Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Importance of Geopolitics in American Foreign Policy

Year 2021, Volume: 21 Issue: 1, 17 - 27, 07.05.2021
https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.809368

Abstract

The United States has an unchanged Eurasian strategy since the end of The World War II, which can be regarded as the beginning of United States of America’s hegemony. Nicholas J. Spykman formed the basis of this strategy before The World War II, and this strategy has remained until today. Spykman’s theory is basically saying that American Foreign Policy and its security should be planned according to the geographical elements. During the Cold War, Spykman's geopolitical theory, which has been successful in maintaining American hegemony, has evolved into a different dimension with the collapse of the USSR. The emergence of a dominant power in Eurasia came to the agenda with the economic strengthening of China. China's Belt and Road Inıtiative aims to reach Europe by following several routes to the west, following the Rimland area, which Spykman attaches great importance to it. In this context, China's project seems to be one of the biggest threats to American hegemony today. Because Belt and Road Initiative could bring the potential Chinese dominance in the Eurasia. Therefore, the exclusion of the US from Eurasia and the prominence of China will mean the loss of American hegemony. In this context, the fact that the current political tensions are special to Rimland as stated by Spykman can be seen as reflections of the tough struggle between USA and China. The aim of this article is to evaluate whether the geopolitical theory of Spykman, which shaped the American foreign policy about a century ago, is still valid today, by comparing it with other geopolitical theorists.

References

  • Andersen, L. E. ve Jiang, Y. (2018), China’s Engagement in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Xinjiang, Will China’s Root Cause Model Provide Regional Stability and Security?, Danish Institute for International Studies.
  • Arase, D. (2015), “China’s Two Silk Roads Initiative: What It Means for Southeast Asia”, Southeast Asian Affairs, 41 (1), 25-45.
  • Brands, H. (2018), “American grand strategy in the post–Cold War era”, (Ed.) Russell W. Glenn, New Directions in Strategic Thinking 2.0, Canberra: ANU Press.
  • Crowl, P. A. (1986), “Alfred Thayer Mahan: The Naval Historian”, (Ed.), Peter Paret, Makers of Modern Strategy from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age, Priceton: Princeton University Press.
  • D’Estmael, T. W. (1999), “Les Théories des Relations Internationales a L'épreuve de L'apres-guerre Froide: Defis Theoriques Pluriels” Studia Diplomatica, 52 (1/2), 161-175.
  • Duchatel, M. (2016), “China's Policy in the East China Sea: The Role of Crisis Management Mechanism Negotiations with Japan (2008-2015)”, China Perspectives, 107 (3), 13-21.
  • Fairbank, J. K. (1966), “The People's Middle Kingdom”, Council on Foreign Relations, 44 (4), 574-586.
  • Garson, R. (1979), “The Role of Eastern Europe in America's Containment Policy, 1945-1948”, Journal of American Studies, 13 (1), 73-92.
  • Jacob, J. T. (2017), “China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Perspectives from India”, China & World Economy, 25 (5), 78-100.
  • Mauter, R. W. (2015) “Churchill and the Unification of Europe”, The Historian, 61(1), 67-84.
  • Mayers, D. (1983), “Eisenhower's Containment Policy and the Major Communist Powers, 1953-1956”, The International History Review, 5 (1), 59-83.
  • Mercier, G. (1990), “Le Concept de Propriété dans la Géographie Politique de Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904)”, Annales de Géographie, 555, 595-615.
  • Rosenboim, O. (2017), The Emergence of Globalism, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Schofield, J. (2012), “Pakistan, The US, Geopolitics and Grand Strategies”, (Ed) Usama Butt ve Julian Schofield, Pakistan-China Strategic Relations, Energy Security and Pakistani Counter-Terror Operations, Pluto Press.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1926), “The Social Background of Asiatic Nationalism”, American Journal of Sociology, 32 (3), 346-411.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1938), “Geography and Foreign Policy, I”, The American Political Science Review, 32 (1), 28-50.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1938), “Geography and Foreign Policy, II”, The American Political Science Review, 32 (2), 213-236.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1942), “Frontiers, Security, and International Organization”, Geographical Review, 32 (3), 436-447.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1944), “The Geography of the Peace”, San Diego: Harcourt Brace Press.
  • Spykman, J. N. ve Rollins, A. A. (1939), “Geographic Objectives in Foreign Policy, I”, The American Political Science Review, 33 (3), 391-410.
  • Spykman, J. N. ve Rollins, A. A. (1939), “Geographic Objectives in Foreign Policy, II”, The American Political Science Review, 33 (4), 591-614.
  • Weigert, H. W. (1946), “Mackinder’s Heartland”, The American Scholar, 15 (1), 43-54.
  • Worley, R. D. (2015), Orchestrating the Instruments of Power, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, Potomac Books.
  • ABD Dışişleri Bakanlığı. (2019), A Free and Open Indo-Pacific Advancing a Shared Vision, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Free-and-Open-Indo-Pacific-4Nov2019.pdf (15.04.2020)
  • ABD Dışişleri Bakanlığı. (2020), Blue Dot Network, https://www.state.gov/blue-dot-network/ (15.04.2020)
  • North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_172436.htm (16.04.2020)
  • https://tr.euronews.com/2020/01/09/trump-nato-orta-dogu-ya-genislemeli-ad-da-nato-me-olmali-iran (11.08.2020)
  • https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/churchill-britain-and-european-unity/ (11.08.2020)
  • http://www.ijnhonline.org/2016/05/26/alfred-and-theodore-go-to-hawaii-the-value-of-hawaii-in-the-maritime-strategic-thought-of-alfred-thayer-mahan/#fn-1869-11 (11.08.2020)

Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi

Year 2021, Volume: 21 Issue: 1, 17 - 27, 07.05.2021
https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.809368

Abstract

Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin, Dünya üzerindeki hegemonyasının başlangıcı olarak kabul edebileceğimiz İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrasından günümüze kadar temel hatları itibariyle değişmeyen bir Avrasya stratejisi bulunmaktadır. Söz konusu stratejinin temellerini Nicholas J. Spykman İkinci Dünya Savaşı’ndan önce oluşturmuştur ve bu strateji günümüze kadar fazlaca değişmeden gelmiştir. Spykman’ın temelde dile getirdiği, Amerikan Dış Politikası’nın ve güvenliğinin, coğrafi unsurlara göre planlanması gerekliliğidir. Soğuk Savaş dönemi boyunca Spykman’ın jeopolitik teorisi bağlamında hareket eden ve Amerikan hegemonyasının sürdürülmesi bakımından da başarıya ulaştığına kanaat getirebileceğimiz söz konusu strateji, SSCB’nin çöküşü ile birlikte farklı bir boyuta doğru evrilmeye başlamıştır. Avrasya’da tekrar baskın bir gücün ortaya çıkması Çin’in ekonomik olarak güçlenmesi ile birlikte gündeme gelmiştir. Çin’in Kuşak-Yol Projesi, doğusundaki birkaç rotadan hareketle, Spykman’ın çok önem verdiği Kenar Kuşak bölgesini takip ederek Avrupa’ya ulaşmayı hedeflemektedir. Bu bağlamda Çin’in söz konusu projesi Amerikan hegemonyasına güncel en büyük tehditlerden birisi olarak değerlendirilebilir. Zira Kuşak Yol Projesi Avrasya bölgesini önce ekonomik ve sonra da beklenen üzere siyasi olarak istikrara kavuşturacak potansiyeli barındırmaktadır. Dolayısıyla ABD’nin Avrasya’dan dışlanması ve Çin’in ön plana çıkması Amerikan hegemonyasının kaybedilmesi anlamına gelecektir. Bu bağlamda günümüzde yaşanan siyasi gerginliklerin Spykman’ın belirttiği Kenar Kuşak özelinde olması tesadüften öte ABD ve Çin arasında yaşanan çetin mücadelenin yansımaları olarak görülebilir. Bu makalenin amacı, yaklaşık bir asır önce Amerikan dış politikasını şekillendiren Spykman’ın jeopolitik teorisinin günümüzde hala geçerli olup olmadığını, diğer jeopolitik teorisyenlerin de alana sunduklarıyla karşılaştırarak değerlendirmektir.

References

  • Andersen, L. E. ve Jiang, Y. (2018), China’s Engagement in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Xinjiang, Will China’s Root Cause Model Provide Regional Stability and Security?, Danish Institute for International Studies.
  • Arase, D. (2015), “China’s Two Silk Roads Initiative: What It Means for Southeast Asia”, Southeast Asian Affairs, 41 (1), 25-45.
  • Brands, H. (2018), “American grand strategy in the post–Cold War era”, (Ed.) Russell W. Glenn, New Directions in Strategic Thinking 2.0, Canberra: ANU Press.
  • Crowl, P. A. (1986), “Alfred Thayer Mahan: The Naval Historian”, (Ed.), Peter Paret, Makers of Modern Strategy from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age, Priceton: Princeton University Press.
  • D’Estmael, T. W. (1999), “Les Théories des Relations Internationales a L'épreuve de L'apres-guerre Froide: Defis Theoriques Pluriels” Studia Diplomatica, 52 (1/2), 161-175.
  • Duchatel, M. (2016), “China's Policy in the East China Sea: The Role of Crisis Management Mechanism Negotiations with Japan (2008-2015)”, China Perspectives, 107 (3), 13-21.
  • Fairbank, J. K. (1966), “The People's Middle Kingdom”, Council on Foreign Relations, 44 (4), 574-586.
  • Garson, R. (1979), “The Role of Eastern Europe in America's Containment Policy, 1945-1948”, Journal of American Studies, 13 (1), 73-92.
  • Jacob, J. T. (2017), “China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Perspectives from India”, China & World Economy, 25 (5), 78-100.
  • Mauter, R. W. (2015) “Churchill and the Unification of Europe”, The Historian, 61(1), 67-84.
  • Mayers, D. (1983), “Eisenhower's Containment Policy and the Major Communist Powers, 1953-1956”, The International History Review, 5 (1), 59-83.
  • Mercier, G. (1990), “Le Concept de Propriété dans la Géographie Politique de Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904)”, Annales de Géographie, 555, 595-615.
  • Rosenboim, O. (2017), The Emergence of Globalism, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Schofield, J. (2012), “Pakistan, The US, Geopolitics and Grand Strategies”, (Ed) Usama Butt ve Julian Schofield, Pakistan-China Strategic Relations, Energy Security and Pakistani Counter-Terror Operations, Pluto Press.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1926), “The Social Background of Asiatic Nationalism”, American Journal of Sociology, 32 (3), 346-411.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1938), “Geography and Foreign Policy, I”, The American Political Science Review, 32 (1), 28-50.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1938), “Geography and Foreign Policy, II”, The American Political Science Review, 32 (2), 213-236.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1942), “Frontiers, Security, and International Organization”, Geographical Review, 32 (3), 436-447.
  • Spykman, J. N. (1944), “The Geography of the Peace”, San Diego: Harcourt Brace Press.
  • Spykman, J. N. ve Rollins, A. A. (1939), “Geographic Objectives in Foreign Policy, I”, The American Political Science Review, 33 (3), 391-410.
  • Spykman, J. N. ve Rollins, A. A. (1939), “Geographic Objectives in Foreign Policy, II”, The American Political Science Review, 33 (4), 591-614.
  • Weigert, H. W. (1946), “Mackinder’s Heartland”, The American Scholar, 15 (1), 43-54.
  • Worley, R. D. (2015), Orchestrating the Instruments of Power, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, Potomac Books.
  • ABD Dışişleri Bakanlığı. (2019), A Free and Open Indo-Pacific Advancing a Shared Vision, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Free-and-Open-Indo-Pacific-4Nov2019.pdf (15.04.2020)
  • ABD Dışişleri Bakanlığı. (2020), Blue Dot Network, https://www.state.gov/blue-dot-network/ (15.04.2020)
  • North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_172436.htm (16.04.2020)
  • https://tr.euronews.com/2020/01/09/trump-nato-orta-dogu-ya-genislemeli-ad-da-nato-me-olmali-iran (11.08.2020)
  • https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/churchill-britain-and-european-unity/ (11.08.2020)
  • http://www.ijnhonline.org/2016/05/26/alfred-and-theodore-go-to-hawaii-the-value-of-hawaii-in-the-maritime-strategic-thought-of-alfred-thayer-mahan/#fn-1869-11 (11.08.2020)
There are 29 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects International Relations
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Tolga Öztürk 0000-0002-8236-0389

Eren İrfanoğlu 0000-0001-8736-1383

Publication Date May 7, 2021
Submission Date October 12, 2020
Acceptance Date November 1, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2021 Volume: 21 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Öztürk, T., & İrfanoğlu, E. (2021). Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 21(1), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.809368
AMA Öztürk T, İrfanoğlu E. Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi. May 2021;21(1):17-27. doi:10.25294/auiibfd.809368
Chicago Öztürk, Tolga, and Eren İrfanoğlu. “Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi”. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi 21, no. 1 (May 2021): 17-27. https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.809368.
EndNote Öztürk T, İrfanoğlu E (May 1, 2021) Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi 21 1 17–27.
IEEE T. Öztürk and E. İrfanoğlu, “Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi”, Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 17–27, 2021, doi: 10.25294/auiibfd.809368.
ISNAD Öztürk, Tolga - İrfanoğlu, Eren. “Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi”. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi 21/1 (May 2021), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.809368.
JAMA Öztürk T, İrfanoğlu E. Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi. 2021;21:17–27.
MLA Öztürk, Tolga and Eren İrfanoğlu. “Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi”. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, vol. 21, no. 1, 2021, pp. 17-27, doi:10.25294/auiibfd.809368.
Vancouver Öztürk T, İrfanoğlu E. Amerikan Dış Politikasında Jeopolitiğin Önemi. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi. 2021;21(1):17-2.
Dizinler

143751437114372      14373