Gezegensel Siyaset Perspektifi Üzerinden Anlaşmazlık Konularının Eleştirel Bir Araştırması: Arktik Meselesi
Abstract
Küresel müşterekler kavramı, hassas bölgelere dirençlilik temelli bir yaklaşımın yolunu açmıştır. Jeopolitik ve ekonominin kesiştiği noktada atmosfer, Antarktika, Açık Denizler ve uzay, iklim değişikliğinin olumsuz etkileri nedeniyle krizde. Bu nedenle, bu araştırma uluslararası ilişkilere yönelik mevcut insan merkezli yaklaşımı sorgulamaktadır. Özellikle son yıllarda yaşadığımız ekolojik krizlere çözüm üretemeyen devlet ve kurumlara karşı sistemli bir yeniden yapılanma sürecine önem vermektedir. Bu yeniden yapılanma sürecinde gezegensel siyaset, sistemik bir değişim önerisiyle uluslararası ilişkiler literatürüne hakim olmuştur. Ekolojik değişimin yıkıcı olduğu Arktik bölgesinde mevcut uluslararası kurum ve politikaların yetersiz olduğunu düşünen Arktik uluslararası ilişkiler literatüründe gezegensel siyaset argümanlarına uyarlanabilir. Ayrıca Arktik bölgesi üzerindeki gezegensel siyaset düşüncesi de, özellikle yeşil teori ile ilgili çalışmalar göz önüne alındığında, benzer argümanlara sahiptir. Yeşil teorinin Arktik uluslararası ilişkiler literatüründe çözüm sağlayıcı bir paradigma olarak ortaya çıktığı bilinmektedir. Buna göre, gezegensel siyaset perspektifini benimseyen bu araştırma, çevre ve kalkınma sorunlarının ve bunlarla bağlantılı ihtilaf konularının Arktik'te nasıl çözümlendiğini özetlemeye çalışmaktadır.
Ethical Statement
Bu çalışmanın, özgün bir çalışma olduğunu; çalışmanın hazırlık, veri toplama, analiz ve bilgilerin sunumu olmak üzere tüm aşamalarından bilimsel etik ilke ve kurallarına uygun davrandığımı; bu çalışma kapsamında elde edilmeyen tüm veri ve bilgiler için kaynak gösterdiğimi ve bu kaynaklara kaynakçada yer verdiğimi; kullanılan verilerde herhangi bir değişiklik yapmadığımı kabul ederek etik görev ve sorumluluklara riayet ettiğimi beyan ederim. Herhangi bir zamanda, çalışmayla ilgili yaptığım bu beyana aykırı bir durumun saptanması durumunda, ortaya çıkacak tüm ahlaki ve hukuki sonuçlara razı olduğumu bildiririm.
References
- Baslar, K. (1998). The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, The Hague-Boston-London, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Berkman, P. A. and Vylegzhanin, A. N. (2012). Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean. Springer.
- Bronder, P. L. (2021). Turkish Yard Wins Bid to Build Nuclear Icebreaker Dock, June 13. https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/industry-and-energy/2021/06/turkish-yard-wins-bid-build-nuclear-icebreaker-dock (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Byers. M. (2013). International Law and the Arctic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Dal, A. (2020). Kuzeydeki Asırlık Çatışma: Arktik Bölgesi’ndeki Çıkarlar Algılaması ve Egemenlik Tartışmaları Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme.Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 30(2).
- Caymaz, E., Büyüksağnak, Y. B. (2021). An Analysis fromthe English School Perspective on conflict issues in the Arctic Region of the Russian Federation and the United States, International Journal of Human Sciences, 18 (1).
- Dauvergne, P. (2012). Handbook of Global Environmental Politics. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Dryzek, J. S. (1997). The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, New York: Oxford University Press.
- Dyer, Hugh C. (2017) Green Theory In McGlinchey, S., Walters, R. and Scheinpflug, C., (eds) International Relations Theory. pp. 84-90. England: E-International Relations Publishing.
- Dyer, Hugh C. (2018). Introducing Green Theory in International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2018/01/07/green-theory-in-international-relations/ (Accessed on 22.08.2023).
- Erçandırlı, Y. (2014). ‘‘Yeşil Teori’’ in Uluslararası İlişkiler Teorileri, Ramazan Gözen (ed.): 493-514. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
- Gül, T. (2014). “Arktikte’ki Rusya: Sorun ve İşbirliği Arasındaki Gel-Git”, Bilgesam Analiz, No.1167.
- Hardin, G. (1968). "The Tragedy of the Commons". Science. 162 (3859): 1243–1248.
- Honneland, G. (2017). Arctic Euphoria and International High North Politics. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Jordan, J. (2021). Russia’s Coercive Diplomacy in the Arctic, The Arctic Institute, https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/russia-coercive-diplomacy-arctic/ (Accessed on 21.08.2023).
- Kanie, N. (2007). "Governance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements: A healthy or ill-equipped fragmentation?" Global Environmental Governance: Perspectives on the Current Debate, Walter Hoffmann and Lydia Swart (eds.), 67-86. New York: Center for UN Reform Education.
- Lavelle, K. C. (2021). Regime, climate, and region in transition: Russian participation in the Arctic Council. Problems of Post-Communism. Vol. 69, Issue 4-5.
- Matz-Lück, N. (2009). Planting the Flag in Arctic Waters: Russia's Claim to the North Pole, Göttingen Journal of Public International Law, 2009, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1416682. Accessed on 22.08.2023.
- McDorman, T. L. and C. Schofield. (2015). Maritime Limits and Boundaries in the Arctic Ocean: Agreements and Disputes. L. C. Jensen ve G. Honneland (Editörler). Handbook of the Politics of the Arctic. Edward Elgar Publishing. (207-226)
- Migeed, R. R. (2022). Ending the Game of Environmental Politics in the Arctic: How the Arctic States Can Achieve Dispute Resolution Using Existing Legal Frameworks. Ocean & Coastal L. J., 35.
- Ostrom, Elinor (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Rehman, M. (2022). Changing contours of Arctic politics and the prospects for cooperation between Russia and China. The Arctic Institute. URL: https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/changing-contours-arctic-politics-prospects-cooperation-russia-china/ (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Reykjavik University (2016). Arctic high seas, ambassadorial panel on building common interests in the Arctic Ocean.URL:https://en.ru.is/news/building-common-interests-in-the-arctic-ocean-1 (Accessed on 22.08.2023).
- Rothwell, R. D. (2018). Arctic Ocean Shipping: Navigation, Security and Sovereignty in the North American Arctic. Leiden: Brill. SAON_IG (Sustained Arctic Observing Networks Initiating Group) (2007). The SAON process Annex 4. URL: https://www.arcticobserving.org/images/pdf/Workshops/2nd_edmonton/saon_ig.pdf (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Stern, P. C. (2011). "Design principles for global commons: natural resources and emerging technologies". International Journal of the Commons. 5 (2): 213.
- The UN (2015). The 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. URL: https://sdgs.un.org/goals
- Trutnev, Y. (2021). Yuri Trutnev Held a Meeting of the State Commission for the Development of the Arctic, https://minvr.gov.ru/press-center/news/yuriy-trutnev-provyel-zasedanie-gosudarstvennoy-komissii-po-voprosam-razvitiya-arktiki-32076/ (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Vaughan, A. (2016). Human impact has pushed Earth into the Anthropocene, scientists say. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/07/human-impact-has-pushed-earth-into-the-anthropocene-scientists-say. Accessed on 22.08.2023.
A Critical Research of the Dispute Matters through the Planetary Politics Perspective: The Arctic Case
Abstract
The concept of the global commons has paved a resilience-based approach to vulnerable regions. At the nexus of geopolitics and economics, the atmosphere, Antarctica, the High Seas, and outer space are in crisis due to the negative effects of climate change. Therefore, this research interrogates the current anthropocentric approach to international relations. It attaches importance to a systematic process of reconstruction, especially against the states and institutions that cannot provide a solution to the ecological crises we have been experiencing in recent years. In this reconstruction process, planetary politics has been dominant in the international relations literature through its suggestion of a systemic change. Planetary politics arguments can be adapted within the Arctic international relations literature that considers the existing international institutions and politics as insufficient in the region, where ecological change is disruptive. Besides, the thought of planetary politics over the Arctic region has similar arguments, especially when considering studies associated with green theory. It is known that green theory emerged as a solution-providing paradigm in the Arctic international relations literature. Accordingly, by adopting the planetary politics perspective, this research tries to outline how the environmental and development issues and their associated dispute matters are being settled in the Arctic
References
- Baslar, K. (1998). The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, The Hague-Boston-London, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Berkman, P. A. and Vylegzhanin, A. N. (2012). Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean. Springer.
- Bronder, P. L. (2021). Turkish Yard Wins Bid to Build Nuclear Icebreaker Dock, June 13. https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/industry-and-energy/2021/06/turkish-yard-wins-bid-build-nuclear-icebreaker-dock (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Byers. M. (2013). International Law and the Arctic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Dal, A. (2020). Kuzeydeki Asırlık Çatışma: Arktik Bölgesi’ndeki Çıkarlar Algılaması ve Egemenlik Tartışmaları Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme.Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 30(2).
- Caymaz, E., Büyüksağnak, Y. B. (2021). An Analysis fromthe English School Perspective on conflict issues in the Arctic Region of the Russian Federation and the United States, International Journal of Human Sciences, 18 (1).
- Dauvergne, P. (2012). Handbook of Global Environmental Politics. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Dryzek, J. S. (1997). The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, New York: Oxford University Press.
- Dyer, Hugh C. (2017) Green Theory In McGlinchey, S., Walters, R. and Scheinpflug, C., (eds) International Relations Theory. pp. 84-90. England: E-International Relations Publishing.
- Dyer, Hugh C. (2018). Introducing Green Theory in International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2018/01/07/green-theory-in-international-relations/ (Accessed on 22.08.2023).
- Erçandırlı, Y. (2014). ‘‘Yeşil Teori’’ in Uluslararası İlişkiler Teorileri, Ramazan Gözen (ed.): 493-514. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
- Gül, T. (2014). “Arktikte’ki Rusya: Sorun ve İşbirliği Arasındaki Gel-Git”, Bilgesam Analiz, No.1167.
- Hardin, G. (1968). "The Tragedy of the Commons". Science. 162 (3859): 1243–1248.
- Honneland, G. (2017). Arctic Euphoria and International High North Politics. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Jordan, J. (2021). Russia’s Coercive Diplomacy in the Arctic, The Arctic Institute, https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/russia-coercive-diplomacy-arctic/ (Accessed on 21.08.2023).
- Kanie, N. (2007). "Governance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements: A healthy or ill-equipped fragmentation?" Global Environmental Governance: Perspectives on the Current Debate, Walter Hoffmann and Lydia Swart (eds.), 67-86. New York: Center for UN Reform Education.
- Lavelle, K. C. (2021). Regime, climate, and region in transition: Russian participation in the Arctic Council. Problems of Post-Communism. Vol. 69, Issue 4-5.
- Matz-Lück, N. (2009). Planting the Flag in Arctic Waters: Russia's Claim to the North Pole, Göttingen Journal of Public International Law, 2009, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1416682. Accessed on 22.08.2023.
- McDorman, T. L. and C. Schofield. (2015). Maritime Limits and Boundaries in the Arctic Ocean: Agreements and Disputes. L. C. Jensen ve G. Honneland (Editörler). Handbook of the Politics of the Arctic. Edward Elgar Publishing. (207-226)
- Migeed, R. R. (2022). Ending the Game of Environmental Politics in the Arctic: How the Arctic States Can Achieve Dispute Resolution Using Existing Legal Frameworks. Ocean & Coastal L. J., 35.
- Ostrom, Elinor (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Rehman, M. (2022). Changing contours of Arctic politics and the prospects for cooperation between Russia and China. The Arctic Institute. URL: https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/changing-contours-arctic-politics-prospects-cooperation-russia-china/ (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Reykjavik University (2016). Arctic high seas, ambassadorial panel on building common interests in the Arctic Ocean.URL:https://en.ru.is/news/building-common-interests-in-the-arctic-ocean-1 (Accessed on 22.08.2023).
- Rothwell, R. D. (2018). Arctic Ocean Shipping: Navigation, Security and Sovereignty in the North American Arctic. Leiden: Brill. SAON_IG (Sustained Arctic Observing Networks Initiating Group) (2007). The SAON process Annex 4. URL: https://www.arcticobserving.org/images/pdf/Workshops/2nd_edmonton/saon_ig.pdf (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Stern, P. C. (2011). "Design principles for global commons: natural resources and emerging technologies". International Journal of the Commons. 5 (2): 213.
- The UN (2015). The 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. URL: https://sdgs.un.org/goals
- Trutnev, Y. (2021). Yuri Trutnev Held a Meeting of the State Commission for the Development of the Arctic, https://minvr.gov.ru/press-center/news/yuriy-trutnev-provyel-zasedanie-gosudarstvennoy-komissii-po-voprosam-razvitiya-arktiki-32076/ (Accessed on 20.08.2023).
- Vaughan, A. (2016). Human impact has pushed Earth into the Anthropocene, scientists say. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/07/human-impact-has-pushed-earth-into-the-anthropocene-scientists-say. Accessed on 22.08.2023.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Environmental Anthropology |
| Journal Section | Makaleler |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | October 24, 2023 |
| Submission Date | September 19, 2023 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2023 Volume: 13 Issue: 2 |
Cite
