تاثیر انقلاب‌های عربی بر سیاستگذاری خارجی ترکیه (بر مبنای نظریه نقش)
نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران مرکزی
2 دانشجوی دکتری علوم سیاسی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران مرکزی
چکیده
اصل عدم دخالت در مسائل خاورمیانه، به عنوان اولویت سیاستگذاری خارجی ترکیه در بیشتر دوران قرن بیستم مطرح بود. اما در طول دهه گذشته، ترکیه به طور قابل ملاحظه‌ای از سنّت کمالیستی و درون‌گرای خود فاصله گرفته و نقشی فعّال در منطقه اتخاذ نموده است. از این رو، بعد از قدرتگیری حزب عدالت و توسعه در سال 2002، ترکیه در چارچوب رویکرد مشکلِ صفر با همسایگان، روابط نزدیکی را با رقبای دیرینه خود، یعنی سوریه، ایران و عراق برقرار نمود، در سازمان همکاری اسلامی نقش رهبری به خود گرفت، در کنفرانس‌های اتحادیه عرب حضور یافت و به نیروهای سازمان ملل مستقر در لبنان کمک کرد. همچنین آنکارا در حل اختلافات بین رژیم اسرائیل و سوریه (2010-2008) و همینطور پرونده هسته‌ای ایران نقش میانجی به خود گرفت. این تغییر در سیاستگذاری خارجی ترکیه و پیرو آن تعریف نقشهای جدید در سایه تحولات سیاسی خاورمیانه از سال 2011 که باعث بروز اعتراضات و سرنگونی برخی حکومت‌های این منطقه شد، بیشتر حائز اهمیت بوده و تغییراتی را نه تنها در سیاستهای ترکیه بلکه در کشورهای منطقه به وجود آورده است. بنابراین، این پژوهش به دنبال بررسی سیاستگذاری خارجی ترکیه در چارچوب نظریه نقش از طریق سوال اصلی ذیل است: «قیامهای عربی چه تاثیری بر برداشتهای نقشی سیاستگذاری خارجی ترکیه در قبال خاورمیانه داشته است؟» بر این اساس، پژوهش حاضرمبتنی بر روش اسنادی و کتابخانه‌ای، بر این فرض استوار است که «قیامهای عربی موجب تغییر در برداشتهای نقش ملی بر مبنای قدرت نرم ترکیه به سوی برداشتهای مادی و سخت نقش ملی در قبال خاورمیانه شده است». لذا، هدف این نوشتار شناخت نقشهای تعریف شده ترکیه در سیاستگذاری خارجی پیشین خود و تبیین تاثیر تحولات سیاسی خاورمیانه در نقشهای جدید در سیاستگذاری خارجی این کشور است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Arabic revolutions impact on Turkish foreign policy (Based on Role theory)
نویسندگان [English]
- Tehereh Ebrahimi Far 1
- Hamed Yaghoubi Far 2
1 Faculty Member of Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch
2 PhD Student of Political Science, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch
چکیده [English]
The principle of non-interference in the Middle Eastern issues was the priority of Turkeys foreign policy strategy during most of the twentieth century. However, over the past decade, Turkey has considerably distanced from its Kemalist and introspective tradition and has become one of the active and influential actors in the region. Consequently, subsequent to the Justice and Development Party coming to power in 2002, Turkey in the framework of the strategy of zero problems with neighbors, established closer relationships with its ancient rivals, namely Syria, Iran and Iraq, adopted the leadership role in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, attended the Arab League conferences and helped United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon. In the same vein, Ankara took on the role of mediator in resolving disputes between Israel and Syria (2008-2010) as well as Irans nuclear file. Thus, the question is that, based on such an approach, how can this new Turkish foreign policy be described and understood towards recent developments in the region.Therefore, it is tried to study the foreign policymaking of Turkey within the framework of Role Theory through the main question: what are the impacts of Arab Revolutions on the role conceptions of Turkish foreign policymaking in the Middle East? Accordingly, the hypothesis of this research is the Arab Revolutions have resulted in the national role conceptions of Turkey in regard to the Middle East.Thus, this article is an attempt to enlighten the roles of Turkey in its new foreign policy-making in the region and towards the recent uprisings in the Middle East through addressing the underneath effective layers that changed Turkey from its previous strategy.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Turkey's Foreign Policy
- making
- Role Theory
- Arab revolutions
- Identity
……………… . (2008). The Possibilities and Limits of Turkey’s Soft Power in the Middle East. Insight Turkey, 10 (2).
Altunışık M. B and Özlem T. (2006). From Distant Neighbors to Partners? Changing Syrian-Turkish Relations, Security Dialogue, 37 (2).
Aras, B. (2002). The New Geopolitics of Eurasia and Turkey's Position. Psychology Press.
Aras, B and A. S. Gorener. (2010). National role conceptions and foreign policy orientation: the ideational bases of the Justice and Development Party's foreign policy activism in the Middle East, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 12 (1).
Baehr, P. R. (2000). Trials and Errors: The Netherlands and Human Rights. in Human Rights and Comparative Foreign Policy. D. P. Forythe (ed.). Tokyo, New York, Paris, United Nations University Press.
Barkey, H. J. (2011). Turkish Foreign Policy and the Middle East, Ceri Strategy Papers, 10.
Barnett, M. (1993). Institutions, Roles and Disorder, The Case of the Arab States System, International Studies Quarterly, 37 (3).
Barzegar, K. (2011). Iran-Turkey’s Role in Solving the Syrian Crisis, Institute for Middle East Strategic Studies.
Breuning, M. (1995). Words and Deeds: Foreign Assistance Rhetoric and Policy Behavior in the Netherlands, Belgium and the United Kingdom, International Studies Quarterly, 39 (2).
- Chafetz, G. et.al. (1996). Role Theory and Foreign Policy: Belarussian and Ukrainian Compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, Political Psychology, 17 (4).
Davutoglu, A. (2001). Strategic Depth: Turkey’s International Position. Istanbul: Kure Yayinlari Press.
……………. . (2010). Stratejik Derinlik, İstanbul. Küre Yay Press.
……………. . (2013). Zero Problems in a New Era. Available at: Http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/21/zero_problems_in_a_new_era_turkey.
Dagi, I. (2007). Pro-Western Kemalists: A Western illusion. http://www.todayszaman.com/columnists/ihsan-dagi_105423-pro-western-kemalists-a-western-illusion.html.
Ertuğru, D. (2012). A Test for Turkey’s Foreign Policy: The Syria Crisis. TESEV Foreign Policy Program.
German Marshall Fund of the United States. (2010). Available at: http:// trendsgmfus. org. php5- 23. dfw1 -2. websitetestlink. com/? page_id3175
Granatstein, J. L. (1992). Peacekeeping: Did Canada Make a Difference? And What Difference Did Canada Make?. in Towards a New World: Readings. J. English and N. Hillmer (eds.). History of Canadian Foreign Policy, Toronto, Lester.
Grigoriadis, L.N. (2013). Learning from the Arab Spring: Turkish Foreign Policy in Flux, Middle Eastern Studies Programme, (32).
Gül, A. (2007). Horizons of Turkish Foreign Policy in the New Century, Ankara, Dışişleri Bakanlığı Yay.
Harnish, S. (2011). Role Theory: Operationalization and Key Concepts. In Role Theory in International Relations: Approaches and Analyses. S. Harnish, C. Frank and H. W. Maull. Oxon: Routledge.
Hedetoft, U. (1993). National Identity and Mentalities of War in Three EC Countries, Journal of Peace Research, 30 (3).
Hudson. V. (2005), Foreign Policy Analysis: Actor-Specific Theory and the Ground of International Relations, Foreign Policy Analysis, (1).
Holsti. K. J. (1970). National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy, International Studies Quarterly, 14 (3).
Hinnebusch. R and Ö. Tür. (2013). Turkey Syria Relations: Between Enmity and Amity.England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Hymans, J. E. C. (2006). The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation: Identity, Emotions and Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ifantis. K, D. Triantaphyllou and A. Kotelis. (2015). National Role and Foreign Policy: An Exploratory Study of Greek Elites. Perceptions towards Turkey.Hellenic Observatory Papers on Greece and Southeast Europe.
Istanbul summit tries to increase pressure on Syria. (2012). Available at: http:// www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17576134.
James, C. C and Ö. Özdamar. (2009). Modeling Foreign Policy and Ethnic Conflict: Turkey’s Policies towards Syria, Foreign Policy Analysis, 5 (1).
Kohen. S. (2012). Is Turkish Foreign Policy Too Ambitious?. Available at: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2012/ 04/overly-ambitious.html.
KardaŞ, Ş. (2012). From Zero Problems to Leading the Change: Making Sense of Transformation in Turkey’s Regional Policy, Turkey Policy Brief Series, International Policy and Leadership Institute, 5.
Keyman, E. F. (2013). Rethinking Turkish Foreign Policy, The Journal of Turkish Weekly. Available at: http://www.turkishweekly.net/columnist/3758/rethinking-turkish-foreign-policy.html.
Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kirişçi, K. (2009). Transformation of Turkish Foreign Policy; the Rise of the Trading State, New Perspectives on Turkey, 40.
Krotz, U. (2002). National Role Conceptions and Foreign Policies: France and Germany Compared, Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Harvard University.
Mabley, B. (2012). The Arab, THE ARAB AGGIORNAMENTO IN SYRIA: TURKEY'S FOREIGN POLICY METAPHORS, TURKISH POLICY QUARTERLY.
Marjanyan, A. (2012). Nuclear Turkey, Globus Analytical Journal, # 4, Naravank Foundation. Available at: http://noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6473.
Murinson. A. (2012). Turkish Foreign Policy in the Twenty-First Century, Mideast Security and Policy Studies, (97).
Özcan, N. A and Ö. Özdamar. (2010). Uneasy Neigbors: Turkish-Iranian Relations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Middle East Policy, 17 (3).
Öniş, Z. (2012). Turkey and the Arab Spring: Between Ethics and Self-Interest, Insight Turkey, 14 (3).
Patton. M. J. (2006). The Economic Policies of Turkey’s AKP Government: Rabbits from a Hat?, Middle Eastern Journal, 60 (3).
Phillips, Ch. (2012). Into the Quagmire: Turkey’s Frustrated Syria Policy, Middle East and North Africa Programme, Chatham House.
Peterson, L. (2002). The Pentagon Talks Turkey, The American Prospect, 13 (16).
Raptopoulos, N. (2004). Rediscovering its Arab Neighbours? The AKP Imprint on Turkish Foreign Policy in the Middle East, Les Cahiers du RMES.
Rikard. B and O. Elgström. (2012). Conflicting Role Conceptions? The European Union in Global Politic, Foreign Policy Analysis, (8).
Rosenau, J. (1966). Pre-Theories and Theories of Foreign Policy. in Approaches to Comparative International Politics. R. B. Farrell (ed.). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
…………… .(1984). A Pre-Theory Revisited: World Politics in an Era of Cascading Interdependence,International Studies Quarterly, 28 (3).
Tank, P. (2006), Dressing for the Occasion: Reconstructing Turkey’s Identity?, Journal of Southeast European and Black Sea Studies.
Taspınar. O. (2012). Turkey’s Strategic Visionand Syria, Center for Strategic and International Studies, The Washington Quarterly.
…………… .(2011). The Three Strategic Visions of Turkey. Available at: http:// www. brookings. edu/ ~/media/ research/ files/ papers/ 2011/3/08%20turkey %20taspinar/0308_turkey _taspinar.pdf.
Taydaş. Z and Ö. Özdamar. (2013). A Divided Government, an Ideological Parliament, and an Insecure Leader: Turkey’s Indecision about Joining the Iraq War, Social Science Quarterly, (94).
Tewes, H. (1998). Between Deepening and Widening: Role Conflict in Germany’s Enlargement Policy, West European Politics, 21 (2).
Thies, C. (2009). Role Theory and Foreign Policy, International Studies Association Compendium Project, Foreign Policy Analysis Section.
Thies. C. G and M. Breuning. (2012). Integrating Foreign Policy Analysis and International Relations through Role Theory, Foreign Policy Analysis, (8).
Thies, Cameron G. and M. Breuning. (2012). Intergrading Foreign Policy Analysis and International Relations through Role Theory. Foreign Policy Analysis.
Walker, S. (1987). Role Theory and Origins of Foreign Policy. Ch. F. Hermann, Ch. Kegley, J. Rosenau (eds.), New Directions in the Study of Foreign Policy, London: Harper Collins.
………….. . (2010). Binary Role Theory and Foreign Policy Analysis. ISA: New Orleans.
Waltz. K. (1979). Theory of International Politics, Reading, Massachusetts. Addison-Wesley Publishing
Wendt, A. (1999), Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Yanık, L. (2009). The Metamorphosis of Metaphors of Vision: “Bridging” Turkey's Location, Role and Identity After the End of the Cold War, Geopolitics Quarterly, 14 (3).
……….. .(2011). Constructing Turkish ‘Exceptionalism’: Discourses of liminality and hybridity in post-Cold War Turkish Foreign Policy, Political Geography, (30).
……….. .(2012). Foreign Policy During 2011 Parliamentary Elections in Turkey: Both an Issue and Non-issue, Turkish Studies, 13 (2).
Zakaria. F. (2007). Worries about Turkey are Fact-Free Paranoia. Available at: http://www.Thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2007/05/13/a-quiet-prayer-for-democracy. Html.
)