Sınırların Kavramsal Çerçevesinin İncelenmesi ve Sınıflandırılması

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 52, 135 - 168, 30.06.2021

Alper Ekmekcioğlu

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, sınır çalışmalarının sınıflandırılmalarını ve metodolojilerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu kapsamda, 19. Yüzyıl sonu ile 21. Yüzyıl’ın ilk çeyreğindeki sınırların inceleme metodolojisine ve sonrasında 21. Yüzyıl ilk çeyreğindeki sınırın güvenlikleştirilmesi iklimine odaklanılmıştır. Kavramsal çerçevede, sınır kavramının tarihsel gelişimi ve çalışmanın kuramsal dayanağını oluşturan güvenlikleştirme yaklaşımı incelenmiştir. Sonrasında sınır çalışmalarının sınıflandırılması 1970 yılı öncesindeki modern yaklaşım ve 1970 yılı sonrasındaki postmodern yaklaşım olarak iki dönem çerçevesinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Modern yaklaşım bölümünde ilk sınır çalışmalarına yer verilmesinin ardından inceleme tarihsel haritalama, tipolojik, işlevsel, siyasi yaklaşım ve postmodern dönemde modern yaklaşım çerçevesinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Postmodern yaklaşım ise sınır çalışmalarının değişen dinamik süreci çerçevesinde küreselleşme, düzeyler ve kimlik, jeo-politik ve sınırların yönetimini başlıkları altında değerlendirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada sınıflandırma sınırların tarihsel gelişimi ve paradigma değişimine göre gerçekleştirilmiştir. Son bölümde güvenlikleştirme çerçevesinde güvenlik tehditlerinin çeşitlenmesi düzensiz göç üzerinden tartışılmış ve yeni bir yaklaşım önerilmiştir. Modern yaklaşımda sınırların durağanlığının kabulüne karşın, postmodern yaklaşımda sınırların dinamik ve sınır çalışmalarının ise disiplinlerarası bir olgu olduğu değerlendirilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sınır, hudut, sınır yönetimi

The Examination and Classification of Conceptual Framework of Borders

Öz

The primary aim of this study is to introduce the classifications of border studies and methodologies. In this perspective, in the late 19th Century and the first quarter of 21th Century, the examination methodology of borders and later the securitization climate of borders in first quarter of 21th Century were focused on. In the conceptional frame, the historical process of border notion and the securitization approach, which is the conceptional root of this study, were examined. Then the classification of border studies was carried out through two terms which are modern approach, which is before 1970, and postmodern approach, which is after 1970. In the modern approach section, after mention initial border studies, the examination was realized in the frame of historical mapping, typology, functional, political approach, and modern approach in the postmodern approach era. Postmodern approach was examined in the frame of the changing and dynamic process of border studies which contains globalism, levels and identiy, geopolitical and management of borders titles. In this study, the classification was fulfilled through historical development and paradigm change. In the last section, diversification of security threats were discussed via irregular migration, and a new approach is proposed. While the borders are admitted static in a modern approach, in postmodern approach borders are accepted as dynamic, and border studies are evaluated as interdisciplinary phenomenon.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Border, boundary, bordering

Kaynakça

• Agnew, J. (1994). The Territorial Trap: The Geographical Assumptions of International Relations Theory. Review of International Political Economy, 1(1), 53-80.
• Barr, D. (1908). Progress in the Native States of India During the Past Forty Years. Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, 56 (2887), 453-474.
• Bassin, M. (1987). Imperialism and the Nation State in Friedrich Ratzel’s Political Geography. Progress in Human Geography, 11(4), 473-495.
• Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization, The Human Consequences. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid Modernity. Oxford: Polity Press.
• BM Kalkınma Programı (1994). İnsani Gelişme Raporu 1994. Erişim: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-1994
• Boggs, S. (1932). Boundary Functions and the Principles of Boundary Making. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 22(1), 48-49.
• Boggs, S. (1940). International Boundaries, A Study of Boundary Functions and Problems. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Boggs, S. (1941). Mapping the Changing World: Suggested Developments in Maps. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 31(2), 119-128.
• Bonacker, T. (2007). Debordering by Human Rights: The Challenge of Postterritorial Conflicts in World Society. Stephan Stetter (Ed.), Territorial Conflicts in World Society içinde (s. 19-32). Londra: Routledge,.
• Bowman, I. (1921). The New World: Problems in Political Geography. New York: World Book Co.
• Brigham, A. P. (1919). Principles in the Determination of Boundaries. Geographical Review, 7(4), 201-219.
• Buzan, B., Waever, O. ve Wilde J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Londra: Lynne Rienner.
• Cloke, P. ve Johnston, R. (2005). Spaces of Geographical Thought: Deconstructing Human Geography's Binaries. (Eds) Paul Cloke ve Ron Johnston. Londra: SAGE Publications.
• Cox, K. (2002). Political Geography: Territory, State, and Society. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
• DePolo J. (2018). The Strategic Relevance of Modern Foreign Internal Defense and Security Force Assistance Initiatives. Special Operations Journal, 4(1).
• Diener, A. ve Hagen, J. (2010). Introduction: Borders, Identity and Geopolitcs, Alexander Diener ve Joshua Hagen (Ed.), In Borders and Borderlands: Political Oddities at the Edge of the Nation-State içinde (s. 1-15), Maryland: Rowman&Littlefield Publishing Group.
• Dunn, E. (1955). The Economics of Location, August Lösch (1954). Woglom, W. (Çev.). Journal of Farm Economics, 37(2), 376.
• Düvell, F., ve Jordan, B. (2002). Immigration, Asylum and Welfare: the European Context. Critical Social Policy, 22(3), 498-517.
• Fait, N. (2013). African Migrations toward Turkey: Beyond the Stepping Stone. Ankara Üniversitesi SDF Dergisi, 68(1), 21-38.
• Fischer, E. (1949). On Boundaries. World Politics, 1(2), 196-222.
• Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. A. Sheridan (Çev.). New York: Vintage Books.
• Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
• Guo, R. (2015). Cross-Border Management: Theory, Method and Application. Londra: Springer.
• Hartshorne, R. (1933). Geographic and Political Boundaries in Upper Silesia. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 23(4), 195-228.
• Hartshorne, R. (1936). Suggestions on the Terminology of Political Boundaries. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 26, 56-57.
• Holdich T. (1916). Political Frontiers and Boundary Making, By Col. Sir Thomas H. Holdich. Londra: Macmillan and Co.
• House, J. (1982). Frontier on the Rio Grande: A Political Geography of Development and Social Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Houtum, H. ve Naerssen T. (2001). Bordering, Ordering and Othering. Tijdschrift woor Economische en Sociale Geografie. 93(2), 125-136.
• Houtum, H. ve Strüver, A. (2002). Borders, Strangers, Doors, and Bridges. Space and Polity, 6(2), 141-146.
• Houtum, H. (2005). The Geopolitics of Borders and Boundaries, Geopolitics, 10(4), 672-679.
• Hyndman, J. (2012). The Geopolitics of Migration and Mobility, Geopolitics. 17(2), 243-255.
• İçduygu, A. ve Yükseker, D. (2012). Retinking Transit Migration in Turkey: Reality and Re-presentation in the Creation of a Migratory Phenomenon. Population, Space and Place, 18, 441-456.
• Jenkins, D. (2008). Distinguishing Between Security Force Assistance & Foreign Internal Defense Determining A Doctrine Road-Ahead. Small Wars Journal, Erişim: https://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/journal/docs-temp/146-jenkins.pdf
• Johnson, D. W. (1917). The Role of Political Boundaries, Geographical Review, 4(3), 208–213.
• Johnson C., Jones, R. ve Paasi, A. (2011). Interventions on Rethinking ‘the Border’ in Border Studies, Political Geography, 30, 61-69.
• Joint Publication 3-22 (2018). Foreign Internal Defense. the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Erişim: https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp3_22.pdf?ver=2018-10-10-112450-103.
• Jones, S. (1943). The Description of International Boundaries. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 33, 99-117.
• Jones, S. (1945). Boundary-Making: A Handbook for Statesmen, Treaty Editors and Boundary Commissioners. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Erişim: https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=ustreaties&handle=hein.hoil/boumakst0001&id=3&men_tab=srchresults
• Jones, S. (1959). Boundary Concepts in Setting Time and Space. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 49, 241-55.
• Kolossov, V. (2005). Border Studies: Changing Perspectives and Theoretical Approaches. Geopolitics, 10(4), 606-632.
• Kristof, L. (1959). The Nature of Frontiers and Boundaries. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 49(3), 269-282.
• Lyde, L. (1915). Some Frontiers of To-Morrow, Londra: A&C Black Ltd.
• Martinez, O. (1994a). The Dynamics of Border Interaction: New Approaches to Border Analysis. Clive H. Schofield (Ed.), Global Boundaries içinde. Londra: Routledge.
• Martinez, O. (1994b). Border People: Life and Society in the US-Mexico Borderlands. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.
• Martinez, O. (1996). U.S-Mexico Borderlans: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives. Lanham: Rowman&Littlefield.
• Minghi, J. (1963). Border Studies in Political Geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 53(3), 407-428.
• Newman, D. ve Paasi, A. (1998). Fences and Neighbours in the Postmodern World: Boundary Narratives in Political Geography. Progress in Human Geography, 22(2), 186- 207.
• Newman, D. (2006). The Lines that Continue to Separate us: Borders in our ‘Borderless’ World. Progress in Human Geography. 30(2), 1-19.
• Obama, B., (2016). Remarks by the President on the Administration’s Approach to Counter-terrorism. FL: MacDill Air Force Base. Erişim: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press office/2016/12/06/remarks-president-administrations-approach counterterrorism
• Ohmae, K. (1989). Managing in a Borderless World, Harvard Business Review, May–June issue, 152-161.
• Ohmae, K. (1990). Borderless World, Power and Strategy in the Global Marketplace. Londra: Harper Collins.
• Ohmae, K. (1995). The End of the Nation State. New York: Free Press.
• Paasi, A. (1996). Territories, Boundaries and Consciousness, The Changing Geographies of the Finnish-Russian Border. Chichester: John Wiley.
• Paasi, A. (2001). Europe as a Social Process and Discourse, European Urban and Regional Studies. 8 (1), 7-28.
• Paasi, A. (2005), The Changing Discourses on Political Boundaries: Mapping the Backgrounds, Contexts and Contents, B/ordering the Space, Ed. Van Houtum Henk, Kramsch Olivier, Zierhofer Wolfgang, Ashgate: Burlington, s. 2-16.
• Paasi, A. (2009). Bounded Spaces in a ‘Borderless World’: Border Studies, Power and the Anatomy of Territory. Journal of Power. 2(2), 213-234.
• Paasi, A. (2011). Borders, Theory and the Challenge of Relational Thinking. Political Geography, 30, 62-63.
• Paasi, A. (2019). Borderless Worlds and Beyond: Challenging the State-Centric Cartographies. E. Prokkola, J. Saarinen ve K. Zimmerbauer (Ed.), Borderless Worlds for Whom? içinde (s. 21-37). Londra: Routledge.
• Payan, T. (2014). Theory-Building in Border Studies: The View from North America. Eurasia Border Review, 5(1), 1-19.
• Peattie, R. (1944). Look to the Frontiers: A Geography for Peace Table. New York: Harper&Brothers.
• Pecoud, A. ve Guchteneire, P. (2006). International Migration, Border Controls and Human Rights: Assessing the Relevance of a Right to Mobility, Journal of Borderlands Studies, 21(1), 69-86.
• Pounds, N. (1951). The Origins of the Idea of National Frontier in France. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 41, 146-57.
• Pounds, N. (1954). France and `les Limites Naturelles' from the Seventeenth to the Twentieth Centuries. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 44, 51-62.
• Prescott, V. (1965). The Geography of Frontiers and Boundaries. Londra: Hutchinson.
• Prescott, V. (1987). Political Frontiers and Boundaries. Chicago: Aldine.
• Pries, L. (2005). Configurations of Geographic and Societal Spaces: A Sociological Proposal between ‘Methodological Nationalism’ and the ‘Spaces of Flows’. Global Networks, 5(2), 167-190.
• Sack, R. (1983). Human Territoriality: A Theory. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 73(1), 55-74.
• Semple, E. (1907). Geographical Boundaries. II. Bulletin of the American Geographical Society, 39(8), 449-463.
• Semple, E. (1941). Influences of Geographic Environment, on the Basis of Ratzel's System of Anthropo-geography. New York: Holt and Company.
• Sendhardt, B. (2013). Border Types and Bordering Processes: A Theoretical Approach to the EU/Polish-Ukranian Border as a Multi-Dimensional Phenomenon. Arnaud Lechevalier ve Jan Wielgohs (Ed.), Borders and Border Regions in Europe içinde (s. 21-44).
• Smith, M.P. (2001). Transnational Urbanism, Locating Globalization. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Spykman, N. (1942). Frontiers, Security, and International Organization. Geographical Review, 32(3), 436-447.
• Stetter, S. (2005). The Politics of De-paradoxification in Euro-Mediterranean Relations: Semantics and Structures of ‘Cultural Dialogue’. Mediterranean Politics, 10 (3), 331- 348.
• Stetter, S. (2007). Regions of Conflict in World Society: The Place of the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa. Stephan Stetter (Ed.), Territorial Conflicts in World Society: Modern Systems Theory, International Relations and Conflict Studies içinde (s.33-47). Londra: Routledge.
• Taylor, P. (1996). Creative Tensions. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 28, 1983-1995. Erişim: https://doi.org/10.1068/a281983
• Urry, J. (2000). Sociology Beyond Societies, Mobilities for the Twenty-First Societies, Londra: Routledge.
• Vogeler, I. (2011). Types of International Borders along the US-Mexico Border. Geography Online, Erişim: https://www.siue.edu/GEOGRAPHY/ONLINE/Vogeler/US- MexciodBorder.htm
• Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 16(4), 387-415.
• Wilson, T. ve Donnan H. (1998). Border Identities: Nation and State at International Frontiers. Birleşik Krallık: Cambridge University Press.
• Yeung, H. (1998). Capital, State and Space: Contesting the Borderless World. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 23(3), 291-309.
• Yıldız, M. ve Ekmekcioğlu, A. (2018). Sınır Güvenliğinde Duvar İnşa ve Tahkim Politikaları. Cenay Babaoğlu ve Elvettin Akman (Ed.), Kamu Politikası Analizi: Türkiye Uygulamaları içinde (s. 331-367). Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
• Ziljstra, J. (2014). Stuck on the Way to Europe? Iranian Transit Migration to Turkey. Insight Turkey, 16(4), 183-199.