 2 (2008): 315-316. 310–320.
• Cooley, A. The Logics of Hierarchy: The Organizations of Empires, States, And Military Occupations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. 2005.
• Deudney, D.. Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory From The Polis to The Global Village. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007.
• Easterly, W. A. Kraay, “Small States, Small Problems? Income, Growth, And Volatility in Small States”. World Development. c.28. s.11 (2000): 2013–2027.
• Fazal, T. “State Death in The international System”. International Organization. c. 58 s. 2 (2004): 311–344.
• Fazal, T.M., R. D. Griffiths. “Membership Has Its Privileges: The Changing Benefits Of Statehood”. International Studies Review. c. 16, s. ? (2014):83-85. 79–106.
• Gilpin, R.. Global Political Economy Understanding The International Economic Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 2001.
• Grøn, C.H., A. Wivel. “Maximizing İnfluence in The European Union After The Lisbon Treaty: From Small State Policy To Smart State Strategy”. Journal of European Integration. c. 33, s. 5 (2011): 523–539.
• Habeeb, W. Power And Tactics In International Negotiations: How Weak Nations Bargain With Strong Nations. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988.
• Handel, Michael. Weak States in The International System. New Jersey: Psychology Press, 1990.
• Ikenberry, G. J., After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, And The Rebuilding of Order After Major Wars. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001.
• Ingebritsen, C. “Norm Entrepreneurs: Scandinavia’s Role in World Politics”. Cooperation and Conflict. c. 37. s. 1 (2002): 11–23.
• Jerwis, R. “Cooperation Under The Security Dilemma”, World Politics, s. 30 (1978): 167–214.
• Karsh, E.. Neutrality And Small States. London: Routledge, 1988.
• Keohane, R. O.. “The Big Influence of Small Allies”. Foreign Policy. c. ?. s. 2 (1971):161–182.
• Killermann, K.. “Loose Ties or Strong Bonds? The Effect of A Commissioner’s Nationality And Partisanship On Voting In The Council”. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. c. 54. s. 6 (2016): 1367–1383.
• Koyama, M., C. Moriguchi, T. H. Sng, “Geopolitics and Asia’s little divergence: A comparative analysis of state building in China and Japan after 1850”. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2682702 [18.11.2019].
• Kronsell, A.. “Can Small States Influence EU Norms?: Insights From Sweden’s Participation in The Field of Environmental Politics”. Scandinavian Studies. c. 74, s. 3 (2002): 287–304.
• Labs, E. J.. “Do Weak States Bandwagon?”. Security Studies. s. 3 (1992): 383–416.
• Lake, D. A.. Hierarchy in International Relations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.2009.
• Leeds,B.A., A. G. Long, S. M. Mitchell, “Reevaluating Alliance Reliability”. Journal of Conflict Resolution. c. 44, s. 5 (2000): 686–699.
• Levy. J.S. “The Causes of War: A Review of Theories And Evidence”. Behavior, Society and Nuclear War. ed. P. E. Tetlock. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989: ?
• McIntyre, W. “The partition of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands”. Island Studies Journal. c. 7, s. 1 (2012): 135–146.
• Naurin, D., R. Lindahl, “Out in The Cold? Flexible Integration And the Political Status of Euro Opt-outs”, European Union Politics, c. 11, s. 4 (2010): 496-497.485–509.
• Neumann, I. B., S. Gstöhl, “Introduction: Lilliputians in Gulliver’s world?”. Small States in International Relations. ed. C. Ingebritsen, I. Neumann, S. Gstöhl, J. Beyer. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2006: ?
• New York Times. “Foreign powers buy influence at think tanks”. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/us/politics/foreign-powers-buy-influence-at-think-tanks.html [6.12.2019]. Nye, J.S. “Soft Power”. Foreign Policy. s. 80 (1990): 153–171.
• Olson, M.. R. Zeckhauser, “An Economic Theory Of Alliances”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, c. 48, s. 3 (1966): 266–279.
• Panke, D. “Small states in the European Union: Structural disadvantages in EU policy-making and counterstrategies”. Journal of European Public Policy. c. 17, s. 6 (2010): 799–817.
• Slapin, J. B.. “Bargaining Power at Europe's Intergovernmental Conferences: Testing Institutional And Intergovernmental Theories”. International Organization. c. 62, s. 1 (2008): 131–162.
• Steinsson, Sverrir, Baldur Thorhallsson. “Small State Foreign Policy”. The Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017): 1-26.
• Teorell, J., B. Rothstein. “Getting to Sweden, Part I: War And Malfeasance, 1720–1850”. Scandinavian Political Studies. c. 38. s. 3 (2015): 217–237
• Thorhallsson, B.. “Small States in The UN Security Council: Means of Influence?”. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy. c. 7, s. 2 (2012): 135–160.
• Thorhallsson, B. The role of small states in the European Union. Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate. 2000.
• Thorhallsson, B. “The Size of States in The European Union: Theoretical And Conceptual Perspectives”, Journal of European Integration. c. 28, s. 1 (2006): 7–31.
• Thorhallsson, B. “Domestic Buffer Versus External Shelter: Viability of Small States in The New Globalised Economy”, European Political Science, s.10 (2011): 324–336.
• Veenendaal, W.P., J. Corbett. “Why Small States Offer Important Answers to Large Questions”. Comparative Political Studies. c.48, s. 4 (2015): 535. 527–549.
• Vital, D. The Inequality of States: A study of The Small Power In International Relations. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967.
• Voeten, E. “The Political Origins of The UN Security Council’s Ability to Legitimize The Use of Force”. International Organization. c. 59, s. 3 (2005): 527–557.
• Wivel, A., A. J. K. Bailes, C. Archer. “Setting the scene: Small states and international security.”. Small States and International Security: Europe and Beyond. ed. C. Archer, A. J. K. Bailes, A. Wivel. London: Routhledge, 2014: 3-25.