Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Although sharing some degree of middle power identification, big disparities exist among MIKTA (Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey, and Australia) countries with respect to their political and economic systems, domestic priorities and problems, and their regional context, which make it difficult to talk about a common MIKTA identity/role. This study draws on social constructivism to problematize and analyze Turkey’s changing middle power role among MIKTA countries through their debates at the United Nations (UN). To this aim, the chapter will conduct a detailed and comparative discourse analysis of Turkey’s and the other MIKTA countries’ statements at the opening sessions of the UN General Assembly from 2001 to 2017 with respect to their social claims about themselves, including the way they define their (1) roles in global governance, (2) attitude toward international order, and (3) the nexus between their global and regional roles. By doing so, the chapter will theoretically question and empirically analyze whether there exists any meaningful evidence demonstrating Turkey’s adoption of a middle power role that could create the opportunity for converging interests among these countries.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Acharya, Amitav. 2017. After Liberal Hegemony: The Advent of a Multiplex World Order. Ethics and International Affairs. Available at https://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2017/multiplex-world-order/ CrossRef
Aral, Berdal. 2009. Turkey in the UN security council: Its election and performance. Insight Turkey 11 (4): 151–168.
Aras Bulent. 2012. Turkey’s Mediation and Friends of Mediation Initiative. Center for Strategic Research Papers 4. Available at http://sam.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/SAM_Papers_No.4-Dec12.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2014.
Barlas, Dilek. 2005. Turkish Diplomacy in the Balkans and the Mediterranean. Opportunities and Limits for Middle-Power Activism in the 1930s. Journal of Contemporary History 40 (3): 441–464. CrossRef
Beeson, Mark. 2011. Can Australia Save the World? The Limits and Possibilities of Middle Power Diplomacy. Australian Journal of International Affairs. 65 (5): 265–278.
Bremmer, Ian, and Nourel Roubini. 2011. A G-Zero World. Foreign Affairs 90 (2), March–April. Available at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2011-01-31/g-zero-world
Buzan, Barry. 2011. A World Order Without Superpowers: Decentred Globalism. International Relations 25 (1): 3–25. CrossRef
Carr, A. 2014. Is Australia a Middle Power? A Systemic Impact Approach. Australian Journal of International Affairs 68 (1): 70–84. CrossRef
Cem, İsmail. 2002. Turkish Foreign Policy: Opening New Horizons for Turkey at the Beginning of a New Millenium. Turkish Policy Quarterly. Available at http://www.turkishpolicy.com/article/33/turkish-foreign-policy-opening-new-horizons-for-turkey-at-the-beginning-of-a-new-millennium-spring-2002/2015
Chapnick, Adam. 1999. The Middle Power. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 7 (2): 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.1999.9673212. CrossRef
Çolakoğlu, Selçuk. 2015. MIKTA: A Global Vision of Middle Powers. Eurasia Review, Expert Opinion. Available at https://scolakoglu.blogspot.com.tr/2015/03/?view=classic
Colakoglu, Selcuk. 2016. The Role of MIKTA in Global Governance: Assessments & Shortcomings. Korea Observer 47 (2): 267–290.
Çolakoğlu, Selçuk. 2017. Is MIKTA Sustainable as a Middle Power Grouping in Global Governance?. Diplo, 11 July. Available at https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/mikta-sustainable-middle-power-grouping-global-governance
Cooper, Andrew F. 1997. In Between Countries: Australia, Canada, and the Search for Order in Agricultural Trade. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Cooper. Squeezed or Revitalized? The Middle Power Model, the G20, and the Evolution of Global Governance. Paper Presented at the Madrid 2012, XXll World Congress of Political Science, 8–12 July. Available at http://paperroom.ipsa.org/app/webroot/papers/paper_8138.pdf
Cooper, Andrew. 2015a. G20 Middle Powers and Initiatives on Development. In MIKTA, Middle Powers, and New Dynamics of Global Governance: The G20’s Evolving Agenda, Asan-Palgrave Macmillan Series, ed. M. Jongryn. New York: Palgrave Pivot.
———. 2015b. Recalibrating Middle Power Diplomacy: The Changing ‘Soft Power’ Brands of Republic of Korea and Canada in Comparative Perspective. Seul, Republic of Korea: EAI Middle Power Diplomacy Initiative Working Paper, 11.
———. 2016. Testing Middle Power’s Collective Action in a World of Diffuse Power. International Journal 71 (4): 529–544. CrossRef
Cooper, Andrew, and Emel Parlar Dal. 2016. Positioning the Third Wave of Middle Power Diplomacy: Institutional Elevation, Practice Limitations. International Journal 71 (4): 516–528. CrossRef
Cooper, Andrew F., Richard A. Higgott, and Kim Richard Nossal. 1993. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Darmosumarto, Santo. 2013. Indonesia and the Asia-Pacific: Opportunities and Challenges for Middle Power Diplomacy. German Marshall Fund Policy Brief, July 2013. http://www.gmfus.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files_mf/1373398834Darmosumarto_Indonesia_Jul13.pdf
Davutoğlu, Ahmet. 2010. Turkish Vision of Regional and Global Order. Political Refection 1 (2): 37–50.
———. 2014. Principles of Turkish Foreign Policy and Regional Political Structuring. Horizons, 1.
Diez, Susana Garcia, and Daniel O’Donnel. 2017. G-20 in Figures, Summit of the G-20 States in Hamburg 2017, Federal Statistics Office of Germany, June.
Efstathopoulos, Charalampos. 2017. Middle Powers and the Behavioural Model. Global Society 32 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2017.1351422. CrossRef
Engin, Belma, and Gürol Baba. 2015. MIKTA: A Functioning Product of “New” Middle Powerism? Uluslararası Hukuk ve Politika 11 (42): 1–40.
Evans, Gareth. 2011. Middle Power Diplomacy, Chile Pacific Foundation, Santiago, June 29. Available at http://www.gevans.org/speeches/speech441.html
Fealy, Greg, and Hugh White. 2016. Indonesia’s ‘Great Power’ Aspirations: A Critical View. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies. 3 (1): 92–100. CrossRef
Forde, Francis. 1945. Speech at the Plenary Session of the United Nations Conference on International Organization. San Francisco, April 27. (quoted in) Carsten Holbraad, Middle Powers in International Politics, p. 61. London: Macmillan Press.
Gilley, Bruce, and Andrew O’Neil. 2014. Middle Powers and the Rise of China. US: Georgetown University Press.
Gök, Gonca Oğuz. 2014. Tracing the Shift in Turkey’s Normative Approach Towards Order Through the Debates in the UN. Perceptions 19 (4): 77–106.
Gök, Gonca Oğuz, and Emel, Parlar Dal. 2016. Understanding Turkey’s Emerging “Civilian” Foreign Policy Role in the 2000s Through Development Cooperation in the Africa Region. Perceptions 21: 3–4, 67–100.
Green, Michael J. 2017. Korean Middle Power Diplomacy and Asia’s Emerging Multilateral Architecture. In The Korean Pivot, The Study of South Korea as a Global Power. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Heenam, Choi. 2015. Middle Power Cooperation and Related Issues in the G20. In MIKTA, Middle Powers, and New Dynamics of Global Governance: The G20’s Evolving Agenda, Asan-Palgrave Macmillan Series, ed. M. Jongryn. New York: Palgrave Pivot.
Herzog, Marc, and Philip Robins. 2014. The Role, Position and Agency of Cusp States in International Relations. London/New York: Routledge.
Holbraad, Carsten. 1984. Middle Powers in International Politics. London: Macmillan Press. CrossRef
Humanitarian Assistance Report. 2016. Available at http://devinit.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Global-Humanitarian-Assistance-Report-2016.pdf
Ikenberry, John. 2016. American Leadership May Be in Crisis, But the World Order Is Not. Foreign Affairs, January 27.
Jordaan, Eduard. 2003. The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing Between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers. Politikon 30 (1): 165–181. CrossRef
Keohane, Robert. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 2005 Edition.
Kuo, A. Mercy. 2016. The End of American World Order, Insights from Amitav Acharya. The Diplomat. Available at https://thediplomat.com/2016/11/the-end-of-american-world-order/
Loraine, Sievers, and Sam Daws. 2014. The Procedure of the UN Security Council. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maihold, Günther. 2016. Mexico: A Leader in Search of Like-Minded Peers. International Journal 71 (4): 545–562. CrossRef
Manicom, James, and Jeffrey Reeves. 2013. Locating Middle Powers in International Relations Theory and Power Transitions. International Affairs 89 (3): 635–651. CrossRef
Manicom, J., and J. Reeves. 2014. Locating Middle Powers in International Relations Theory and Power Transitions. In Middle Powers and the Rise of China, 23–44. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
Mi-Kim, Sung. 2016. South Korea’s Middle Power Diplomacy: Changes and Challenges. Chatham House Asia Programme. Research Paper 5, June 2016.
“MIKTA as a Force for Good”. 2014. Daily Sabah. https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/2014/04/25/mikta-as-a-force-for-good
Naim, Moises. 2009. Minilateralism. Foreign Policy. Available at http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/06/21/minilateralism/
Narlikar, Amrita, and Rajiv Kumar. 2012. From Pax Americana to Pax Mosaica? Bargaining Over a New Economic Order. The Political Quarterly. 83 (2): 384–394. CrossRef
Nolte, Defley. 2010. How to Compare Regional Powers: Analytical Concepts and Research Topics. Review of International Studies 36 (4): 881–890. CrossRef
Öniş, Ziya, and Mustafa Kutlay. 2016. The Dynamics of Emerging Middle-Power Influence in Regional and Global Governance: The Paradoxical Case of Turkey. Australian Journal of International Affairs 71 (2): 164–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2016.1183586. CrossRef
Özerkan, Fulya. 2009. Domestic Double Standards in Darfur Policies. Hürriyet.
Parlar Dal, Emel. 2013. Assessing Turkey’s “Normative” Power in the Middle East and North Africa Region: New Dynamics and their Limitations. Turkish Studies 14 (4): 709–734. CrossRef
———. 2018. Profiling Middle Powers in Global Governance and the Turkish Case: An Introduction. In Middle Powers in Global Governance: The Rise of Turkey, ed. Emel Parlar Dal. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Parlar Dal, Emel, and Ali Murat Kurşun. 2016. Assessing Turkey’s Middle Power Foreign Policy in MIKTA: Goals, Means and Impact. International Journal 71 (4): 608–629. p. 617. CrossRef
Parlar Dal, Emel, and Ali Murat Kurşun. 2018a. Turkey in the UN Funding System: A Comparative Analysis with the BRICS Contries (2010–2013). In Middle Powers in Global Governance: The Rise of Turkey, ed. Emel Parlar Dal. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Reeves, Jeffrey. 2014. Rethinking Weak State Behavior: Mongolia’s Foreign Policy Toward China. International Politics 51 (2): 254–271. CrossRef
Robertson, Jeffrey. 2017. Middle-Power Definitions: Confusion Reigns Supreme. Australian Journal of International Affairs 7: 355–370. CrossRef
Sander, Oral. 1998. Türkiye’nin Dış Politikası. İstanbul: İmge.
Santikajaya, Awidya. 2016. Walking the Middle Path: The Characteristics of Indonesia’s Rise. International Journal 71 (4): 563–586. CrossRef
Schiavon, Jorge A., and Diego Domínguez. 2016. Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, and Australia (MIKTA): Middle, Regional, and Constructive Powers Providing Global Governance. Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies. 2 (2): 495–504. CrossRef
Sever, Aysegul, and Gonca Oğuz Gök. 2016. UN Factor in the “Regional Power Role” and the Turkish Case in 2000s. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 29 (3): 1150–1185. CrossRef
Sohn, Yul. 2015. Searching For a New Identity: South Korea’s Middle Power Diplomacy, Policy Brief No: 212, p. 4, December.
Stockholm Peace Institute, Military Expenditure Database, Data for All Countries from 1988–2016 in Constant 2015. USD. https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/Milex-constant-2015-USD.
Stuenkel, Oliver. 2016. The Post-Western World and the Rise of a Parallel Order. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2016/09/the-post-western-world-and-the-rise-of-a-parallel-order/
Teo, Sarah. 2017. Middle Power Identities of Australia and South Korea: Comparing the Kevin Rudd/Julia Gillard and Lee Myung-bak Administrations. The Pacific Review: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2017.1371210.
United Nations Statistics Division, Population and Vital Statistics Report, Population, Latest Available Census and Estimates (2015–2016). Last Updated 2 November 2017. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/vitstats/serATab2.pdf
Vezirgiannidou, Sevasti-Eleni. 2013. The United States and Rising Powers in a Post- Hegemonic Global Order. International Affairs 89 (3): 635–651. CrossRef
Wang, Hongying, and Erik French. 2013. Middle Range Powers in Global Governance. Third World Quarterly 34 (6): 985–999. CrossRef
Watson, Iain. 2011. Global Korea: Foreign Aid and National Interests in an Age of Globalization. Contemporary Politics 17 (1): 53–69. CrossRef
Weiss, Thomas. 2016. Rising Powers, Global Governance, and the United Nations. Rising Powers Quarterly 1 (2): 7–19.
Wight, Martin. 1987. Power Politics (quoted in) James Manicom and Jeffrey Reeves. Locating Middle Powers in International Relations Theory and Power Transitions. In Middle Powers and the Rise of China, ed. Bruce Gilley and Andrew O’Neil, p. 65. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Wilkins, Thomas S. 2014. Australia: A Traditional Middle Power Faces the Asian Century. In Middle Powers and the Rise of China, ed. Bruce Gilley and Andrew O’Neil. US: Georgetown University Press.
Wright, Thomas. 2015. Middle Powers and the Multilateral Pivot. In MIKTA, Middle Powers, and New Dynamics of Global Governance: The G20’s Evolving Agenda, Asan-Palgrave Macmillan Series, ed. M. Jongryn. New York: Palgrave Pivot.
Xing, Li. 2016. The Nexus Between the Emerging Powers and the Existing World Order: Interdependent Hegemony. Op-Ed. Rising Powers Project. Available at http://risingpowersproject.com/nexus-emerging-powers-existing-world-order-interdependent-hegemony/
Yanık, Lerna. 2009. The Metamorphosis of Metaphors of Vision: “Bridging” Turkey’s Location, Role and Identity After the End of the Cold War. Geopolitics 14 (3): 531–549. CrossRef
———. 2011. Constructing Turkish “Exceptionalism”: Discourses of Liminality and Hybridity in Post-Cold War Turkish Foreign Policy. Political Geography 30 (2): 59–114. CrossRef
Zakaria, Fareed. 2008. The Post-American World. The New York Times. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/books/chapters/books.html?action=click&contentCollection=Books&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article
- Analyzing “T” in MIKTA: Turkey’s Changing Middle Power Role in the United Nations
Gonca Oğuz Gök
Radiye Funda Karadeniz
- Chapter 7
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© BBL, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Neuer Inhalt/© hww, digitale Transformation/© Maksym Yemelyanov | Fotolia