Journals / Anadolu Strateji Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1

Transformation of Landpowers into Seapowers: A Systemic Necessity

Kara Güçlerinin Deniz Gücüne Dönüşümü: Sistemik Bir Zorunluluk

Can Yurdakurban(MİLLİ SAVUNMA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-4841-2306
Güngör Şahin(MİLLİ SAVUNMA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6296-8568
Pages
117–126
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️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)

In the study, qualitative data were collected from secondary source documents and analysed comparatively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The fact that most of the world is covered by seas and oceans due to its natural geographical shape has closely linked elements such as trade and power projection with seapower.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, in the international system built on liberal values such as free market and global trade, the definition of great power is based on seapower.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the study, qualitative data were collected from secondary source documents and analysed comparatively.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Deniz Gücü · Almanya · Sovyetler Birliği

Abstract

The fact that most of the world is covered by seas and oceans due to its natural geographical shape has closely linked elements such as trade and power projection with seapower. In this context, in the international system built on liberal values such as free market and global trade, the definition of great power is based on seapower. In a system whose norms and rules are determined through seapower, landpowers are in an asymmetry. In this study, it will be analysed why Germany and the Soviet Union tend to transform into a seapower despite being important landpowers. Landpowers, which are not defined as a seapower in the system, show the behaviour of transforming into a seapower in order to maintain their existence in the system and to adapt to the conditions defined by the system. This situation is perceived as a threat by the existing seapowers in the system and creates a power struggle. The findings obtained from the research will contribute to the literature in order to understand the behaviour of actors in the context of land-sea conflict in the international system. In the study, qualitative data were collected from secondary source documents and analysed comparatively.

Özet

Dünyanın doğal coğrafi şeklinden ötürü büyük bir çoğunluğunun denizler ve okyanuslarla kaplı olması, ticaret ve güç nakli gibi unsurları deniz gücüyle yakından ilişkilendirmiştir. Bu bağlamda serbest piyasa ve küresel ticaret gibi liberal değerler üzerine inşa edilmiş olan uluslararası sistemde, büyük güç tanımı deniz gücü üzerinden yapılmaktadır. Norm ve kuralları deniz gücü üzerinden belirlenmiş olan sistem içerisinde kara güçleri bir asimetri içerisindedir. Bu çalışmada, Almanya ve Sovyetler Birliği’nin önemli kara güçleri olmalarına rağmen neden bir deniz gücüne dönüşme eğilimi gösterdikleri incelenecektir. Sistem içerisinde deniz gücü olarak tanımlanmayan kara güçleri, sistem içerisindeki varlıklarını sürdürebilmek ve sistemin tanımlamış olduğu şartlara uyum sağlayabilmek için deniz gücüne dönüşme davranışı göstermektedirler. Bu durum, sistem içerisindeki mevcut deniz gücü büyük güçler tarafından bir tehdit olarak algılanmakta ve bir güç mücadelesi yaratmaktadır. Araştırmadan elde edilen bulgular, uluslararası sistem içerisinde kara-deniz çatışması bağlamında aktörlerin davranışlarını anlayabilmek için literatüre katkı sağlayacaktır. Çalışmada ikincil kaynak dokümanlardan nitel veriler toplanmış ve karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yurdakurban, C., Şahin, G. (2026). Transformation of Landpowers into Seapowers: A Systemic Necessity. Anadolu Strateji Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 117–126. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21022465

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Cropsey, S., & McGrath, B. (t.y.). Maritime Strategy in a New Era of Great Power Competition.
  2. Fellegi, B. (2022). THE CONFLICT OF LAND AND SEA IN GEOPOLITICS COMPARINGTHE GEOPOLITICAL THINKING OF HALFORD MACKINDER AND ALFRED MAHAN (1890-1914). Journal of International Relations and Political Science Studies, 4, 1-18.
  3. Flint, C. (2024). Near and far waters: The geopolitics of seapower. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
  4. Gorshkov, S. G. (1979). The sea power of the state. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press.
  5. Gülboy, B. S. (2014). Mutlak Savaş: Birinci Dünya Savaşı’nın Kökenleri Üzerine Clausewitzyen Bir Çözümleme (1. bs). İstanbul: Röle Akademik Yayıncılık.
  6. Herwig, H. H. (1988). The Failure of German Sea Power, 1914–1945: Mahan, Tirpitz, and Raeder Reconsidered. The International History Review, 10(1), 68-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/07075332.1988.9640469
  7. Kennedy, P. M. (2006). The rise and fall of British naval mastery (Pbk. ed). Amherst, N.Y: Humanity Books.
  8. Mahan, A. T. (2010). The influence of sea power upon history: 1660-1783. Cambridge New York: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Modelski, G. (1978). The Long Cycle of Global Politics and the Nation-State. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 20(2), 214-235. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500008914
  10. Modelski, G., & Thompson, W. R. (1988). Seapower in Global Politics, 1494–1993 (1st ed. 1988). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-09154-6
  11. Murray, M. (2010). Identity, Insecurity, and Great Power Politics: The Tragedy of German Naval Ambition Before the First World War. SECURITY STUDIES, 19(4), 656-688. (WOS:000284765200003). https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2010.524081
  12. Neumann, I. B. (2008). Russia as a great power, 1815–2007. Journal of International Relations and Development, 11(2), 128-151. https://doi.org/10.1057/jird.2008.7
  13. Pizzolo, P. (2022). The legacy of Admiral von Tirpitz: A geopolitical understanding of China’s naval buildup through sea-denial strategies. Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana Di Scienza Politica, 52(3), 297-312. https://doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2021.40
  14. Riber, J. (2022). Russia’s Twenty-First-Century Naval Strategy—Combining Admiral Gorshkov with the Jeune École. 75(3). Ricardo, D. (2006). The principles of political economy and taxation. Mineola, N.Y: Dover Publications. Schmitt, C. (1997). Land and Sea. Washington, DC: Plutarch Press. Smith, A. (2016). Milletlerin Zenginliği (H. Derin, Çev.). S.l.: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları. Stocker, J. (2020). Architects of Continental Seapower: Comparing Tirpitz and Gorshkov (1. bs). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003080558 Waltz, K. N. (2001). Man, the state, and war: A theoretical analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.