Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 24 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 495 - 509 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 02-09-2021

DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ

Öz:
İnsanlık tarihinin son birkaç yüzyılı içinde varlık kazanarak evrensel ölçekte gözlemlenen siyasi birörgütlenme haline gelen devletler, uluslararası politikayı anlamak üzere geliştirilen teorik yaklaşım vekavramların uzunca bir süre odak noktasında yer almıştır. Devletler halen uluslararası politikadaayrıcalıklı bir konumda yer almalarına karşın, son dönemde ulus üstü ve ulus altı aktörlerin uluslararasıpolitikayı etkileme kapasitelerinde bir artış gözlenmektedir. Küreselleşme, bölgeselleşme ve teknolojideyaşanan gelişmelerin eş zamanlı işleyişi, yeni aktörlerin devletlerin yanı sıra uluslararası politikada yeralmalarının önünü açmıştır. Dolayısıyla devlet dışındaki aktörlerin dış politika davranışları dikkatealınmaksızın günümüzde uluslararası politikanın anlaşılması oldukça zordur. Bu çalışmada ulus altıaktörlerin dış politika davranışlarını açıklamak üzere geliştirilen bir kavram olan, paradiplomasi kavramıele alınmaktadır. İki ana bölümden oluşan çalışmanın ilk kısmında, paradiplomasi kavramının ortayaçıkışı ve uluslararası ilişkiler alan yazınındaki yeri incelenirken; çalışmanın ikinci kısımda paradiplomatikfaaliyette bulunan aktörler, söz konusu motivasyonları ve karşı karşıya kaldıkları tepkilere odaklanarakuygulamada paradiplomasinin nasıl işlediği konusu üzerinde durulmaktadır.
Anahtar Kelime:

THE NEW FACE OF THE CHANGING DIPLOMACY: PARADIPLOMACY

Öz:
States, as political organisation which gained existence in the last couple of centuries of the human history, constitute the focal point of the many theoretical approaches and concepts aiming to understand international politics. Despite the ongoing privileged position of the states, the capacity of the supranational and subnational political actors to influence international politics has enhanced tremendously. The concurrent operation of the developments such as globalization, regionalization and advances in technology has opened the way for the involvement of the different actors to the international politics across states. Hence it is difficult to fully grasp the current international politics without considering the foreign policy activities of the subnational actors. This study elaborates on the paradiplomacy concept which aims to explain foreign policy actions of the subnational actors and composes of two main parts. While the development of the paradiplomacy as a concept as well as its place in the International Relations literature is covered in the first part; subnational actors, their motivations and responses given to the paradiplomatic actions of these actors are elaborated in the second part focusing on the implementation phase of the paradiplomacy.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Ackrén, M. (2019). “Diplomacy and paradiplomacy in the North Atlantic and the arctic—A comparative approach”. The Global Arctic Handbook, M. Finger and L. Heininen (Der) içinde, Springer, 236-250.
  • Aguirre, I. (1999). Making sense of paradiplomacy? An Intertextual enquiry about a concept in search of a definition. Regional and Federal Studies, 9(1), 185-209.
  • Aldecoa, F. ve M. Keating. (1999). Introduction. Paradiplomacy in action: The foreign relations of subnational governments, F. Aldecco ve M. Keating (Der.) içinde, Londra: Frank Cass, vii-x.
  • Alvarez, M. (2020). The rise of paradiplomacy in ınternational relations. E-International Relations. Butler, R. (1961). Paradiplomacy. Studies in diplomatic history and historiography, A. Sarkissian (Der.) içinde, Londra: Longman, 12-25.
  • Chan, D. K. (2016). City diplomacy and glocal governance: Revitalizing cosmopolitan democracy. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 29 (2), 134-160.
  • Chan, W. Y. (2019). The soft power and paradiplomacy of Hong Kong. Asian Education and Development Studies, 8 (2), 161-172.
  • Chechi, A. (2018). Non-State actors and the ımplementation of the World Heritage Convention in Asia: Achievements, problems, and prospects. Asian Journal of International Law, 8, 461-489.
  • Cornago, Noé. (2010). On the normalization of sub-state diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 5, 11-36.
  • ---. (2018). Paradiplomacy and protodiplomacy.
  • (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3174277, Erişim Tarihi: 28 Mayıs 2020). Czapiewski, T. (2015). The (Para)Diplomacy of Scotland Towards Asian Countries. Acta Politica, No. 31, 59-75.
  • Daoudov, M. (2013). Yerel dış politikanın temelleri. Marmara Belediyeler Birliği.
  • Demirtaş, B. (2016). Türkiye’de yerel yönetimlerin dış ilişkilerinin analizi: Merkez-çevre etkileşimini yeniden düşünmek. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 13 (52), 151-173.
  • Dışişleri Bakanlığı’nın Kuruluş ve Görevleri Hakkında Kanun, Kabul Tarihi: 7/7/2010. (http://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/BAKANLIK/mevzuat-2013.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 28 Mayıs 2020).
  • Duchacek, I. D. (1984). The International dimension of sub-national self-government. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 14 (4), 5-31.
  • ---. (1990). Perforated sovereignties: Towards a typology of new actors in ınternational relations. Federalism and International Relations: The Role of Subnational Units, H. J. Michelmann ve P. Soldatos (Der.) içinde, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1-33.
  • Duran, M. (2016). Paradiplomacy as a diplomatic broker: Between separating differences and engaging commonalities. Brill Research Paper.
  • Gençkaya, Ö. F. ve K. Kaya. (2018). İstanbul ilçe belediyelerinin dış ilişkileri. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 1 (3), 303-316.
  • Grydehøji, A. (2014). Goals, capabilities, and ınstruments of paradiplomacy by subnational jurisdictions. Local Actions in a Global Context: Paradiplomacy by Subnational Jurisdictions, A. Grydehøj vd. (Der) içinde, Brussels: Centre Maurits Coppieters, 10-20.
  • Hocking, B. (1993). Localising foreign policy: Non-Central governments and multilayered diplomacy. Londra ve New York: Macmillan and St. Martin Press.
  • ---. (1999). Patrolling the ‘Frontier’: Globalization, Localization and the ‘Actorness’ of Non‐central Governments. Regional & Federal Studies, 9 (1), 17-39.
  • Hooghe, L. (1995). Subnational mobilisation in the European Union. West European Politics, 18 (3), 175- 198.
  • İskit, T. (2012). Diplomasi: Tarihi, teorisi, kurumları ve uygulaması. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları. 4. Baskı.
  • Jha, P. C. (2014). Federalism, regionalism and states’ paradiplomacy in India. Federalism in India: Towards a fresh balance of power, L. Lobo ve J. Shah (Der.) içinde, Rawat Publication, 1-27.
  • Joenniemi P. ve A. Sergunin. (2014). Paradiplomacy as a capacity-building strategy: The case of Russia’s Northwestern subnational actors. Problems of Post Communism, 61 (6), 18-33. Keating, M. (1996). Nations against the state. Macmillan Press.
  • ---. (2000). Paradiplomacy and regional networking. Forum of Federations: an International Federalism. (http://www.forumfed.org/libdocs/ForRelCU01/924-FRCU0105-eu-keating.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 28 Mayıs 2020).
  • Keohane, R. ve J. Nye. (1973). Transnational relations and world politics. Harward University Press. Kincaid, J. (1990). Constituent diplomacy in federal polities and the nation state: Conflict and cooperation. Federalism and International Relations: The Role of Subnational Units, H. J. Michelmann ve P. Soldatos (Der.) içinde, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 54-75.
  • Kuznetsov, A. S. (2015). Theory and practice of paradiplomacy: Subnational governments in ınternational affairs. Routledge Press.
  • Lecours, A. (2008). Political ıssues of paradiplomacy: Lessons from the developed world. Netherlands Institute of International Relations Discussion Paper.
  • Liu, T. ve Y. Son. (2020). Chinese paradiplomacy: A theoretical review. SAGE Open, 1-14.
  • Maclean, G. ve K. R. Nossal. (1993). Triangular dynamics: Australian States, Canadian provinces and relations with China. Foreign relations and federal states, Brian Hocking (Der.) içinde, Leicester University Press, 170-189.
  • McConnell, F., T. Moreau ve J. Dittmer. (2012). Mimicking state diplomacy: The legitimizing strategies of unofficial diplomacies. Geoforum, 43, 804-814.
  • Mohammed, H. K. ve F. Owtram. (2014). Paradiplomacy of regional governments in ınternational relations: The foreign relations of the Kurdistan regional government (2003 – 2010). Iran and the Caucasus, 18, 65-84.
  • Mursitama T.N. ve L. Lee. (2018). “Towards a Framework of smart city diplomacy”. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science.
  • Mutlu, S. ve Y. Demirkaya. (2018). Avrupa yönetişimi ve ulusaltı yönetimlerin ulusötesi ağ faaliyetleri. Strategic Public Management Journal, 4 (7), 59-82.
  • Neumann, I. B. (2002). Returning practice to the linguistic turn: the case of diplomacy. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 31 (3), 627-651.
  • Özcelik, A. O. (2014). An empirical basis of multi-level governance approach: subnational mobilisation in the european union arena. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15 (2), 1-22.
  • ---. (2015). The multi-level engagement of subnational administrations in european policy-making process: The case of Turkish municipalities and regional development agencies. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 13 (25), 7-39.
  • ---. (2017). Analysing stages of subnational mobilisation across the european union: The case of subnational administrations in Turkey. Regional & Federal Studies, 27 (2), 171-199.
  • Paquin, S. ve G. Lachapelle. (2005). Why do sub-states and regions practice ınternational relations. Mastering globalization: New sub-states’ governance and strategies, G. Lachapelle ve S. Paquin (Der.) içinde, Oxon: Routledge, 77-89.
  • Paquin, S. (2018). Identity paradiplomacy in Québec. Québec Studies, 66, 3-26.
  • Pietraś, M. The Late westphalian ınternational order. Polish Political Science, 26, (134-157).
  • Setzer, J. (2015). Testing the boundaries of subnational diplomacy: The ınternational climate action of local and regional governments. Transnational Environmental Law, 1-19.
  • Soldatos, P. (1990). An explanatory framework for the study of federated states as foreign-policy actors. Federalism and ınternational relations: the role of subnational units, H. J. Michelmann ve P. Soldatos (Der.) içinde, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 34-53.
  • Soldatos, P. ve H. J. Michelmann. (1992). Subnational units' paradiplomacy in the context of european ıntegration. Journal of European Integration, 15 (2-3), 129-134.
  • Sönmez, E. K. (2014). Regional cooperation in the Black Sea basin: What role for city diplomacy. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 14 (4), 489-507.
  • Susiatiningsih, Hermini vd. (2018).Decentralization in ınternational relations: A study of semarang city’s paradiplomacy. ICENIS Conference: Semerang-Endonezya. 14-15.
  • Tavares, R. (2016a). Paradiplomacy: Cities and states as global players. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • ---. (2016b). Forget Nations: Cities will transform the way we conduct foreign affairs. (https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/10/forget-the-nation-state-cities-will-transform-the-way-weconduct-foreign-affairs, Erişim Tarihi: 28 Mayıs 2020).
  • Van Der Pluijm, R. ve J. Melissen. (2007). City Diplomacy: The expanding role of cities in ınternational politics. The Netharlands Institude of International Relations Clingendael Paper.
  • Voicu, I. (2001). Coping with business diplomacy in a globalized world. ABAC Journal. 21 (3).
  • Wolff, S. (2007). Paradiplomacy: Scope, opportunities and challenges. The Bologna Center Journal of International Affairs, 10, 141-150.
  • Woods, L. T. (1991). Non‐governmental organizations and Pacific Cooperation: Back to the future?. The Pacific Review, 4 (4), 312-321.
  • Zarghani, S. H., M. J. Ranjkesh ve M. Eskandaran. (2014). City diplomacy, analysis of the role of cities as the new actor in ınternational relations. Urban-Regional Studies and Research Journal, 5 (20), 33-36.
APA Erdoğan S (2020). DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. , 495 - 509.
Chicago Erdoğan Seven DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. (2020): 495 - 509.
MLA Erdoğan Seven DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. , 2020, ss.495 - 509.
AMA Erdoğan S DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. . 2020; 495 - 509.
Vancouver Erdoğan S DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. . 2020; 495 - 509.
IEEE Erdoğan S "DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ." , ss.495 - 509, 2020.
ISNAD Erdoğan, Seven. "DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ". (2020), 495-509.
APA Erdoğan S (2020). DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 24(3), 495 - 509.
Chicago Erdoğan Seven DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 24, no.3 (2020): 495 - 509.
MLA Erdoğan Seven DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, vol.24, no.3, 2020, ss.495 - 509.
AMA Erdoğan S DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2020; 24(3): 495 - 509.
Vancouver Erdoğan S DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2020; 24(3): 495 - 509.
IEEE Erdoğan S "DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ." Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 24, ss.495 - 509, 2020.
ISNAD Erdoğan, Seven. "DÖNÜŞEN DİPLOMASİNİN YENİ YÜZÜ: PARADİPLOMASİ". Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 24/3 (2020), 495-509.