SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 35

THE NEW SECURITY PARADIGM AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: A SECURE SOCIETY OR A SURVEILLANCE SOCIETY?

YENİ GÜVENLİK PARADİGMASI VE YAPAY ZEKÂ: GÜVENLİ TOPLUM MU, GÖZETİM TOPLUMU MU?

Yahya Gençay(Yeşilyurt Belediyesi)0000-0003-1304-2245
Canan Katılmış(İNÖNÜ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5978-2674
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-17
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that AI offers opportunities to enhance security capacity; however, without democratic oversight and governance grounded in human rights, the security-surveillance paradox may shift toward a surveillance society.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the relationship between security and surveillance in the age of artificial intelligence (AI) within the framework of the “security-surveillance paradox.” While states employ surveillance technologies to ensure national security and public order, private sector actors pursue economic profit and behavioral manipulation through data-driven applications.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, the concept of the “surveillance society” refers to state-centered surveillance, whereas “surveillance capitalism” denotes data-oriented surveillance practices by the private sector.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that AI offers opportunities to enhance security capacity; however, without democratic oversight and governance grounded in human rights, the security-surveillance paradox may shift toward a surveillance society.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yapay Zekâ (YZ) · Güvenlik · Gözetim Toplumu

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between security and surveillance in the age of artificial intelligence (AI) within the framework of the “security-surveillance paradox.” While states employ surveillance technologies to ensure national security and public order, private sector actors pursue economic profit and behavioral manipulation through data-driven applications. In this context, the concept of the “surveillance society” refers to state-centered surveillance, whereas “surveillance capitalism” denotes data-oriented surveillance practices by the private sector. The aim of the study is to analyze the impact of AI on the field of security, along with its potential risks to individual freedoms and democratic values. Employing a literature review and theoretical analysis, the study discusses the ethical and societal dimensions of AI applications. The findings indicate that AI offers opportunities to enhance security capacity; however, without democratic oversight and governance grounded in human rights, the security-surveillance paradox may shift toward a surveillance society. Accordingly, the study emphasizes the importance of maintaining a balance between ensuring security and addressing the risks of surveillance in the AI era.

Özet

Bu çalışma, yapay zekâ (YZ) çağında güvenlik ve gözetim ilişkisini “güvenlik-gözetim paradoksu” çerçevesinde ele almaktadır. Devletler, ulusal güvenlik ve kamu düzenini sağlamak amacıyla gözetim teknolojilerini kullanırken; özel sektör aktörleri veri temelli uygulamalarla ekonomik kazanç ve davranış manipülasyonu hedeflemektedir. Bu bağlamda, “gözetim toplumu” devlet merkezli gözetimi, “gözetim kapitalizmi” ise özel sektörün veri odaklı gözetim pratiklerini tanımlamaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı, YZ’nin güvenlik alanındaki etkilerini ve bireysel özgürlükler ile demokratik değerler üzerindeki potansiyel risklerini analiz etmektir. Literatür taraması ve kuramsal inceleme yöntemiyle yürütülen çalışmada, YZ uygulamalarının etik ve toplumsal boyutları tartışılmıştır. Bulgular, YZ’nin güvenlik kapasitesini artıran fırsatlar sunduğunu; ancak demokratik denetim ve insan haklarına dayalı yönetişim ile dengelenmediğinde, güvenlik-gözetim paradoksunun gözetim toplumuna doğru kayabileceğini göstermektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışma, YZ çağında güvenliğin sağlanması ile gözetim riskleri arasındaki dengenin önemini vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gençay, Y., Katılmış, C. (2026). THE NEW SECURITY PARADIGM AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: A SECURE SOCIETY OR A SURVEILLANCE SOCIETY?. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 35. https://doi.org/10.35379/cusosbil.1695483

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (84)

  1. Abanoz, M. ve Acar, E. (2023). Yapay zekâ ve ontolojik güvensizlik: Bireysel ve toplumsal kaygı dinamikleri üzerine bir değerlendirme. LAÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(1), 22-51.
  2. Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the middle ground: Constructivism in world politics. European Journal of İnternational Relations, 3(3), 319-363.
  3. Akyılmaz, B. (2020). Yapay zekâ temelli gözetim teknolojileri ve pazar ilişkisi. C. Tor-Kadıoğlu (Ed.), Dijital pazarlamada güncel araştırmalar içinde (s. 81-101). Artikel Akademi.
  4. Amoore, L. (2013). The politics of possibility: Risk and security beyond probability. Duke University Press.
  5. Ay, A. ve Sezer, Ö. (2019). Dijitalleşmenin güvenlikleştirme vaadi: Dijital hapishaneler. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(1), 123-136.
  6. Ayoob, M. (1997). Defining security: A subaltern realist perspective. K. Krause ve M. C. Williams (Eds.), Critical security studies: Concepts and cases (pp. 121-146). University of Minnesota Press.
  7. Azgin, B. ve Kiralp, S. (2024). Surveillance, disinformation, and legislative measures in the 21st century: AI, social media, and the future of democracies. Social Sciences, 13(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13100510
  8. Bahtiyar, N. (2024). Yapay zekâ teknolojilerinin ekonomi ve siyaset bağlamında ortaya çıkardığı yeni toplumsal dinamiklerin ABD, Çin ve Türkiye üzerinden incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Pamukkale Üniversitesi.
  9. Bellany, I. (1981). Towards a theory of international security. Political Studies, 29(1), 100-105.
  10. Bentham, J. (1995). The panopticon writings. Verso Books.
  11. Bilgin, K. R. (2024). Geleceğin savaşlarında yapay zekâ. Güvenlik Stratejileri, 20(50), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.17752/guvenlikstrtj.1394924
  12. Bodin, J. (2008). On sovereignty. Cambridge University Press.
  13. Booth, K. (1997). Security and self: Reflections of a fallen realist. K. Krause ve M. C. Williams (Eds.), Critical security studies: Concepts and cases (pp. 35-60). University of Minnesota Press.
  14. Brundage, M., Avin, S., Clark, J., Toner, H., Eckersley, P., Garfinkel, B., Dafoe, A., Scharre, P., Zeitzoff, T., Filar, B., Anderson, H., Roff, H., Allen, G. C., Steinhardt, J., Flynn, C., Ó hÉigeartaigh, S., Beard, S., Belfield, H., Farquhar, S. ve Amodei, D. (2018). The malicious use of artificial intelligence: Forecasting, prevention, and mitigation. Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1802.07228
  15. Buzan, B. (2015). People, states & fear: An agenda for international security studies in the post-Cold War era. ECPR Press.
  16. Buzan, B., Weaver, O. ve de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
  17. C.A.S.E. Collective. (2006). Critical approaches to security in Europe: A networked manifesto. Security Dialogue, 37(4), 443-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010606073085
  18. Carnevali, A. T. (2022). Governing the use of autonomous weapon systems. M. Tinnirello (Ed.), The global politics of artificial intelligence (pp. 85-99). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429446726-4
  19. Cavelty, M. (2008). Cyber-security and threat politics: US efforts to secure the information age. Routledge.
  20. Cicero, M. T. (1999). De Officiis (C. D. Yonge, çev.). Harvard University Press.
  21. Coeckelbergh, M. (2022). The political philosophy of AI: An introduction. John Wiley & Sons.
  22. Cole, M., Cant, C., Ustek Spilda, F. ve Graham, M. (2022). Politics by automatic means? A critique of artificial intelligence ethics at work. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 5, 869114. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.869114
  23. Crawford, K. (2021). Atlas of AI. Yale University Press.
  24. Çiçek, A. E. (2025). Türkiye’nin yapay zekâ tabanlı siber güvenlik stratejisi. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 23(56), 993-1012.
  25. Çiçek, Ç. (2025). Yapay zekâ ile kamu yönetimi ve güvenlikte dönüşümün yeni çağı. Tarsus Üniversitesi Uygulamalı Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 50-62.
  26. Çiftçi, O. (2024). Yapay zekâ ve silahlanma yarışı: ABD ve Çin arasındaki güç dengesinin değişen dinamikleri. Marmara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(2), 175-200. https://doi.org/10.14782/marmarasbd.1436516
  27. Darici, A. B. (2020). Yapay zekânın yönetiminin uluslararası güvenliğe etkileri. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(1), 49-72.
  28. Das, R. ve Sandhane, R. (2021). Artificial intelligence in cyber security. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1964(4), 042072. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1964/4/042072
  29. David, M. ve Verbakel, D. (2022). Critical security studies: A schismatic history. Contemporary security studies. Oxford University Press.
  30. Deibert, R. J. (2013). Black code: Surveillance, privacy, and the dark side of the internet. Signal Books.
  31. Doyran, E. (2021). Dijital dünya, gözetim teknolojileri ve yapay zekâ: Hükümranlık ve özgürlük arasında modern insan. INSAMER Analiz. https://insamer.com/tr/dijital-dunya-gozetim-teknolojileri-ve-yapay-zeka-hukumranlik-ve-ozgurluk-arasinda-modern-insan_3989.html
  32. Dupont, B. (2007). Power struggles in the field of security: Implications for democratic transformation. M. Deflem (Ed.), Sociology of crime, law and deviance: Surveillance and governance: Crime control and beyond (pp. 259-280). Emerald Group Publishing.
  33. Eşitti, Ş. (2015). Gözetim toplumunda sinoptikon ve sosyal medya (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi.
  34. Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Pantheon Books.
  35. Fischer, S.-C. ve Wenger, A. (2021). Artificial intelligence, forward-looking governance and the future of security. Swiss Political Science Review, 27(1), 170-179. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12439
  36. Galloway, C. ve Swiatek, L. (2018). Public relations and artificial intelligence: It’s not (just) about robots. Public Relations Review, 44(5), 734-740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.008
  37. Garcia, E. V. (2022). Multilateralism and artificial intelligence: What role for the United Nations? M. Tinnirello (Ed.), The global politics of artificial intelligence (pp. 57-75). CRC Press.
  38. Haldun, İ. (2004). Mukaddime (A. Işık, çev.). Klasik Yayınları.
  39. Hälterlein, J. (2023). The use of AI in domestic security practices. S. Lindgren (Ed.), Handbook of critical studies of artificial intelligence (pp. 763-772). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  40. Herz, J. H. (1950). Idealist internationalism and the security dilemma. World Politics, 2(2), 157-180.
  41. Hoadley, D. S. ve Lucas, N. J. (2018). Artificial intelligence and national security. Congressional Research Service. https://www.crs.gov
  42. Hobbes, T. (1992). Leviathan. Cambridge University Press
  43. Jahankhani, H., Kendzierskyj, S., Chelvachandran, N. ve Ibarra, J. (2020). Cyber defence in the age of AI, smart societies and augmented humanity. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35746-7
  44. Jiang, Y., Li, X., Luo, H., Yin, S. ve Kaynak, O. (2022). Quo vadis artificial intelligence? Discover Artificial Intelligence, 2(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-022-00022-8
  45. Kanat, S. ve Akoğuz, N. O. (2024). Uluslararası ilişkiler ve yapay zekâ: Uluslararası güvenlik açısından bir değerlendirme. Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 25(54), 60-73.
  46. Kaygısız, Ü. (2020). Gözetim toplumunun siyaset, devlet ve demokraside yansımaları: Algoritmik vatandaşlık odağında bir değerlendirme. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(2), 1288-1299. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.537299
  47. Kello, L. (2013). The meaning of the cyber revolution: Perils to theory and statecraft. International Security, 38(2), 7-40. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00138
  48. Kolodziej, E. A. (2005). Security and international relations. Cambridge University Press.
  49. Krause, K. ve Williams, M. C. (1997). Critical security studies: Concepts and cases. University of Minnesota Press.
  50. Liddell, H. G. ve Scott, R. (1940). A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford University Press.
  51. Lippmann, W. (1943). U.S. Foreign policy: Shield of the Republic. Little Brown and Company.
  52. Locke, J. (2002). Two treatises of government. Yale University Press.
  53. Luciani, G. (1989). The security dilemma and the national interest: The case of the Mediterranean. International Relations, 23(1), 48-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/004711788902300105
  54. Lyon, D. (2007). Surveillance studies: An overview. Polity Press.
  55. Lyon, D. (2019). State and surveillance. Centre for International Governance Innovation.
  56. Machiavelli, N. (2005). The prince (W. K. Marriott, çev.). University of Chicago Press.
  57. Marwala, T. (2023). Artificial intelligence, game theory and mechanism design in politics. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-5103-1
  58. Masco, J. (2020). Surveillance and the senses. I. Bartoletti (Ed.), An artificial revolution: Power, politics and AI (pp. 181-184). The Indigo Press.
  59. Mill, J. S. (2008). Özgürlük üzerine (M. Özay, çev.). Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
  60. Mondal, B. (2020). Artificial Intelligence: State of the Art. Balas, R. K. ve R. Srivastava (Ed.), Recent Trends and Advances in Artificial Intelligence and Internet of Things (pp. 389-425). Springer.
  61. Montesquieu, C. (1998). The spirit of the laws (A. M. Cohler, B. C. Miller ve H. S. Stone, çev.). Cambridge University Press.
  62. Nişanyan, S. (2009). Türkçe etimoloji sözlüğü. Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  63. Ogaba, O. (2010). Security, “Globalization and Climate Change”: A Conceptual Analysis. E. E. Osita, ve O. Ogaba (Eds.), Security in Nigeria (pp. 28-39). NIIA.
  64. Oseni, A., Moustafa, N., Janicke, H., Liu, P., Tari, Z. ve Vasilakos, A. (2020). Security and privacy for artificial intelligence: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of the ACM, 37(4), 111. https://doi.org/10.1145/1122445.1122456
  65. Poku, N. K. ve Graham, D. T. (2000). Introduction. N. K. Poku ve D. T. Graham (Eds.), Migration, globalization, and human security (pp. 1-15). Routledge.
  66. Radulov, N. (2019). Artificial intelligence and security. New Bulgarian University.
  67. Risse, M. (2023). Political theory of the digital age: Where artificial intelligence might take us. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009255189
  68. Rousseau, J. J. (2004). Toplum sözleşmesi. (B. Kaynak, çev.), Betik Yayınları.
  69. Russell, S. J. ve Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Pearson Education.
  70. Scherer, M. U. (2016). Regulating artificial intelligence systems: Risks, challenges, competencies, and strategies. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 29(2), 354-398.
  71. Shahbaz, A. (2018). Freedom on the net 2018: The rise of digital authoritarianism. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2018/rise-digital-authoritarianism
  72. Singer, P. W. ve Friedman, A. (2014). Cybersecurity and cyberwar: What everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press.
  73. Sloane, M. (2022). Threading innovation, regulation, and the mitigation of AI harm: Examining ethics in national AI strategies. M. Tinnirello (Ed.), The global politics of artificial intelligence (pp. 1-28). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429446726-1
  74. Sönmez, O. (2019). Küresel siyaset ve uluslararası ilişkiler yüksek lisans programı kapsamında yapay zekâ ve ulusal güvenlik (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi.
  75. Şahin, M. (2024). Gözetim toplumu ve Çin sosyal kredi sistemi: Toplumsal kontrolün yeni yüzü. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (49), 66-84. https://doi.org/10.61904/sbe.1452667
  76. Tinnirello, M. (2022). The global politics of artificial intelligence. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429446726
  77. Türk, O. (2021). How to govern military AI: On the global governance of artificial intelligence from an international security perspective (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
  78. Ullman, R. (1983). Redefining security. International Security, 8(1), 129-153. https://doi.org/10.2307/2538545
  79. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391-425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764
  80. Wolfers, A. (1962). Discord and collaboration: Essays on international politics. The Johns Hopkins Press.
  81. Yalçın, A. (2024). Türkiye’de kamu kurumlarının toplum için geliştirdiği yapay zekâ uygulamaları. İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16(2), 185-215.
  82. Zhang, B. ve Dafoe, A. (2019). Artificial intelligence: American attitudes and trends. Center for the Governance of AI, Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3312874
  83. Zeng, J. (2021). Securitization of artificial intelligence in China. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 14(3), 385-411. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poab005
  84. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.