В западной орбите: турецкие подходы к изучению международных отношений

В статье проведен анализ развития и современного состояния исследований международных отношений в Турции с акцентом на возможные причины их периферизации, а также вероятные точки роста для формирования самостоятельных теоретических подходов.

Рассмотрены особенности развития изучения и преподавания международных отношений в Турции, причины недостаточного внимания к местным теориям. Для анализа использованы официальные статистические данные, результаты зарубежных опросов, биографические профили ведущих турецких исследователей международных отношений, их рефлексия относительно обозначенной проблемы, а также турецкие работы в области международных отношений, претендующие на теоретическую новизну. Автор делает вывод, что перспективы российско-турецких отношений определяются в том числе и тем, насколько турецкая научная школа международных отношений сможет отстоять свою независимость и выработать оригинальные теоретические подходы или, для начала, адаптировать незападные теории. В настоящее время Турция в теоретическом плане все еще находится в западной орбите, однако демонстрирует выраженный политический запрос на преодоление такой зависимости. Турецкое академическое сообщество пока еще не преодолело фазу критического переосмысления западоцентризма, оно только готовится проявить выраженный интерес к незападным теориям международных отношений и поиску оснований для построения теорий в собственной локальной среде, истории и культуре. Недостаточное развитие теоретических исследований международных отношений в Турции, несмотря на негативный фактор прозападной ориентации, предоставляет простор для сотрудничества и положительной интеграции российской и турецкой академической среды. Знакомство турецких исследователей с российскими традициями и подходами к международным отношениям является залогом успешного развития российско-турецких отношений.

1. Аватков, В.А., Видяйкин, А.С. Деятельность аналитических центров в Турции при правлении Партии справедливости и развития // Вестник МГИМО-Университета. 2013. Т. 30. № 3. C. 100–104. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2013-3-30-100-104.

2. Барнашов, О.В., Геворгян, А.Г., Геккая Ф.Х. Изучение международных отношений в Турции // Власть. 2019. Т. 27. № 2. С. 268–275. https://doi.org/10.31171/vlast.v27i2.6362.

3. Гузаеров, Р.И. «Стабилизирующая» Турция в нестабильном мире // Дискурс-Пи. 2023. Т. 20. № 3. С. 168–179. https://doi.org/10.17506/18179568_2023_20_3_168.

4. Ибрагимов, А.Г., Новрузов, С.Э., Цездоев, Р.М. Роль западных теорий в исследовании международных отношений в Турции // Дипломатическая служба. 2019. № 3.

5. Acharya, Amitav, and Barry Buzan, eds. Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia. Washington-London: Taylor & Francis, 2009.

6. Aydın, Mustafa. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Akademisyenlerinin Bilimsel Araştırma ve Uygulamaları ile Disipline Bakış Açıları ve Siyasi Tutumları Anketi.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 4, no. 15 (2007): 1–31.

7. Aydın, Mustafa. “A Questionnaire about Scientific Research and Teaching Practices, Views on the Discipline and Political Attitudes of International Relations’ Academicians in Turkey.” International Relations 4, no. 15 (2007): 1–31 [In Turkish].

8. Aydın, Mustafa, and Korhan Yazgan. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Akademisyenleri Araştırma, Eğitim ve Disiplin Değerlendirmeleri Anketi – 2009.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 7, no. 25 (2010): 3–42.

9. Aydın, Mustafa, and Korhan Yazgan. “Survey of International Relations Faculty in Turkey: Research, Teaching and Views on the Discipline – 2009.” International Relations 7, no. 25 (2010): 3–42 [In Turkish].

10. Aydın, Mustafa, and Korhan Yazgan. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Akademisyenleri Eğitim: Araştırma ve Uluslararası Politika Anketi – 2011.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 9, no. 36 (2013): 3–44.

11. Aydın, Mustafa, and Korhan Yazgan, “Survey International Relations Faculty in Turkey: Teaching, Research and International Politics – 2011”, International Relations 9, no. 36 (2013): 3–44 [In Turkish].

12. Aydın, Mustafa, Fulya Hisarlıoğlu, and Korhan Yazgan. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Akademisyenleri ve Alana Yönelik Yaklaşımları Üzerine Bir İnceleme: TRIP 2014 Sonuçları.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 12, no. 48 (2016): 3–35. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.463044.

13. Aydın, Mustafa, Fulya Hisarlıoğlu, and Yazgan Korhan. “An Analysis of International Relations Academics in Turkey and Their Approaches to the Field: TRIP 2014 Faculty Survey Results”, International Relations 12, no. 48 (2016): 3–35 [In Turkish].

14. Aydın, Mustafa, and Cihan Dizdaroğlu. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler: TRIP 2018 Sonuçları Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 16, no. 64 (2019): 3–28. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.652877.

15. Aydın, Mustafa, and Cihan Dizdaroğlu. “International Relations in Turkey: An Evaluation on the Findings of TRIP 2018”, International Relations 16, no. 64 (2019): 3–28 [In Turkish].

16. Aydınli, Ersel, and Julie Mathews. “Periphery Theorising for a Truly Internationalised Discipline: Spinning IR Theory out of Anatolia.” Review of International Studies 34, (2008): 693–712. https://doi.org:10.1017/S0260210508008231.

17. Baskıcı, Murat. Mülkiye Tarihi. Mülkiye’den Siyasal’a 160 Yılın Öyküsü. Ankara: Anakara Üniversitesi Basımevi, 2021.

18. Baskıcı, Murat. History of Mülkiye: a 160 Year Story from Mülkiye to Political Science. Ankara: Ankara University Press, 2021 [In Turkish].

19. Bilgin, Pınar. “Uluslararası İlişkiler Çalışmalarında “Merkez-Çevre”: Türkiye Nerede? Uluslararası İlişkiler.” International Relations 2, no. 6 (2005): 3–14.

20. Bilgin, Pınar. “‘Center-periphery’ Relations in the Study of International Relations: Where is Turkey?.” International Relations 2, no. 6 (2005): 3–14 [In Turkish].

21. Bilgin, Pınar, and Oktay F. Tanrısever. “A Telling Story of IR in the Periphery: Telling Turkey About the World, Telling the World About Turkey.” Journal of International Relations and Development 12 (2009): 174–179. https://doi.org/10.1057/jird.2009.5.

22. Crawford, R.M.A., and D.S.L. Jarvis, eds. International Relations – Still an American Social Science: Towards Diversity in International Thought. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 2001.

23. Erhan, Çağri, and Mustafa Aydın. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Eğitiminin Dünü, Bugünü.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 2, no. 6 (2005): 25–29.

24. Erhan, Çağri, and Mustafa Aydın. “The Past and Present of International Relations Education in Turkey.” International Relations 2, no. 6 (2005): 25–29 [In Turkish].

25. Gönlübol, Mehmet et al. Olaylarla Türk Diş Politikasi (1919–1995). Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi yayınları, 1969.

26. Gönlübol, Mehmet et al. Turkish Foreign Policy with Events (1919–1995). Ankara: Ankara University Faculty of Political Sciences Publications, 1969 [In Turkish].

27. Holsti, Kalevi Jaakko. The Dividing Discipline: Hegemony and Diversity in International Theory. Boston: Allen and Unwin, 1985.

28. İşeri, Emre, and Nevra Esentürk. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Çalışmaları: Merkez-Çevre Yaklaşımı.” Elektronik Mesleki Gelişim ve Araştırma Dergisi 4, no. 2 (2016): 17–33.

29. İşeri, Emre, and Nevra Esentürk. “International Relations Studies in Turkey: Center-Periphery Approach.” Electronic Journal of Occupational Improvement and Research 4, no. 2 (2016): 17–33 [In Turkish].

30. Karamık, İrem and Erman Ermihan. “Quo Vadis, Turkish IR? Mapping Turkish IR’s Footsteps within the Global.” All Azimuth 12, no. 2 (2023): 241–260. doi: 10.20991/allazimuth.1310640.

31. Kut, Şule et al. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Eğitiminin Geleceği.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 2, no. 6 (2005): 87–105.

32. Kut, Şule et al. “The Future of International Relations Education in Turkey.” International Relations 2, no. 6 (2005): 87–105 [In Turkish].

33. Mehmetçik, Hakan. “Türkiye’de Uluslararasi İlişkiler Çalişmalari Ve “Neden Batili Olmayan Bir Uluslararasi İlişkiler Teorisi Yok?.” Sorusuna Cevap Aramak.” İ.Ü. Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, no. 50 (2014): 243–258.

34. Mehmetçik, Hakan. “IR Studies in Turkey and Looking for an Answer for the Question of Why There is No Turkish IR Theories.” Istanbul University Faculty of Political Sciences Journal, no. 50 (2014): 243–258 [In Turkish].

35. Lebedeva, M. “International Relations Studies in the USSR / Russia: Is there a Russian National School of IR Studies?.” Global Society 18, no. 3 (2004): 263–278.

36. Makarychev, Andrey, and Viatcheslav Morozov. “Is “non-Western Theory” Possible? The Idea of Multipolarity and the Trap of Epistemological Relativism in Russian IR.” International Studies Review 15, no. 3 (2013): 328–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/misr.12067.

37. Okur, Mehmet Akif, and Cavit Emre Aytekin. “NonWestern Theories in International Relations Education and Research: The Case of Turkey / Turkish Academia.” All Azimuth 12, no. 1 (2023): 19–44.

38. Oran, Baskin. Türk Dış Politikası Kurtuluş Savaşindan Bugüne Olgular, Belgeler, Yorumlar. C. 1. 1919–1980. İstanbul: Iletişim Yayınları, 2001.

39. Oran, Baskin. Turkish Foreign Policy: Facts, Documents, Comments from the War of Independence to Today. V. 1. 1919–1980. Istanbul: Communication Publications, 2001 [In Turkish].

40. Özkoç, Özge, and Pınar Çağlayan. “The Trajectory of International Relations Dissertations in Turkish Academia Between 2000 and 2020.” All Azimuth 12, no. 1 (2023): 107–128. https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1218033.

41. Turan, İlter. “Progress in Turkish International Relations.” All Azimuth 7, no. 1 (2018): 137–142. http://dx.doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.328455.

42. Voskressenski, Alexei D. Non-Western Theories of International Relations: Conceptualizing World Regional Studies. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.

43. Kutlay, Mustafa and Ziya Öniş. “Turkish Foreign Policy in a Post-Western Order: Strategic Autonomy or New Forms of Dependence?” International Afairs 97, no. 4 (2021):1085–1104.

44. Bilgin, Pınar. “Security Dimension: A Clash of Security Cultures? Differences Between Turkey and the European Union Revisited.” In Fifty Years of EUTurkey Relations, edited by Armağan Emre Çakır, 67–83. London: Routledge, 2010.