AMERİKAN HEGEMONYASININ DEVAMI VE ORTADOĞU’NUN YENİDEN YAPILANDIRILMASI ARASINDAKİ POZİTİF KORELASYON
Files
Date
2013-04-21
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
21. yüzyılın başında 11 Eylül 2001’de yaşanan terör olayı sonrası
İslami terör ile mücadele merkezli oluşturulan ABD dış politikası
çerçevesinde Afganistan ve Irak işgal edilmiş, tüm Müslümanlar için
potansiyel terörist algısı yaratılmıştır. 2008 yılına gelindiğinde Irak’ta artan
İran etkisi ve Afganistan’da yürütülen mücadelenin somut bir sonuç
vermemesi bir de üstüne üstlük tüm bu mücadelelerin yürütülebilmesi için
yapılan harcamaların diğer etkenler ile birlikte ABD ekonomisini krize itmesi
ve yürütülen bu politikalar sonucu başta Müslüman kitleler olmak üzere tüm
dünya halklarında ABD imajının zedelenmesi sonuçları ile karşı karşıya
kalınmıştır. Bu tablo karşısında ABD, hegemonyanın devamını esas alan
genel stratejisi doğrultusunda hatalı olan dış politik yaklaşımını ve 2008
Başkanlık seçimlerinde yönetimini değiştirmiştir.
2008 Ekonomik krizi, ABD’nin Irak’tan çekilmesi ve 2010 yılında
Ortadoğu’da başlayan Arap Baharı süreci kapsamında ABD dış politikasında
hissedilen değişiklik; ABD’nin bölgede etkisinin azaldığı, gelişmelerin ABD
insiyatifinin dışında gerçekleştiği iddialarını gündeme taşımıştır. ABD yanlısı
otoriter liderler olan Hüsnü Mübarek, Salih ve Bin Ali’nin iktidarlarını
kaybetmeleri, El Nahda ve Müslüman Kardeşler gibi İslami grupların
bulundukları ülkelerde iktidara gelmeleri ise ABD etkisinin azaldığı iddiasını
kuvvetlendiren gelişmeler olarak değerlendirilmiştir. ABD’nin 2008 yılında
Mısır’da Mübarek sonrası için muhalifler ile görüştüğü, 2006 yılında Suriye’de
Esad rejimi muhaliflerine mali destek sağladığı bilgileri bize Arap Baharı
sürecine ABD’nin hazırlıksız yakalandığı iddialarının yanlış olduğunu
göstermektedir. 1979 İran Devrimi’nde Şah’ın devrilmesine, 27 Mayıs 1960
İhtilali’nde Türkiye’de Menderes iktidarının son bulmasına da ABD yönetimi
ses çıkarmamıştır. Kısacası Mübarek, Salih, Bin Ali gibi ABD ile uyumlu
liderlerin bölge ülkelerinde görevlerini kaybetmeleri ilk değildir. ABD ile
uyumlu politikalar izledikleri sürece bölge ülkelerinde iktidarda kimin
olduğunun ABD açısından bir önemi yoktur. Henüz kısa bir zaman geçmiş
olmasına rağmen anılan ülkelerde ABD aleyhine radikal bir dış politika
değişikliği de söz konusu olmamış, bilakis Libya gibi kazanımlarda olmuştur.
ABD’nin küresel hegemonyasının devamı için enerji kaynaklarının ve
ulaşım yollarının kontrol altında tutulması hayati öneme sahiptir. Bu durum
muhtemel rakipler Çin ve Hindistan’ın hızla artan enerji ihtiyacı ile birlikte
düşünüldüğünde bir kat daha artmaktadır. Ayrıca 1970’li yıllarda Bretton
Woods sisteminin yıkılmasından sonra Amerikan dolarının küresel para olma
vasfını devam ettirmesini sağlayan en önemli etkenlerden birisinin petrolün
dolar ile satılması olduğu unutulmamaldır. Ortadoğu’da ABD etkisinin devamı
bölgedeki gelişmeleri yönlendirmesi ile paraleldir. Ortadoğu’daki değişimin
ABD’nin kontrolü dışında gerçekleşmesi bölgede ABD etkisinin sonu
demektir. Bu ise ABD’nin enerji kaynaklarına hakimiyetinin bitmesi, bölgedeki
etkisinin kaybolması nedeniyle enerjinin dolar ile satışı sebebiyle küresel mali
sistemi elinde bulundurma avantajının sona ermesi yani hegemon statüsünün
kaybedilmesi anlamına gelmektedir. Kısacası küresel hegemonya
mücadelesinin yapılacağı yer Ortadoğu’dur. Ortadoğu’da etkisini kaybeden
ABD’nin tüm dünyade etkinliğini yitireceği bir gerçektir. Ortadoğu’daki
değişim ile ABD hegemonyasının devamı arasında pozitif bir korealasyon söz
konusudur. Bu sebeple bölgede yer alan ülkelerin kendine özgün koşullarını
da esas alarak ABD’nin Ortadoğu’daki değişimi kendi ekseninde
şekillendirmeye çalışacağı bir realitedir.
Description
The Positive Correlation between the Restructuring of Middle
East and the Continuation of the U.S. (American) Hegemony
ABSTRACT: At the beginning of the 21st century, Afghanistan and Iraq were occupied and the perception that “all the Muslims were potentially terrorist” was created within the framework of the US foreign policy which was against “Islamic terrorism” after the September 11 (9/11) terrorist attacks. By the beginning of 2008, image of the US on the public opinion of the world, especially in the Muslim world, faced with enormous disappointment as a result of the growing Iranian influence in Iraq and Afghanistan and disability for getting certain result of all these struggles in the fight against terrorism. For these reasons, the US changed its fault foreign policy approach based on general strategy that the US hegemony should continue and its governance with the 2008 presidential election. It has been claimed that the US influence in the Middle East decreased and political events in the region actualized outside the US initiative within the scope of perceived American foreign policy changes in consequence of economic crisis in 2008, the withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq and the Arab Spring started in 2010. These claims were strengthened with the incidents of power transition from the pro-US authoritarian leaders, Hosni Mubarak and Ben Ali Salih, to Islamic Groups such as Al Nahda and the Muslim Brotherhood. However, it is wrong to say that the US was unprepared to these developments due to the Arab Spring. Because there were some evidences that the US met with the opposition in Egypt for the period after Mubarak in 2008, similarly the United States has been provided with financial support to opponents of the Assad regime in Syria since 2006. In the past, the US government also gave no reaction to the Iranian Revolution, the ousting the Shah in 1979, and to the military coup (May 27), ousting Menderes from the Power in 1960 in Turkey. In short, the overthrowing of Mubarak and Saleh Ben Ali, leaders loyal to the policies of the US, in the region are not the first examples. It is not very important for the US who is in charge in the countries of the region if they follow policies compatible with US interest. Although very short time passed through the revolutionary changes in the mentioned states, there have been no radical foreign policy changes against the US In contrast, the US has got advantageous position in some countries like Libya. It is vital for the US to control the energy sources and transport routes for the continuation of the US global hegemony. The importance of controlling energy sources and transport routes has been duplicated when it is thought of the increasing energy demand of the countries such as China and India that are probable rivals to the US in the region. In addition, it is not forgotten that it is the only way for continuation of being a global currency for the US dollar to be in oil sales, after the collapse of the Bretton Woods System in 1970. The continuation of the US influence in the Middle East is more in line with the direction of developments in the region. If the changes in the Middle East realized beyond the control of the United States, it would mean the end of the US influence in the region. In that case, the US will lose its hegemonic status since the ending of dominance position in controlling energy sources and in losing influence in the region. And it will also lose the advantage of holding global financial system as a result of using dollar as global currency for oil trade. In conclusion, Middle East is the place for global hegemonic struggles. It is fact that if the United States lost influence in Middle East, it would lose influence all over the world. There is a positive correlation between the change in the Middle East and continuation of the US hegemony. Therefore, it is inevitable for the US to shape changes in the region countries on its own axis while considering individual conditions of these relevant countries.
ABSTRACT: At the beginning of the 21st century, Afghanistan and Iraq were occupied and the perception that “all the Muslims were potentially terrorist” was created within the framework of the US foreign policy which was against “Islamic terrorism” after the September 11 (9/11) terrorist attacks. By the beginning of 2008, image of the US on the public opinion of the world, especially in the Muslim world, faced with enormous disappointment as a result of the growing Iranian influence in Iraq and Afghanistan and disability for getting certain result of all these struggles in the fight against terrorism. For these reasons, the US changed its fault foreign policy approach based on general strategy that the US hegemony should continue and its governance with the 2008 presidential election. It has been claimed that the US influence in the Middle East decreased and political events in the region actualized outside the US initiative within the scope of perceived American foreign policy changes in consequence of economic crisis in 2008, the withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq and the Arab Spring started in 2010. These claims were strengthened with the incidents of power transition from the pro-US authoritarian leaders, Hosni Mubarak and Ben Ali Salih, to Islamic Groups such as Al Nahda and the Muslim Brotherhood. However, it is wrong to say that the US was unprepared to these developments due to the Arab Spring. Because there were some evidences that the US met with the opposition in Egypt for the period after Mubarak in 2008, similarly the United States has been provided with financial support to opponents of the Assad regime in Syria since 2006. In the past, the US government also gave no reaction to the Iranian Revolution, the ousting the Shah in 1979, and to the military coup (May 27), ousting Menderes from the Power in 1960 in Turkey. In short, the overthrowing of Mubarak and Saleh Ben Ali, leaders loyal to the policies of the US, in the region are not the first examples. It is not very important for the US who is in charge in the countries of the region if they follow policies compatible with US interest. Although very short time passed through the revolutionary changes in the mentioned states, there have been no radical foreign policy changes against the US In contrast, the US has got advantageous position in some countries like Libya. It is vital for the US to control the energy sources and transport routes for the continuation of the US global hegemony. The importance of controlling energy sources and transport routes has been duplicated when it is thought of the increasing energy demand of the countries such as China and India that are probable rivals to the US in the region. In addition, it is not forgotten that it is the only way for continuation of being a global currency for the US dollar to be in oil sales, after the collapse of the Bretton Woods System in 1970. The continuation of the US influence in the Middle East is more in line with the direction of developments in the region. If the changes in the Middle East realized beyond the control of the United States, it would mean the end of the US influence in the region. In that case, the US will lose its hegemonic status since the ending of dominance position in controlling energy sources and in losing influence in the region. And it will also lose the advantage of holding global financial system as a result of using dollar as global currency for oil trade. In conclusion, Middle East is the place for global hegemonic struggles. It is fact that if the United States lost influence in Middle East, it would lose influence all over the world. There is a positive correlation between the change in the Middle East and continuation of the US hegemony. Therefore, it is inevitable for the US to shape changes in the region countries on its own axis while considering individual conditions of these relevant countries.
Keywords
international relations