ALLIANCE POLITICS UNDER UNIPOLARITY: A THEROTICAL APPROACH TO ALLAIANCE SECURITY DILEMMA

Year 2023, Volume: 1 Issue: 3 - İstanbul Ticaret University Journal of Foreign Trade, 1 - 12, 26.09.2023

Zekeriya Akçam

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8376796

Abstract

This article aims at developing a theoretical approach on the impacts of unipolarity on alliance behavior by using the concepts introduced by Neorealist Kenneth N. Waltz. Alliance security dilemma as a key concept introduced by Glenn Snyder is used fort he analysis. It is accepted that international political system did not evolve into multi-polarity, but to uni-polarity after the Cold War. Thus, it has become important how unipolarity has impacts on alliance behavior. In this framework, a) why the unipolar power still keeps its traditional alliances albeit constant crises and conflicts with them? b) why traditional alliances still maintains their close relationship with the unipolar power despite the fact that unipolarity as comparing to other two systems (multipolarity and bipolarity) provides them much flexibility for freedom of action. Alliance security dilemma plays a key role for the analysis.

Keywords

Unipolarity, Military Alliances, Alliance Security Dilemma, Ad Hoc Coalision

TEK-KUTUPLULUK ALTINDA MÜTTEFİKLİK POLİTİKASI: MÜTTEFİKLİK GÜVENLİK İKİLEMİ ÜZERİNE TEORİK BİR YAKLAŞIM

Abstract

Bu makalede, uluslararası ilişkiler disiplini alanında sistemler teorisini geliştiren Neorealist Kenneth N. Waltz’ın kavramlarından yola çıkarak, tek-kutupluluğun müttefik davranışları üzerine etkisi üzerine teorik bir yaklaşım geliştirilmesi hedeflenmiştir. Glenn Snyder’in literatüre kazandırmış olduğu müttefiklik güvenlik ikilemi anahtar bir kavram olarak kullanılmıştır. Soğuk Savaş’ın sona ermesiyle birlikte uluslararası politik sistem çok-kutupluluğa değil, tek-kutupluluğa doğru hızla evrilmiştir. Bu yüzden tek-kutupluluğun müttefik davranışları üzerindeki etkisini incelemek önemli hale gelmiştir. Bu çerçevede, a) hakim güç geleneksel müttefikleriyle arasında daha fazla kriz ve anlaşmazlık çıkmasına rağmen, varlığını niçin devam ettirmektedir? b) tek-kutuplu sistem, diğer iki sisteme göre, (çok-kutuplu ve iki-kutuplu) daha esnek bir müttefiklik ilişkisi kurmasına rağmen müttefikler hakim-devletle ilişkisini niçin sürdürmeye gayret etmektedir. Bu soruları cevaplandırmada müttefiklik güvenlik ikilemi anahtar bir rol oynamaktadır.

Keywords

Tek Kutupluluk, Askeri İttifaklar, Müttefiklik Güvenlik İkilemi, Geçici Koalisyonlar

References

• Barnett, M. N. & Levy, J. S. (1991). Domestic Sources of Alliances and Alignments: the case of Egypt, 1962-1973, International Organization, Vol. 45, No.3, 370.
• Chollet, D. & Goldgeier, J.(2008). America Between the Wars: From 11/9 to 9/11: The Misunderstood Years Between the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the Start of the War on Terror. New York: Public Affairs. 65-71
• Colin, S. (2012). War, Peace and International Relations: An Introduction to Strategic History. Second Edition, (Routledge Taylor &Francis Group, London & New York).
• Cox, M., Booth, K. & Dunne, T. (1999). Introduction:The Interregnum: Controversies in World Politics, 1989-1999. Review of International Studies, vol.25, Special Issue, 3-19.
• Hansen, B. (2011). Unipolarity and World Politics: A Theory and Its Implications. Routledge Global Security Studies: London and New York.Holsti, O., Hopman, T. P. & J. D., Sullivan. (1973). Unity and Disintegration in International Alliances. Lanham/New York/London.
• Holsti O. R., Hopmann, T. P. & Sullivan, J. D. (1973). Unity and Disintegration in International Allainces. Lanham, New York London.
• Ikenberry, G. J., Mastanduno, J.M. & Wohlforth, C.H. (2009). International Relations Theory and the Consequences of Unipolarity, World Politics, Vol. 61, No. 1.
• Kim, Tongfi. (2011). Why Alliances Entangle But Seldom Entrap States.” Security Studies 20, no. 3, 350–77.
• Krauthammer, C. (1990-1991). The Unipolar Moment: America and the World. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 70, No. 1, 23-33
• Layne, C. (1993). The Unipolar Ullusion: Why New Great Powers will Arise. International Security, 17, 5-51.
• Leeds, B. A. & Savun, B. (2007). Terminating Alliances: Why do States Abrogate Agreements? Journal of Politics 69, no.4, 1118-32.
• Leeds, B. A.(2003). Alliance Reliability in Times of War: Explaining State Decisions to Violate Treaties, International Organization 57, no.4, 801-27.
• Liberman, P. (2000–2001). Ties That Blind: Will Germany and Japan Rely Too Much on the United States?”Security Studies 10, no. 2, 98–138.
• Liska, G.(1968). Nations in Alliance. The Limits of Interdependence. Paperback edition, Baltimore.
• Mandelbaum, M. (1981). The Nuclear Revolution: International Politics Before and After Hiroshima. New York:Cambridge University Press.
• Mearsheimer, J.(1990). Back to the Future: Instabillity in Europe after the Cold War. International Security, 15, 5-57.
• Monteiro, N.P. (2014). Theory of Unipolar Politics. Cambridge Studies in International Relations, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Morgenthau, Hans J. (1967). Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 4th edition. Knopf.
• Morrow, J. D. (1991). Alliances and Asymmetry: An Alternative to the Capability Aggregation Model of Alliances, American Journal of Political Science, Published By: Midwest Political Science Association Vol. 35, No. 4, 904-933.
• Mowle, T. S. & Sacko, D. H., (2007) The Unipolar World: An Unbalanced Future. Palgrave Macmillan: New York. 87-88.
• Posen, B.R. (2003). Command of the Commons: The Military Foundation of U.S. Hegemony International Security, Vol. 28, No. 1, 5–46
• Press-Barnathan, G.(2006). Managing the Hegemon: NATO Under Unipolarity, Security Studies 15, no.2, 271-309.
• Singer, D. J. & Melvin, S. (1966). Formal Alliances, 1815-1939: a Quantitative Description, Journal of Peace Research. V.3 No.1, 4
• Wilkins, T. S. (2012). The Shifting Paradigm of International Security Cooperation: Toward a Conceptual Taxonomy of Alignment. Review of International Studies, Vol. 38, 55
• Wallander, C. A. & Keohane, R.O. (1999). Risk, Threat, and Security Institutions. Haftendorn, Keohane, and Wallander (Der.) Imperfect Unions: Security Institutions Over Time and Space. Oxford University Press, New York. 21–47.
• Walt, Stephen M. (2002). Keeping the World "Off-Balance": Self-Restraint and U.S. Foreign Policy. John Ikenberry (Der.) America Unrivaled: The Future of the Balance of Power, Cornell University Press, 1st ed. 121-154.
• Waltz, K. N. (1993). The Emerging Structure of International Politics.” International Security, Vol. 18, 44–79.
• Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
• Ward, Michael D. (1982). Research Gaps in Alliance Dynamics. Denver, CO, University of Denver.
• Weitsman, P. (2003). Alliance Cohesion and Coalition Warfare: The Central Powers and the Triple Entente. Security Studies, Vol. 12, No:3, 79-119.