SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 43

Tracing Geopolitical Change Through Documents: A Comparative Content Analysis of Germany’s Arctic Policy Guidelines (2013–2024)

Belgelerde Jeopolitik Değişimin İzini Sürmek: Almanya’nın Arktik Politika Kılavuzlarının Karşılaştırmalı İçerik Analizi (2013–2024)

Hasan Fatih Seval(Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İİBF Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü)0000-0003-4609-8819
Pages
152–170
Publication Date
2026-10-15
🏛️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 article adds an observer-state case to Arctic securitization research and shows how measurement separates changes that a before-and-after reading runs together.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Research on Arctic securitization centers on the Arctic states; non-Arctic observers have received less systematic attention.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This article examines Germany, an Arctic Council observer since 1998, and asks how its official framing of the Arctic changed between 2013 and 2024.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The article adds an observer-state case to Arctic securitization research and shows how measurement separates changes that a before-and-after reading runs together.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Arktik Jeopolitiği · Güvenlikleştirme · Güvenlik Sektörleri

Abstract

Research on Arctic securitization centers on the Arctic states; non-Arctic observers have received less systematic attention. This article examines Germany, an Arctic Council observer since 1998, and asks how its official framing of the Arctic changed between 2013 and 2024. It applies qualitative comparative content analysis in MAXQDA to Germany’s three Arctic Policy Guidelines (2013, 2019, 2024). Barry Buzan’s five sectors of security serve as the main codes, supplemented by thematic and perceptual codes; the documents are compared through coverage and normalized co-occurrence densities. The analysis identifies two shifts of different kinds. Between 2013 and 2019, opportunity framing fell from 19 to 8 percent of the text, while threat framing and the military sector barely moved. The balance between threat and opportunity thus tipped two and a half years before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Between 2019 and 2024, military coverage rose from 6 to 15 percent, and its framing moved from preventing an arms race to deterrence. The documents tie only this second shift to the war. Environmental security remained the largest sector throughout. The article adds an observer-state case to Arctic securitization research and shows how measurement separates changes that a before-and-after reading runs together.

Özet

Arktik Bölge’nin güvenlikleştirilmesine dair araştırmalar ağırlıklı olarak Arktik ülkelere odaklanmakta, Arktik-dışı gözlemci ülkeler daha az sistematik ilgi görmektedir. Bu makale, 1998’den bu yana Arktik Konseyi gözlemcisi olan Almanya’yı inceleyerek ülkenin Bölge’ye dair resmî çerçevesinin 2013-2024 döneminde nasıl değiştiğini sorgulamaktadır. Çalışma, Almanya’nın üç Arktik Politika Kılavuzu belgesini (2013, 2019, 2024) MAXQDA ile yürütülen nitel karşılaştırmalı içerik analiziyle incelemektedir. Barry Buzan’ın beş güvenlik sektörü ana kodları oluşturmakta, bunlar tematik ve algısal kodlarla desteklenmekte, belgeler kod kapsamı ve normalleştirilmiş kesişim yoğunlukları üzerinden karşılaştırılmaktadır. Analiz, nitelik olarak farklı iki değişim tespit etmektedir. 2013-2019 arasında fırsat söylemi metnin yüzde 19'undan yüzde 8'ine gerilemiş, tehdit söylemi ve askerî sektör ise neredeyse değişmemiştir. Böylece tehdit ile fırsat arasındaki denge, Rusya’nın Ukrayna’yı işgalinden iki buçuk yıl önce tehdit lehine dönmüştür. 2019-2024 arasında askerî sektörün kapsamı yüzde 6’dan yüzde 15’e yükselmiş, askerî söylem silahlanma yarışını önleme vurgusundan caydırıcılığa geçmiştir. Belgeler yalnızca bu ikinci değişimi savaşla ilişkilendirmektedir. Çevresel güvenlik ise üç belgede de en geniş sektör olmayı sürdürmüştür. Makale, Arktik güvenlikleştirme literatürüne bir gözlemci devlet örneği eklemekte ve ölçümün, öncesi ve sonrası okumalarında birbirine benzeyen değişiklikleri nasıl ayırdığını göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Seval, H. F. (2026). Tracing Geopolitical Change Through Documents: A Comparative Content Analysis of Germany’s Arctic Policy Guidelines (2013–2024). Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı: 43, 152–170. https://doi.org/10.54600/igdirsosbilder.1956223

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (54)

  1. Adrians, H., Däumer, M., Etzold, T., & Paul, M. (2026). Germany as Arctic Security Actor: New Guidelines for German Arctic Policy under More Difficult Conditions (SWP Research Paper 6). Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik. https://doi.org/10.18449/2026RP06
  2. Arctic Council. (1996). Declaration on the Establishment of the Arctic Council. Arctic Council.
  3. Atland, K. (2008). Mikhail Gorbachev, the Murmansk Initiative, and the Desecuritization of Interstate Relations in the Arctic. Cooperation and Conflict, 43(3), 289-311.
  4. Atland, K., & Ven Bruusgaard, K. (2009). When Security Speech Acts Misfire: Russia and the Elektron Incident. Security Dialogue, 40(3), 333-353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010609336201
  5. Basse, D. (2019). Germany: A New (Non-)Arctic Power? Arctic Yearbook, (2019), 1-18.
  6. Bennett, M. M. (2015). How China Sees the Arctic: Reading Between Extraregional and Intraregional Narratives. Geopolitics, 20(3), 645-668. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2015.1017757
  7. Brady, A. M. (2017). China as a Polar Great Power. Cambridge University Press.
  8. Buzan, B. (1983). People, States and Fear: The National Security Problem in International Relations. Wheatsheaf Books.
  9. Buzan, B. (1991). People, States & Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era (2nd ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
  10. Buzan, B. (2014). An Introduction to the English School of International Relations: The Societal Approach. Polity Press.
  11. Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
  12. Chuffart, R., Devyatkin, P., & Raspotnik, A. (2025, June 24). Arctic Exceptionalism as Myth, Method, and Mirror. The Arctic Institute: https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/arctic-exceptionalism-myth-method-mirror/
  13. Depledge, D. (2018). Britain and the Arctic. Palgrave Pivot.
  14. Exner-Pirot, H. (2013). What Is the Arctic a Case Of? The Arctic as a Regional Environmental Security Complex and the Implications for Policy. The Polar Journal, 3(1), 120-135.
  15. Exner-Pirot, H., & Murray, R. (2017). Regional Order in the Arctic: Negotiated Exceptionalism. Politik, 20(3), 47-64. https://doi.org/10.7146/politik.v20i3.97153
  16. Federal Foreign Office. (2013). Germany’s Arctic Policy Guidelines: Assume Responsibility, Seize Opportunities. Federal Foreign Office.
  17. Federal Foreign Office. (2019). Germany’s Arctic Policy Guidelines: Assuming Responsibility, Creating Trust, Shaping the Future. Federal Foreign Office.
  18. Federal Foreign Office. (2024). Germany’s Arctic Policy Guidelines: Germany and the Arctic in the Context of the Climate Crisis and the Zeitenwende. Federal Foreign Office.
  19. Fuhrhop, P. (2023, March 6). Germany’s Zeitenwende and the Future of European Security. Istituto Affari Internazionali: https://www.iai.it/en/publications/c05/germanys-zeitenwende-and-future-european-security
  20. Gad, U., Wæver, O., & Jacobsen, M. (2024). Conclusion: Learning from Greenland in Arctic Security. In M. Jacobsen, O. Wæver, & U. P. Gad, Greenland in Arctic Security: (De)securitization Dynamics under Climatic Thaw and Geopolitical Freeze (pp. 310-349). University of Michigan Press.
  21. Greaves, W., & Pomerants, D. (2017). 'Soft Securitization': Unconventional Security Issues and the Arctic Council. Politik, 20(3), 31-46.
  22. Heininen, L., Everett, K., Padrtova, B., & Reissell, A. (2020). Arctic Policies and Strategies: Analysis, Synthesis, and Trends. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. https://doi.org/10.22022/AFI/11-2019.16175
  23. Herz, J. H. (1950). Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma. World Politics, 2(2), 157-180.
  24. Hough, P. (2018). Understanding Global Security (4th ed.). Routledge.
  25. Jacobsen, M., & Strandsbjerg, J. (2017). Desecuritization as Displacement of Controversy: Geopolitics, Law and Sovereign Rights in the Arctic. Politik, 20(3), 15-30.
  26. Jacobsen, M., Wæver, O., & Gad, U. (2024). Introduction: Analyzing Greenland in Arctic Security. In M. Jacobsen, O. Wæver, & U. P. Gad, Greenland in Arctic Security: (De)securitization Dynamics under Climatic Thaw and Geopolitical Freeze (pp. 1-39). University of Michigan Press.
  27. Jensen, L. C. (2013). Seduced and Surrounded by Security: A Post-Structuralist Take on Norwegian High North Securitizing Discourses. Cooperation and Conflict, 48(1), 80-99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836712461482
  28. Käpylä, J., & Mikkola, H. (2015). On Arctic Exceptionalism: Critical Reflections in the Light of the Arctic Sunrise Case and the Crisis in Ukraine. FIIA Working Paper. https://fiia.fi/en/publication/on-arctic-exceptionalism
  29. Klimenko, E. (2019). The Geopolitics of a Changing Arctic. SIPRI. https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/sipribp1912_geopolitics_in_the_arctic.pdf
  30. Knecht, S. (2017). The Politics of Arctic International Cooperation: Introducing a Dataset on Stakeholder Participation in Arctic Council Meetings, 1998-2015. Cooperation and Conflict, 52(2), 203-223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836716652431
  31. Koivurova, T., & Kopra, S. (Eds.). (2020). Chinese Policy and Presence in the Arctic. Brill Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004408425
  32. Krause, K., & Williams, M. (2018). Security and “Security Studies”: Conceptual Evolution and Historical Transformation. In A. Gheciu, & W. Wohlforth, The Oxford Handbook of International Security (pp. 14–28). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198777854.013.2
  33. Kříž, Z. (2025). From Arctic Exceptionalism to Military-Driven Geopolitics: Cooperation and Conflict after Russia’s Invasion of the Ukraine. Czech Polar Reports, 15(S), 26-51. https://doi.org/10.5817/CPR2025-S-2
  34. Lanteigne, M. (2017). ‘Have You Entered the Storehouses of the Snow?’ China as a Norm Entrepreneur in the Arctic. Polar Record, 53(2), 117-130. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0032247416000759
  35. Leskien, S. (2021). Die Wissenschaft als Wegbegleiterin zur Umsetzung der Leitlinien Deutscher Arktispolitik [Science as a Companion to the Implementation of the German Arctic Policy Guidelines]. Polarforschung, 89(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.5194/polf-89-37-2021
  36. Malik, S. (2015a). Constructing Security. In P. Hough, S. Malik, A. Moran, & B. Pilbeam, International Security Studies: Theory and Practice (pp. 72-84). Routledge.
  37. Malik, S. (2015b). Framing a Discipline. In P. Hough, S. Malik, A. Moran, & B. Pilbeam, International Security Studies: Theory and Practice (pp. 3-11). Routledge.
  38. McDonald, M. (2013). Constructivisms. In P. D. Williams (Ed.), Security Studies: An Introduction (2nd ed., pp. 63-76). Routledge.
  39. Pechko, K. (2025, January 7). Rising Tensions and Shifting Strategies: The Evolving Dynamics of US Grand Strategy in the Arctic. The Arctic Institute: https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/rising-tensions-shifting-strategies-evolving-dynamics-us-grand-strategy-arctic/
  40. Peria-Peigne, L., & Tenenbaum, E. (2023). Zeitenwende: The Bundeswehr’s Paradigm Shift. The French Institute of International Relations.
  41. Schmidt, B. (2021). Realist International Theory and the Military. In A. Sookermany, Handbook of Military Sciences (pp. 1-16). Springer.
  42. Schreiber, M. (2022, March 3). Arctic Council Nations are ‘Pausing’ Work after Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine. Arctic Today. https://www.arctictoday.com/the-7-other-arctic-council-nations-are-pausing-work-after-russias-invasion-of-ukraine/
  43. Siddi, M. (2016). German Foreign Policy towards Russia in the Aftermath of the Ukraine Crisis: A New "Ostpolitik?". Europe-Asia Studies, 68(4), 665-677.
  44. Smith, E. (2015). The Traditional Routes to Security: Realism and Liberalism. In P. Hough, S. Malik, A. Moran, & B. Pilbeam, International Security Studies: Theory and Practice (pp. 12-30). Routledge.
  45. Snyder, G. H. (2002). Mearsheimer's World-Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security: A Review Essay. International Security, 27(1), 149-173.
  46. Taliaferro, J. W. (2000). Security Seeking under Anarchy: Defensive Realism Revisited. International Security, 25(3), 128-161.
  47. Tausendfreund, R. (2022, February 28). Zeitenwende—The Dawn of the Deterrence Era in Germany. The German Marshall Fund of the United States: https://www.gmfus.org/news/zeitenwende-dawn-deterrence-era-germany
  48. Watson, S. (2013). Macrosecuritization and the Securitization Dilemma in the Canadian Arctic. Critical Studies on Security, 1(3), 265-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2013.809220
  49. Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and Desecuritization. In R. D. Lipschutz, On Security (pp. 46-86). Columbia University Press.
  50. Wæver, O. (2017). Afterword: The Arctic Security Constellation. Politik, 20(3), 121-136.
  51. Walt, S. M. (1991). The Renaissance of Security Studies. International Studies Quarterly, 35(2), 211-239. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600471
  52. Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
  53. Wilhelmsen, J., & Hjermann, A. (2022). Russian Certainty of NATO Hostility: Repercussions in the Arctic. Arctic Review on Law and Politics, 13, 114-142.
  54. Williams, P. D. (2013). Security Studies: An Introduction. In P. D. Williams (Ed.), Security Studies: An Introduction (2nd ed., pp. 1-12). Routledge.