Journals / Marmara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1

Dış Politika ve İç / Dış Ayrımı: Kavramsallaştırmaya Bütüncül Bir Yaklaşım

Foreign Policy and the Internal/External Distinction: An Integrative Approach to Conceptualisation

Pages
65–82
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

Such a conceptualisation makes it possible to incorporate not only 'why' and 'how' questions that form the basis of the mainstream rationalistic accounts in Foreign Policy Analysis but also 'how possible' questions that are vital to reflectivist investigations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Although it is widely accepted that one of the first steps in an investigation of an actor's foreign policy requires the precise definition of the phenomena to be explained, assessments of the state of Foreign Policy Analysis reveal that the concept 'foreign policy' is either left undefined or point out to the need to its enhancement.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Therefore, this study probes into the traditional distinction between internal and external environments through the lenses of main approaches and relevant studies in the field and offers a comprehensive and integrative conceptualisation that draws attention to two interrelated aspects: (1) the overlapping nature of foreign and domestic policy that places them both in a relationship and sharing of joint place rather than absolute opposition across well-defined boundaries; and (2) the boundary drawing practices and performances that characterise the everyday life of foreign policy of states.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Such a conceptualisation makes it possible to incorporate not only 'why' and 'how' questions that form the basis of the mainstream rationalistic accounts in Foreign Policy Analysis but also 'how possible' questions that are vital to reflectivist investigations.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Although it is widely accepted that one of the first steps in an investigation of an actor's foreign policy requires the precise definition of the phenomena to be explained, assessments of the state of Foreign Policy Analysis reveal that the concept 'foreign policy' is either left undefined or point out to the need to its enhancement. Therefore, this study probes into the traditional distinction between internal and external environments through the lenses of main approaches and relevant studies in the field and offers a comprehensive and integrative conceptualisation that draws attention to two interrelated aspects: (1) the overlapping nature of foreign and domestic policy that places them both in a relationship and sharing of joint place rather than absolute opposition across well-defined boundaries; and (2) the boundary drawing practices and performances that characterise the everyday life of foreign policy of states. Such a conceptualisation makes it possible to incorporate not only 'why' and 'how' questions that form the basis of the mainstream rationalistic accounts in Foreign Policy Analysis but also 'how possible' questions that are vital to reflectivist investigations.

Özet

Bir aktörün dış politikasının araştırılması sürecinde atılması gereken ilk adımlardan bir tanesinin soruşturulacak olan olguların itinalı bir tanımının yapılması olduğu genel bir kabul görmektedir. Buna rağmen Dış Politika Analizi alanının durumuna ilişkin değerlendirmeler "dış politika" kavramının ya tanımlanmadığına ya da kavramın tanımlanmasında iyileştirmeler yapılması gerektiğine işaret etmektedir. Bu nedenle bu çalışma geleneksel iç ve dış çevre ayırımını alandaki temel yaklaşımlar ve ilgili çalışmalar açısından irdelemekte ve birbiri ile ilişkili iki yöne dikkat çeken kapsamlı ve bütünleştirici bir kavramsallaştırma sunmaktadır: (1) dış ve iç politikanın birbirleri ile örtüşen yapıları gereğince, keskin çizgilerle belirlenmiş mutlak karşıtlık yerine her ikisinin ilişkisel ve ortak bir alanı paylaşan konumları ve (2) devletlerin süregelen dış politikalarının ayrılmaz bir parçası olan sınır üreten pratik ve performansları. Böylesine bir kavramsallaştırma, Dış Politika Analizinin ana akım rasyonel yaklaşımlarının temelini oluşturan "neden" ve "nasıl" sorularının yanında, refleksif soruşturmalar için çok önemli olan "nasıl mümkün" sorusunun da içerilmesini olanaklı kılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇATI, M. O. (2022). Dış Politika ve İç / Dış Ayrımı: Kavramsallaştırmaya Bütüncül Bir Yaklaşım. Marmara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1, 65–82. https://ajindex.com/articles/578778

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Allison, G. (1969) "Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis", American Political Science Review, 63/3: 689-718.
  2. Ashley, R. K. (1989) "Living on Borderlines: Man, Structuralism, and War", in Der Derian ]. and M. ]. Shapiro (eds.), International/intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics, New York: Lexington Books. Aydın-Düzgit, S. (2012) Constructions of European Identity: Debates and Discourses on Turkey and the EU, New York: Palgrave. Balcı, A. (2007) "Diskors ve Pratik Olarak Dış Politika", Uluslararası İlişkiler, Vol. 4/ 15: 67-87.
  3. Barkawi, T., M. Laffey (2002) "Retrieving the Imperial: Empire and International Relations', Millenium: Journal ofInternational Studies, 31/1: 109-127. Braveboy-Wagner, ]. A. (2008) Small States in Global Affairs. The Foreign Policies ofthe Caribbean Community (CARICOM), New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brecher, M., Steinberg, B. Stein, ]. (1969) "A Framework for Research on Foreign Policy Behavior", Journal ofConflict Resolution, 13/1: 75-101.
  4. Brown, C. (2012) "Realism: Rational or Reasonable?" InternationalAijairs, 88/4: 867-877.
  5. Buzan, B. (1991)
  6. People, States and Fear, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Campbell, D. (1992) Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  7. Carlsnaes, W. (2002) "Foreign Policy" in Carlsnaes W., T. Risse and B. A. Simmons (eds.), Handbook of International Relations, London: Sage Publications. Carlsnaes, W. (2008) "Actors, Structures, and Foreign Policy Analysis" in Smith S., A. Hadfield and T. Dunne (eds.), Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  8. Cati, M. 0. (2013) The Political Economy ofSyrian Foreign Policy: 1949-1963,
  9. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, SOAS, University of London. Chamberlain, N. (1937) The Struggle for Peace, as quoted in Carr E. H. (1991) The Twenty Years' Crisis 1919-1939, London: Papermac. Clapham, C. (1985)
  10. Third World Politics, London: Routledge. Cox, R. W. (1981) "Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory", Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 10/2: 126-55.
  11. Reprinted with postscript in Keohane, R. O. (ed.), (1986)
  12. Neorealism and Its Critics, New York: Columbia University Press.
  13. Diez, T. (2014) "Speaking Europe, Drawing Boundaries: Reflections on the Role of Discourse in EU Foreign Policy and Identity", in Morin ].-F. and Carta C. (eds.), EU Foreign Policy through the Lens of Discourse Analysis: Making