Journals / Orta Asya ve Kafkasya Araştırmaları / 2009 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 8

Rejim güvenliğine karşı yayılmacı jeopolitik: Orta Asya devletlerinin karar alma sürecini hangi faktörler etkilemektedir?

Regime security vs. imperialist geopolitics: Which factors dominate the decision making of the central Asian states?

Pages
50–70
DOI
—
🏛️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 meantime, the privileged clans have also supported the existing policies of the leaders.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Following the collapse of the former Soviet Union in 1991, powerful actors acting according to an imperialist geopolitical approach, such as Russia, China, the United States, European Union, Turkey and Iran, pursued a foreign policy aimed at dominating the regional states.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, the items on the agendas of Central Asian leaders were quite different from those of the powerful states.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the meantime, the privileged clans have also supported the existing policies of the leaders.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:ABD · USA

Abstract

Following the collapse of the former Soviet Union in 1991, powerful actors acting according to an imperialist geopolitical approach, such as Russia, China, the United States, European Union, Turkey and Iran, pursued a foreign policy aimed at dominating the regional states. However, the items on the agendas of Central Asian leaders were quite different from those of the powerful states. In the first years of their independence, the leaders promised to adopt democratic reforms. But in the course of time they constructed authoritarian regimes. After reinforcing their power over the political mechanisms, the leaders gave priority to the preservation of their regimes, or in other words maintenance of their posts, while determining the domestic and foreign policies. The leaders, acting in view of these concerns, have avoided close relations with the countries who threatened or criticized their regimes, and in order to preserve their regimes they were not reluctant to be in contact with the rival great power(s). In this respect, they have objected to democratization in their countries, and by keeping in mind the balances among different clans within their countries they have spent their time so as to protect their posts. In the meantime, the privileged clans have also supported the existing policies of the leaders.

Özet

1991 yılında Sovyetler Birliği'nin yıkılmasıyla birlikte, yayılmacı jeopolitik kuramlara göre hareket eden Rusya, Çin, ABD, Avrupa Birliği, Türkiye ve İran gibi ülkeler, bölge ülkeleri üzerinde hakimiyet kurma politikası güttüler. Ancak Orta Asyalı liderlerin gündemleri, bu devletlerin dış politika yaklaşımlarından oldukça farklıydı. Bağımsızlıklarının ilk yıllarında, demokratikleşme yönünde vaatlerde bulunan liderler, zamanla otoriter rejimlerini inşa ettiler. Siyasi mekanizma üzerindeki hakimiyetlerini pekiştiren liderler, iç ve dış politikayı belirlerken, önceliği kendi rejimlerini veya diğer bir ifadeyle kendi makamlarını korumaya verdiler. Bu düşünceler ışığında hareket eden liderler, kendi rejimlerini tehdit eden ülkeler ile sıcak ilişkiler kurmaktan sakındılar ve kendi rejimlerini muhafaza etmek için rakip büyük güçler ile temas içerisinde olmaktan çekinmediler. Halen daha bölge liderleri, önceliği kendi rejimlerine vermektedir. Bu bağlamda, demokratikleşme adımlarına karşı çıkan liderler, yine de kabileler arası dengeleri gözeterek, varlıklarını sürdürmeye çalışmaktadır. Liderlerin bu politikalarına ise, kendisine ayrıcalıklar tanıdığı kabilelerde destek vermektedir.

Keywords
🔖

Cite This Article

EFEGİL, E. (2009). Rejim güvenliğine karşı yayılmacı jeopolitik: Orta Asya devletlerinin karar alma sürecini hangi faktörler etkilemektedir?. Orta Asya ve Kafkasya Araştırmaları, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 8, 50–70. https://ajindex.com/articles/288369

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. "Caucasus: EU and Caucasus Diplomats Discuss Cooperation", Eurasia Insight, 26 October 2009. "Uzbekistan: Washington Denies Interest in Returning to Khanabad Airbase", Eurasia Insight, 24 August 2009.
  2. Akbarzadeh, Shahram, "Geopolitics versus Democracy in Tajikistan", ' Demokratizatsiya, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2006.
  3. Akbarzadeh, Shahram, "Uzbekistan and the United States: Friends or Foes?", Middle East Policy, Vol. 14, No. 1, Spring 2007.
  4. Allison, Roy, "Virtual Regionalism, Regional Structures and Regime Security in Central Asia", Central Asian Survey, Vol. 27, No. 2, June 2008.
  5. Arystanbekova, A., "Kazakhstan: Ten Years in the U.N.", International Affairs, Vol. 48, No. 4, 2002.
  6. Atal, Subodh, "Central Asian Geopolitics and U.S. Policy in the Region-. The Post-11 September Era", Mediterranean Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 2, Spring 2003.
  7. Baev, Pavel K., "Assessing Russia's Cards: Three Petty Games in Central Asia", Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 17, No. 2, July 2004.
  8. Bahgat, Gawdat, "Oil and Terrorism: Central Asia and the Caucasus", The journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, Vol. 30, No. 3, Fall 2005.
  9. Bassin, Mark and Konstantin E. Aksenov, "Mackinder and the Heartland Theory in Post-Soviet Geopolitical Discourse", Geopolitics, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2006.
  10. Bobokulov, Inomjon, "Central Asia: Is There an Alternative to Regional Integration?", Central Asian Survey, Vol. 25, No. 1-2, March - June 2006.
  11. Bogatyrev, Valentine Borisovich, "The Central Asian Transition: Threats to Security", Helsinki Monitor, No. 3, 2003.
  12. Bohr, Annette, "Regionalism in Central Asia: New Geopolitics, Old Regional Order", International Affairs, Vol. 80, No. 3, 2004. Bruce Pannier, "Shifting Tides of Influence in Central Asia", Radio Free Europe I Radio Liberty, 1 August 2009.
  13. Ceccarelli, Alessandra, "Clans, Politics and Organized Crime in Central Asia", Trends Organized Crimes, No. 10, No. 3, 2007.
  14. Crandall, Maureen S., "Low Grades for Petro-States in the Former Soviet Union", journal of Third World Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2007.
  15. Edwards, Matthew, "The New Great Game and the New Great Gamers: Disciples of Kipling and Mackinder", Central Asian Survey, Vol. 22, No. 1, March 2003.
  16. Efegil, Ertan, " 11 Eylül Sonrası Orta Asya'da Silahlanma Girişimleri ve Bölge Güvenliğine Etkileri", Kamer Kasım and Zerrin A. Bakan (Ed.), Uluslararası Güvenlik Sorunları, (Ankara: ASAM Publications, 2004.
  17. Efegil, Ertan, "Bağımsızlık Sonrası Türkmenistan'ın Siyasi, Ekonomik ve Kültürel Politikalarının