SavedAdd your journal

Journals / TESAM Akademi Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2

Analysis of Proxy Wars from a Neorealist Perspective; Case of Syrian Crisis

Neorealist Yaklaşımdan Vekalet Savaşlarının Analizi; Suriye Krizi Örneği

Vahit Güntay(KARADENİZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0645-8023
Pages
491–516
Publication Date
2020-09-01
🏛️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 Syrian Crisis has also revealed that inter-state systemic changes will be continuous in terms of international relations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to analyze the proxy wars and the Syrian Crisis from the neorealist perspective of international relations as a recent debate.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Syria, one of the most cosmopolitan countries in the Middle East, is among the most strategic actors influenced by the process called the Arab Spring.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The Syrian Crisis has also revealed that inter-state systemic changes will be continuous in terms of international relations.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Vekalet Savaşları · Neorealizm · Realizm

Abstract

The aim of this study is to analyze the proxy wars and the Syrian Crisis from the neorealist perspective of international relations as a recent debate. Syria, one of the most cosmopolitan countries in the Middle East, is among the most strategic actors influenced by the process called the Arab Spring. The selection of the Syrian Crisis as a case study in methodological terms is related to the dynamics of this study. As a conclusion, the study shows that actors are in conflict as a natural reaction in Syria. This is due to the systematic disorders of the international arena and the evolution of diplomacy. The Syrian Crisis has also revealed that inter-state systemic changes will be continuous in terms of international relations.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı son dönemde yükselen bir tartışma olarak vekalet savaşlarını ve Suriye Krizi’ni uluslararası ilişkilerin neorealist perspektifinden analiz etmektir. Vekalet savaşlarının tipik örneklerinden birisinin yaşandığı Suriye Ortadoğu’nun en kozmopolit ülkelerinden birisidir ve Arap Baharı’nın etkilediği en stratejik aktörler arasındadır. Metodolojik anlamda örnek olay olarak Suriye Krizi’nin seçilmesi dinamiklerinin bu çalışmaya uygun olması ile ilgilidir. Sonuç olarak çalışma, aktörlerin doğal bir reaksiyon olarak Suriye’de çatışma içinde olduğunu göstermektedir. Bunun sebebi uluslararası alanın sistematik bozukluklarından ve diplomasinin evriminden kaynaklanmaktadır. Suriye Krizi uluslararası ilişkiler açısından, devletlerarası sistemsel değişikliklerin sürekli olacağını da ortaya koymuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Güntay, V. (2020). Analysis of Proxy Wars from a Neorealist Perspective; Case of Syrian Crisis. TESAM Akademi Dergisi, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 491–516. https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.788857

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. Afridi, M. and Jibran, A. (2018). Russian response to Syrian crisis: A neorealist perspective. Strategic Studies, 38(2), 56-70.
  2. Anderson, N. T. (2016). Competitive intervention and its consequences for civil wars. Accessed in: 03.01.2020, https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/107541
  3. Bar-Siman-Tov, Y. (1984). The strategy of war by proxy. Cooperation and Conflict, 19(4), 263-273. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/45083584
  4. Barkin, S. (2009). Realism, prediction, and foreign policy. Foreign Policy Analysis, 5(3), 233-246. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/24909777
  5. Baylis, J. (2008). Uluslararası ilişkilerde güvenlik kavramı. Uluslararası İlişkiler / International Relations, 5(18), 69-85. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/43926429
  6. Behr, H. and Heath, A. (2009). Misreading in IR theory and ideology critique: Morgenthau, Waltz and neo-realism. Review of International Studies, 35(2), 327-349. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/20542792
  7. Booth, K. (2007). Theory of world security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Carr, E. H. (1981). The twenty years’ crisis 1919-1939: An introduction to the study of international relations. London: Macmillan Press.
  9. Darwich, M. (2018). The Saudi intervention in Yemen: Struggling for status. Insight Turkey, 20(2), 125-142. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26390311
  10. Davenport, K. and Horner, D. (2012). Obama warns Syria on chemical arms. Arms Control Today, 42(7), 27-28. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/23629298
  11. Fox, A. (2019). Conflict and the need for a theory of proxy warfare. Journal of Strategic Security, 12(1), 44-71. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26623077
  12. Deutsch, K. W. (1980). External involvement in internal war. In Harry Eckstein (Eds), Internal War: Problems and Approaches, West Port: Praeger.
  13. Giegerich, B. (2016). Hybrid warfare and the changing character of conflict. Connections, 15(2), 65-72. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26326440
  14. Glaser, C. (1994). Realists as optimists: Cooperation as self-help. International Security, 19(3), 50-90.
  15. Groh, T. (2019). A Theory of proxy war. In Proxy war: The least bad option (pp. 83-124). California: Stanford University Press.
  16. Hale, W. (2019). Turkey, the US, Russia, and the Syrian Civil War. Insight Turkey, 21(4), 25-40.
  17. Harrison, E. (2002). Waltz, Kant and systemic approaches to international relations. Review of International Studies, 28(1), 143-162. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/20097783
  18. Holtmann, P. (2013). Syria – a best case, a worst case and two most likely scenarios. Perspectives on Terrorism, 7(3), 135-146. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26296975
  19. Hussain, N. (2013). The Syrian Crisis and regional order in the Middle East. Pakistan Horizon, 66(4), 39-51. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/24711514
  20. James, P. (1995). Structural realism and the causes of war. Mershon International Studies Review, 39(2), 181-208.
  21. John, M. (1993). Realism neorealism and critical theory: A general essay. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 54(1), 128-154. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/41855644
  22. Kahf, A. (2016). Geopolitical realignments around Syria: Threats and opportunities. Insight Turkey, 18(2), 21-30. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26299573
  23. Kamalov, I. (2013). Ortadoğu silah pazarında Rusya’nın payı. Ortadoğu Analiz, 5(55), 58-70. Retrieved from https://www.orsam.org.tr/d_hbanaliz/7ilyaskemaloglu.pdf
  24. Keohane, R. and Waltz, K. (2000). The neorealist and his critic. International Security, 25(3), 204-205. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/2626711
  25. Kozhanov, N. (2017). Russian-Iranian relations through the prism of the Syrian Crisis. Insight Turkey, 19(4), 105-124. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26300560
  26. Krieg, A. (2017). Trump and the Middle East: ‘Barking Dogs Seldom Bite’. Insight Turkey, 19(3), 139-158. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/26300535
  27. Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New York: Norton.
  28. Mitton, J. (2016). The problem with everybody’s favourite solution in Syria. International Journal, 71(2), 283-290. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/44631186
  29. Natil, I. (2016). Turkey’s foreign policy challenges in the Syrian Crisis. Irish Studies in International Affairs, 27, 75-84.
  30. Oelsner, A. (2007). Friendship, mutual trust and the evolution of regional peace in the international system. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 10(2), 257-279.
  31. Painter, D. (2014). Oil and geopolitics: The oil crises of the 1970s and the Cold War. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 39(4 (150)), 186-208. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/24145533
  32. Palka, E. (1995). The US Army in operations other than war: A time to revive military geography. GeoJournal, 37(2), 201-208. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/41146609
  33. Ryan, C. (2012). The new Arab cold war and the struggle for Syria. Middle East Report, (262), 28-31. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/41702433
  34. Russett, B., Risse-Kappen, T. and Mearsheimer, J. (1990). Back to the Future, Part III: Realism and the realities of European security. International Security, 15(3), 216-222.
  35. Sevilla, H. (2013). Conflict In Syria: The changing political landscape of the Middle East. World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues, 17(3), 40-61.
  36. Smith, S. (2007). Introduction: Diversity and disciplinarity in international relations theory. In Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki ve Steve Smith (Eds.), International relations theories: Discipline and diversity (pp.1-12). New York: Oxford University Press.
  37. Thies, C. (2004). Are two theories better than one? A constructivist model of the neorealist-neoliberal debate. International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale De Science Politique, 25(2), 159-183. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/1601675
  38. Vasquez, J. A. (2004). The power of power politics: From classical realism to neotraditionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  39. Waever, O. (1995). Identity, integration and security: Solving the sovereignty puzzle in E.U. studies. Journal of International Affairs, 48(2), 389-431. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/24357597
  40. Waltz, K. (2000). Structural realism after the Cold War. International Security, 25(1), 5-51.
  41. Waltz, K. (2010). Theory of international politics. Long Grove: Waveland Press.
  42. Weber, C. (2010). International relations theory, A critical introduction. London: Routledge.
  43. Wohlforth, W. C. (2008). Realism. In Christian Reus-Smit ve Duncan Snidal (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of international relations (pp. 131-149).New York: Oxford University Press.
  44. John, M. (1993). Realism neorealism and critical theory: A general essay. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 54(1), 128-154. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/41855644