KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 60

SÖYLEMSEL BİR İNŞA OLARAK KUŞAK VE YOL GİRİŞİMİ: ELEŞTİREL JEOPOLİTİK BİR ANALİZ

THE BELT AND ROAD INITIATIVE AS A DISCOURSE CONSTRUCTION: A CRITICAL GEOPOLITICAL ANALYSIS

Adil Batuhan Aktaş(ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ)0000-0002-5829-1766
Mustafa Serdar Palabıyık(TOBB EKONOMİ VE TEKNOLOJİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5938-7017
Sayfa
1–21
Yayın Tarihi
2024-01-17
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bu yolla Çin’in KYG coğrafyasına yönelik alansallaştırma pratiklerini resmi ve akademik söylem aracılığıyla gerçekleştirdiği gözler önüne serilmektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti tarafından 2013 yılında duyurulan Kuşak ve Yol Girişimi (KYG) halen uluslararası siyasetin önemli tartışma konularından birisidir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Bu makale, girişimi eleştirel jeopolitik bir yaklaşımla ele alarak Çin resmi makamları ve Çin üniversitelerine mensup akademisyenlerin KYG’ye yönelik ürettikleri söylemleri incelemektedir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bu yolla Çin’in KYG coğrafyasına yönelik alansallaştırma pratiklerini resmi ve akademik söylem aracılığıyla gerçekleştirdiği gözler önüne serilmektedir.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2013 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Kuşak ve Yol Girişimi · Eleştirel jeopolitik · Bilgi-iktidar ekseni

Özet

Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti tarafından 2013 yılında duyurulan Kuşak ve Yol Girişimi (KYG) halen uluslararası siyasetin önemli tartışma konularından birisidir. Bu makale, girişimi eleştirel jeopolitik bir yaklaşımla ele alarak Çin resmi makamları ve Çin üniversitelerine mensup akademisyenlerin KYG’ye yönelik ürettikleri söylemleri incelemektedir. Bu amaçla makalede, Çin resmi makamları ve Çin akademyasınca üretilen metinler içerik analizi ve söylem analizi yoluyla incelenerek KYG’ye ilişkin söylemin ve bu söylem inşası sürecinde iktidar ile akademya arasındaki ilişkinin niteliklerini ortaya koymak amaçlanmaktadır. Makalede Çin hükümeti ve Çin akademyasının KYG’yi tasvir etmek adına ürettiği bilgi sorunsallaştırılmakta, bu iki söylemin tamamlayıcı nitelikte oldukları ve üretilen bilgilerin Çin’in çıkarlarına hizmet etmek üzere araçsallaştırıldığı gösterilmektedir. Bu yolla Çin’in KYG coğrafyasına yönelik alansallaştırma pratiklerini resmi ve akademik söylem aracılığıyla gerçekleştirdiği gözler önüne serilmektedir.

Abstract

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which the People's Republic of China announced in 2013, is still one of the critical topics of discussion in international politics. This article takes a critical geopolitical approach to the initiative and analyses the discourses on BRI produced by Chinese officials and academics from Chinese universities. For this purpose, the article analyses the texts produced by Chinese official authorities and academia through content and discourse analysis to reveal the characteristics of the discourse on the BRI and the relationship between power and academia in the process of discourse construction. The article problematizes the knowledge produced by the Chinese government and academia to portray the BRI, shows that these two discourses are complementary and the information produced is instrumentalized to serve China's interests. In this way, it is revealed that China carries out its spatialization practices towards the BRI geography through official and academic discourse.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Aktaş, A. B., Palabıyık, M. S. (2024). SÖYLEMSEL BİR İNŞA OLARAK KUŞAK VE YOL GİRİŞİMİ: ELEŞTİREL JEOPOLİTİK BİR ANALİZ. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı: 60, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1274883

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (84)

  1. Anastasiadou, I. E. (2019). "Iron Silk Roads: The Geopolitics of Past and Present Initiatives for the Revival of Eurasian Trade through Overland Transport Corridors", Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 12/1, 57-76, DOİ: 10.1093/cjres/rsy035.
  2. Anderson, M. (1996). Frontiers: Territory and State Formation in the Modern World, Polity, Londra.
  3. Antonsich, M. (2009). "On Territory, The Nation-state and The Crisis of The Hyphen", Progress in human geography, 33/6, 789-806, DOİ: 10.1177/0309132508104996.
  4. ASEAN-China Centre (2013). Speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping to Indonesian Parliament. Erişim: 12.04.2022, http://www.asean-china-center.org/english/2013-10/03/c_133062675.htm
  5. Asia Media Center (2018). Explainer: The Belt and Road Initiative. Erişim: 12.04.2022, https://www.asiamediacentre.org.nz/features/explainer-belt-and-road-initiative-china/
  6. Bērziņa-Čerenkova, U. A. (2016). BRI Instead of OBOR – China Edits The English Name of Its Most Ambitious International Project. Latvian Institute of International Affairs. Erişim: 12.04.2022, https://liia.lv/en/opinions/bri-instead-of-obor-china-edits-the-english-name-of-its-most-ambitious-international-project-532
  7. Blanchard, J. M. F. ve Flint, C. (2017). "The Geopolitics of China's Maritime Silk Road Initiative", Geopolitics, 22/2, 223-245, DOİ: 10.1080/14650045.2017.1291503.
  8. Cao, J. (2019). "China’s Belt and Road Initiative 2.0.”, China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 5/2, 233-48, DOİ: 10.1142/S2377740019500155.
  9. Crampton, J. W. ve Elden S. (2007). Space, Knowledge and Power, Ashgate, Aldershot.
  10. Changhoon, C. (2017). “China’s Westward March: Strategic Views of One Belt, One Road”, The Korean Journal of International Studies, 15/3, 483-500, DOİ: 10.14731/kjis.2017.12.15.3.483.
  11. China Daily (2016). Full Text of Keynote Speech of China's Top Legislator at Belt and Road Summit in Hong Kong. Erişim: 12.04.2022, https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2016-05/18/content_25349164.htm
  12. China Daily (2019a). Preparations Underway for The Second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation. Erişim: 12.04.2022, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201903/30/WS5c9ea520a3104842260b3673.html
  13. China Daily (2019b). Keynote Speech on The Belt and Road Initiative by H.E. Ambassador Liu Xiaoming at The British Parliament: New Stage, New Opportunities, New Role. Erişim: 12.04.2022, http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201906/26/WS5d13389aa3103dbf1432a6c7_3.html
  14. China Daily (2023). Belt and Road 2022 in Numbers. Erişim: 24.02.2023, https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202301/06/WS63b751c0a31057c47eba7ecd_1.html
  15. Chun, Z. (2017). “The Belt and Road Initiative and Global Governance in Transition”, China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 3/2, 175-191, DOİ: 10.1142/S2377740017500166.
  16. China International Development Cooperation Agency (2020). Opening Speech by State Councilor Wang Yi at The Meeting of The Advisory Council of The Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, 2020. Erişim: 12.04.2022, http://en.cidca.gov.cn/2020-12/21/c_576318.htm
  17. Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Dışişleri Bakanlığı (2014). Speech by Yang Jiechi: Jointly Undertake The Great Initiatives With Confidence and Mutual Trust. Erişim: 13.04.2022, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/zyjh_665391/t1145860.shtml
  18. Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Dışişleri Bakanlığı (2018). Remarks by Executive Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng At The Welcoming Dinner of The First Meeting of The Advisory Council of The Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation (BRF). Erişim: 11.04.2022, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/zyjh_665391/201812/t20181221_678714.html
  19. Dahlman, C. ve Brunn, S. (2003). “Reading Geopolitics Beyond the State: Organisational Discourse in Response to 11 September”, Geopolitics, 8/3, 253-280, DOİ: 10.1080/14650040412331307782.
  20. Dalby, S. (1991). “Critical Geopolitics: Discourse, Difference, and Dissent”, Environment and Planning D Society and Space, 9/3, 261-283, DOİ: 10.1068/d090261.
  21. Daojiong, Z. (2015). “China’s Economic Diplomacy Focusing on the Asia-Pacific Region”, China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 1/1, 85-104, DOİ: 10.1142/S2377740015500050.
  22. Demiryol, T. (2022). “Between Geopolitics and Development: The Belt and Road Initiative and The Limits of Capital Accumulation in China”, China Report, 1-21, DOİ: 10.1177/00094455221080313.
  23. Dodds, K. (2001). “Political Geography III: Critical Geopolitics After Ten Years”, Progress in Human Geography, 25, 469-484, DOİ: 10.1191/030913201680191790.
  24. Dodds, K., Kuus M. ve Sharp J. (2013). “Introduction: Geopolitics and Its Critics”, The Ashgate Research Companion to Critical Geopolitics, (Ed: K. Doods, M. Kuus ve J. Sharp), Ashgate, Surrey.
  25. Du, J., Yang G. ve Dang H. (2020). “Special Issue on Foreign Trade and Investment in China’s Continuing Economic Opening and The Belt and Road Initiative”, Pacific Economic Review, 25/2, 121-26, DOİ: 10.1111/1468-0106.12327.
  26. Elden, S. (2010). “Land, Terrain, Territory”, Progress in Human Geography, 34/6, 799-817, DOİ: 10.1177/0309132510362603.
  27. Fang, L., Kleimann M., Li Y. ve Schmerer H. J. (2021). “The Implications of The New Silk Road Railways on Local Development”, Journal of Asian Economics, 75, 1-15, DOİ: 10.1016/j.asieco.2021.101326.
  28. Fardella, E. ve Prodi G. (2017). “The Belt and Road Initiative Impact on Europe: An Italian Perspective”, China & World Economy, 25/5, 125-138, DOİ: 10.1111/cwe.12217.
  29. Feiteng, Z. (2017). “Beyond Geopolitical Myth: China’s New Asia Strategy”, Looking for A Road, (Ed: B. Shao), Brill, Leiden, DOİ: 10.1163/9789004330818_004.
  30. Flint, C. ve Zhu C. (2019). “The Geopolitics of Connectivity, Cooperation, and Hegemonic Competition: The Belt and Road Initiative”, Geoforum, 99 (Aralık), 95-101, DOİ: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.12.008.
  31. Flint, C. ve Xiaotong Z. (2019). “Historical-Geopolitical Contexts and The Transformation of Chinese Foreign Policy”, Chinese Journal of International Politics, 12/3, 295-331, DOİ: 10.1093/cjip/poz011.
  32. Foucault, M. (2007). Cinselliğin Tarihi (Çev: H. Ü. Tanrıöver), Ayrıntı Yayınları, İstanbul.
  33. Godement, F. (2015). “One Belt, One Road: China’s Great Leap Outward”, China Analysis, 1-18.
  34. Güneş (2018). Tonga da Çin’in Kuşak-Yol Projesine Katıldı. Erişim: 13.04.2022, https://www.gunes.com/dunya/tonga-da-cinin-kusak-yolprojesine-katildi-929644
  35. Hassner, P. (1997). “Obstinate and Obsolete: Non-territorial Transnational Forces Versus The European Territorial State”, Geopolitics in The Post-Wall Europe: Security, Territory and Identity, (Ed: O. Tunander, P. K. Baev ve V. I. Einagel), Sage, Londra.
  36. He, B. (2019). “The Domestic Politics of The Belt and Road Initiative and Its Implications”, Journal of Contemporary China, 28/116, 180-95, DOİ: 10.1080/10670564.2018.1511391.
  37. Hepple, L. W. (1992). “Metaphor, Geopolitical Discourse and The Military in South America”, Writing Worlds: Discourse, Text and the Metaphor in The Represantations of Landscape, (Ed: T.J. Barnes ve J. S. Duncon), Routledge, Londra.
  38. Hong, Z. (2019). “China's Belt and Road Initiative and ASEAN”, China: An International Journal, 17/2, 127-147, DOİ: 10.1353/chn.2019.0019.
  39. Hu, F., Zhang X., Hu M. ve Cook D. L. (2019). “Chinese Enterprises’ Investment in Infrastructure Construction in Cambodia”, Asian Perspective, 43/1, 177-207, DOİ: 10.1353/apr.2019.0006.
  40. Huang, Y. (2016). “Understanding China’s Belt & Road Initiative: Motivation, Framework and Assessment”, China Economic Review, 40, 314-321, DOİ: 10.1016/j.chieco.2016.07.007.
  41. Jiang, W., Zhang H. ve Lin Y. (2021). “Trade Sustainability and Efficiency under the Belt and Road Initiative: A Stochastic Frontier Analysis of China’s Trade Potential at Industry Level”, Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 58/6, 1-13, DOİ: 10.1080/1540496X.2021.1925246.
  42. Khan, Z., Changgang G., Ahmad R. ve Wenhao F. (2018). “CPEC: A Game Changer in The Balance of Power in South Asia”, China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 4/4, 595-611, DOİ: 10.1142/S237774001850029X.
  43. Knight, D. B. (1982). “Identity and Territory: Geographical Perspectives on Nationalism and Regionalism”, Annals of The Association of American Geographers, 72, 514-31, DOİ: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1982.tb01842.x.
  44. Knowles E. ve Elliott J. (1997). The Oxford Dictionary of New Words, Oxford University Press, New York.
  45. Lingliang, Z. (2016). “Conceptual Analysis of China’s Belt and Road Initiative: A Road Towards a Regional Community of Common Destiny”, Chinese Journal of International Law, 15/3, 517-541, DOİ: 10.1093/chinesejil/jmw021.
  46. Liu, F. (2020). “The Recalibration of Chinese Assertiveness: China’s Responses to The Indo-Pacific Challenge”, International Affairs, 96/1, 9-27, DOİ: 10.1093/ia/iiz226.
  47. Liu, W. ve Dunford M. (2016). “Inclusive Globalization: Unpacking China's Belt and Road Initiative”, Area Development and Policy, 1/3, 323-340, DOİ: 10.1080/23792949.2016.1232598.
  48. Mayer, M. (2018). “China’s Historical Statecraft and The Return of History”, International Affairs, 94/6, 1217-35, DOİ: 10.1093/ia/iiy209.
  49. Mayer, M. ve Zhang X. (2020). “Theorizing China-World Integration: Sociospatial Reconfigurations and The Modern Silk Roads”, Review of International Political Economy, 28/4, 974-1003, DOİ: 10.1080/09692290.2020.1741424.
  50. Musabelliu, M. (2017). “China’s Belt and Road Initiative Extension to Central and Eastern European Countries - Sixteen Nations, Five Summits, Many Challenges”, Croatian International Relations Review, 23/78, 57-76, DOİ: 10.1515/cirr-2017-0007.
  51. Na-Xi, L., Meng-Fang H. ve Shan-Bing L. (2019). “How The Belt and Road Initiative Can Help Strengthen The Role of The SCO and Deepen China’s Cooperation with Russia and The Countries of Central Asia”, India Quarterly, 75/1, 56-68, DOİ: 10.1177/0974928418821484.
  52. National Development and Reform Commission (2015). Vision and Actions on Jointly Building the Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. Erişim: 11.04.2022, http://2017.beltandroadforum.org/english/n100/2017/0410/c22-45.html
  53. Newman, D. (2003). “Boundaries.”, A Companion to Political Geography (Ed: J. A. Agnew, K. Mitchell ve G. Ó. Tuathail), Blackwell, New Jersey.
  54. Ni, Z., Lu, X. ve Xue W. (2021). “Does The Belt and Road Initiative Resolve The Steel Overcapacity in China? Evidence From a Dynamic Model Averaging Approach”, Empirical Economics, 61/1, 279-307, DOİ: 10.1007/s00181-020-01861-z.
  55. Office of The Leading Group for The Belt and Road Initiative (2017). Building the Belt and Road: Concept, Practice and China’s Contribution. Foreign Languages Press, Pekin.
  56. Paasi, A. (2003). “Territory”, A Companion to Political Geography, (Ed: J. A. Agnew, K. Mitchell ve G. Ó. Tuathail), Blackwell, New Jersey.
  57. Pekcan, C. (2019). Çin Dış Politikası ve ABD ile İlişkiler, 1. Baskı, Dora, Bursa.
  58. Rolland, N. (2015). China’s New Silk Road. The National Bureau of Asian Research. Erişim: 11.04.2022, https://www.nbr.org/publication/chinas-new-silk-road/
  59. Sallan Gül, S. ve Kahya Nizam, Ö. (2021). "Sosyal Bilimlerde İçerik ve Söylem Analizi", Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 42/1, Ö181-Ö198, DOİ: 10.30794/pausbed.803182.
  60. Sidaway, J. D. ve Woon, C. Y. (2017). “Chinese Narratives on ‘One Belt, One Road’ (一带一路) in Geopolitical and Imperial Contexts”, The Professional Geographer, 69/4, 591–603, DOİ: 10.1080/00330124.2017.1288576.
  61. Shepard, W. (2017). Beijing To The World: Don't Call The Belt And Road Initiative OBOR. Forbes. Erişim: 12.04. 2022, https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2017/08/01/beijing-to-the-world-please-stop-saying-obor/?sh=326ae8da17d4
  62. The Guardian (2018). APEC Summit Fails to Agree on Statement Amid Us-China Spat. Erişim: 11.04.2022, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/04/mike-pence-to-warn-against-chinese-intimidation-in-south-china-sea?CMP=gu_com
  63. Tirben, E. G. (2009). “Dünyaya Yeni Bir Bakış: Eleştirel Jeopolitik”, Palabıyık, Mustafa Serdar (Der.), Batı’da Jeopolitik Düşünce, (Ed: M. S. Palabıyık), Orion, Ankara.
  64. Toal, G. ve Agnew J. (1992). “Geopolitics and Discourse: Practical Geopolitical Reasoning in American Foreign Policy” Political Geography, 11/2, 190-204, DOİ: 10.1016/0962-6298(92)90048-X.
  65. Toal, G. ve Dalby S. (1998). “Introduction: Rethinking Geopolitics”, Rethinking Geopolitics (Ed: G. Ó. Tuathail ve S. Dalby), Routledge, Londra.
  66. Toal, G. (2002). “Theorizing Practical Geopolitical Reasoning: The Case of The United States’ Response to The War in Bosnia”, Political Geography, 21/5, 601-628, DOİ: 10.1016/S0962-6298(02)00009-4.
  67. Wang, Y. (2016). “Offensive for Defensive: The Belt and Road Initiative and China's New Grand Strategy”, The Pacific Review, 29/3, 455-463, DOİ: 10.1080/09512748.2016.1154690.
  68. Wu, S. ve Jiao, Y. (2022). “The Belt and Road Initiative and The Executive Compensation Contract: Evidence From Chinese Security Market”, Applied Economics Letters, 29/16, 1460-1465, DOİ: 10.1080/13504851.2021.1937493.
  69. Wu, S., Hu B. ve Pan Q. (2019). “The Impact of The US Interest Rate Hike on Emerging Market Economies and The Belt and Road Initiative”, China and World Economy, 27/3, 126-42, DOİ: 10.1111/cwe.12283.
  70. Xi, Jinping (2013, Eylül). Promote Friendship Between Our People and Work Together to Build a Bright Future. FMPRC. Erişim: 11.04.2022, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/ce/cebel/eng/zxxx/t1078088.htm
  71. Xi, Jinping (2017, Mayıs). Work Together to Build the Silk Road Economic Belt and The 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. Belt and Road Portal. Erişim: 13.04.2022, https://eng.yidaiyilu.gov.cn/home/rolling/13299.htm
  72. Xi, Jinping (2019, Nisan). Working Together to Deliver a Brighter Future For Belt and Road Cooperation. FMPRC. Erişim: 12.04.2022, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/zyjh_665391/201904/t20190426_678729.html
  73. Xiangyang, L. (2019). “The ‘Absence’ of Asian Regional Economic Integration and The Development Orientation of The Belt and Road”, Social Sciences in China, 40/1, 132-47, DOİ: 10.1080/02529203.2019.1556484.
  74. Xiaomei, Z. ve Shimin W. (2018). “Strategic Mutual Trust from the Perspective of Spatial Blending”, Social Sciences in China, 39/4, 171-84, DOİ: 10.1080/02529203.2018.1519232.
  75. Xing, G. (2017). “Understanding China’s One-Belt-One-Road Initiative—A New Link Pattern for Deepened Interaction Between China and The World”, Looking for A Road (Ed: B. Shao), Brill, Leiden, DOİ: 10.1163/9789004330818_011.
  76. Yale, W. (2015). China’s Maritime Silk Road Gamble. The Diplomat. Erişim: 11.04.2022, https://thediplomat.com/2015/04/chinas-maritime-silk-road-gamble/
  77. Yalew, M. T. ve Changgang G. (2020). “China’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’: Implication for Land Locked Ethiopia”, Insight on Africa, 12/2, 175-93, DOİ: 10.1177/0975087819891538.
  78. Yeşiltaş, M. (2017). “Jeopolitik”, Uluslararası İlişiklere Giriş: Tarih, Teori, Kavram ve Konular, (Ed: A. Balcı ve Ş. Kardaş), Küre, İstanbul.
  79. Yilmaz (Yao Shifan), S. ve Changming L. (2020). “Remaking Eurasia: The Belt and Road Initiative and China-Russia Strategic Partnership”, Asia Europe Journal, 18/3, 259-80, DOİ: 10.1007/s10308-019-00547-1.
  80. Yinhong, S. (2017). “Prudence Crucial for The One-Belt-One-Road Initiative”, Looking for A Road, (Ed: B. Shao), Brill, Leiden, DOİ: 10.1163/9789004330818_014.
  81. Zhao, Y. ve Tan-Mullins M. (2021). “From the Ancient Silk Road to The Belt and Road Initiative: Narratives, Signalling and Trust-Building”, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 23/2, 280-96, DOİ: 10.1177/1369148120987464.
  82. Zheng, X. ve Jia L. (2017). “An Empirical Study on the Economic Effect of Financial Cooperation Among Countries of The ‘Silk Road Economic Belt’”, Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 28/5, 542-551, DOİ: 10.5755/j01.ee.28.5.19189.
  83. Zhexin, Z. (2018). “The Belt and Road Initiative: China’s New Geopolitical Strategy?”, China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 4/3, 327-43, DOİ: 10.1142/S2377740018500240.
  84. Zhou, F. (2016). “The U.S. Alliance System in Asia: A Chinese Perspective”, Asian Politics & Policy, 8/1, 207-218, DOİ: 10.1111/aspp.12231.