SİBER UZAMA YÖNELİK POLİTİK SÖYLEMDE İLETİŞİM GÜVENLİK YAKINSAMASI: ABD, AB VE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Bu çalışmada risk ve tehdit kavramları temelinde ve güvenlik tedbirleri kapsamında siber uzama yönelik güvenlikleştirme olarak tanımlayabileceğimiz, gözetim, denetim ve kontrolü meşrulaştırma stratejilerinin ortaya çıkarılması amaçlanmaktadır. Güvenlikleştirmeye olanak sağlayan söylemsel stratejiler, siber uzamı düzenlemeye yönelik politika metinleri aracılığıyla inşa edilmektedir. Politika metinleri, resmî söylemin kamuya sunulma aracı olarak yönetimin eylemlerini meşrulaştıran ve yasallaştıran ideolojik bir pratiğe olanak sağlamaktadır. Politika metinleri aynı zamanda, hegemonyanın geliştirildiği, toplumun farklı sınıflarının sisteme dahil edildiği, dolayısıyla devletin meşruiyetinin ve devlete olan güvenin pekiştirildiği araç işlevi görmektedir. Bu kapsamda hazırlanan çalışmada, Türkiye, AB ve ABD siber güvenlik politika metinleri eleştirel söylem analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Norman Fairclough’un üç boyutlu eleştirel söylem analizinin izlendiği bu çalışmada, metinlerin “mezo düzey” analizine yer verilmiştir. Mezo düzey analiz, söylemsel temalar, stratejiler ve diğer metinlerle bağlantılarının ortaya çıkarılmasına olanak sağlamaktadır. Siber uzama yönelik düzenlemelerin kapsamının kişi hak ve özgürlüklerini ihlal edecek şekilde genişletilmesi dikkate alındığında, politika metinlerinin analizi, uzama yönelik kontrol, denetim ve gözetim faaliyetleri ve ideolojik pratikleri görünür kılmaktadır. Siber uzama yönelik düzenlemelerin ve tartışmaların güncelliğini koruması ve “güvenlik”, “güvende olma” gibi çerçeveler altında gerçekleştirilen düzenlemelerin kapsamının kişi hak ve özgürlüklerini ihlal edecek şekilde genişletilmesi dikkate alındığında; bu çalışmanın siber uzama yönelik kontrol, denetim ve gözetim faaliyetlerinin tarihsel toplumsal bağlamını ve politika metinleri aracılığıyla görünmez kılınan ideolojik pratikleri görünür kılma açısından, özellikle iletişim çalışmaları alanında siber uzama yönelik çalışmalara katkı sağlayacağı değerlendirilmektedir.

SECURITY-COMMUNICATION CONVERGENCE AT CYBER SPACE POLICY DISCOURSE: USA, EU AND TURKEY EXAMPLE

This study aimed to reveal the strategies of legitimization of surveillance and control under the name of security measures for cyberspace, through the concepts of risk and threats. Discursive strategies that allow securitization are built through policy texts to regulate cyberspace. Policy texts are the means of publicizing official discourse and allow an ideological practice that legitimizes and legalizes the actions of the administration. Also, policy texts are the tools that the hegemony is developed, different classes of society are included in the system, and thus the legitimacy of the state and the trust in the state are reinforced. In this regard, the USA, EU, and Turkey's cybersecurity policy documents were subject to critical discourse analysis. In this study, critical discourse analysis method of Norman Fairclough was used and a meso-level analysis was performed. The Meso-level analysis makes it possible to reveal discursive themes, strategies, and their connections with other texts. Considering the widening of the scope of the regulations on cyberspace in a way that violates the rights and freedoms of individuals, analysis of policy texts makes visible control and surveillance activities and ideological practices. Considering that the regulations and discussions on cyberspace are kept up-to-date and the scope of the regulations made under the frameworks such as "security" and "being safe" is expanded in a way that violates the rights and freedoms of individuals; it is considered that this study will contribute to studies especially in the field of communication studies, in terms of making visible the historical social context of control and surveillance activities for cyberspace and ideological practices made invisible through policy texts.

___

  • Assange, J. (2013). Şifrepunk: Özgürlük ve İnternetin Geleceği Üzerine Bir Tartışma. Metis.
  • Banks, K. (2005). Index on censorship. Summitry & Strategies, 34(3), 85-91.
  • Barnard-Wills, D. (2013). Security, Privacy and Surveillance In European Policy Documents. International Data Privacy Law, 3, 170-180, doi: 10.1093/idpl/ipt014
  • Bazerman, C. (2003). Intertextuality: How texts rely on other texts. C. Bazerman, P. Prior (Ed). What writing does and how it does It içinde (s. 83-97). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Beck, U. (2002). The terrorist threat: World risk society revisited. Theory Culture Society, 19(4), 39-55.
  • Beck, U. (2006). Living in the world risk society. Economy and Society, 35(3), 329-345.
  • Bendiek, A. (2014). Cybersecurity and civil liberties: A Task for the European Union. Ethics and Armed Forces. http://www.ethikundmilitaer.de/en/ full-issues/20142-cyberwar/benediek-cybersecurity-and-civil-liberties-a-task-for-the-european-union/
  • Bendrath, R. (2001). The cyberwar debate perception and politics in U.S. critical infrastructure protection. Information & Security: An International Journal, 7, 80-103.
  • Bright, J. (2010). Security, technology and control: Repositioning securitisation theory for the information society. Politics in Hard Times: International Relations Responses to the Financial Crisis. SGIR7th Pan-European Conference. https://www.mendeley.com/ catalogue/ec490172-a857-3006-a23d-204b567f8688/
  • Burgess, J.P. (2007). Social values and material threat: the European programme for critical Infrastructure Protection. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, 3(3-4), 471–487.
  • Burton, F. ve Carlen, P. (1979). Official Discourse: On discourse analysis, government publications, ideology and the State. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  • Cavelty, M. D. (2008). Cyber-security and threat politics. Routledge.
  • Cavelty, M. D. (2012). The militarisation of cyberspace: Why less may be better. 4th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CYCON 2012). NATO CCD COE Publications, 141-152.
  • Cavelty, M. D. (2014). Global cyber-security policy evolution. Cybersecurity in Switzerland. Springer.
  • Clarke, R. A. ve Knake, R. K. (2011). Siber savaş. (M. Erduran, Çev.).
  • İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Çoban, S. (2013). Teknolojik determinizm bağlamında bilgi toplumu strateji belgesinin incelenmesi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Akademik Bilişim Konferansı. https://ab.org.tr/ab13/bildiri/30.pdf
  • Deibert, R. J. ve Rohozinski, R. (2012). Contesting cyberspace and the coming crisis of authority. R. Deibert, J. Palfrey, R. Rohozinski ve J. Zittrain (Eds.) Access contested: Security, identity, and resistance in Asian cyberspace içinde (s. 21-42), MIT Press.
  • Deibert, R. J. (2013). Black code: Inside the battle for cyberspace. McClelland & Stewart.
  • Deisman, W. W. (2008). Securing Cyberspace: Neo-Liberalism, risk and child safety. [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Carleton University.
  • Denizcilik, U., & Bakanlığı, H. (2013). Ulusal siber güvenlik stratejisi ve 2013-2014 eylem planı. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/ 2013/06/20130620-1-1.pdf
  • Edmunds, D. and Wollenberg, E. (2001). A strategic approach to multistakeholder negotiations. Development and Change, 32(2), 231-253. Elliott, R. (1996). Discourse analysis: Exploring action, function and conflict in social texts. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 14(6), 65-68.
  • Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity.
  • Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
  • Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power. Pearson Education.
  • Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Routledge.
  • Fiske, J. (2003). İletişim çalışmalarına giriş. (S. İrvan, Çev.). (2. Baskı). Bilim ve Sanat.
  • Foucault, M. (2002). Toplumu savunmak gerek. (Ş. Aktaş, Çev.). YKY
  • Giddens, A. (2000). Elimizden kaçıp giden dünya. (O. Akınhay, Çev.). Alfa Yayınları.
  • Grewal, B. S. (2008). Neoliberalism and discourse: Case studies of knowledge policies in the Asia-Pacific. [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Auckland University of Technology.
  • Hansen, L. (2006). Security as practice: Discourse analysis and the Bosnian war. Routledge.
  • Jackson, R. (2005). Writing the war on terrorism: Language. Politics and Counterterrorism. Manchester University Press.
  • Jager, S. (2001). Discourse and knowledge: Theoretical and methodological aspects of a critical discourse and dispositive analysis. R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Ed.) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis içinde (s. 32-62). Sage.
  • JOIN/2013/01 final. (2013). Joint communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Cybersecurity Strategy of the European Union: an Open, Safe and Secure Cyberspace, 7(1). http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/cybersecurity.
  • Kabanov, Y. (2012). Information (Cyber-) security discourses and policies in the European Union and Russia: A comparative analysis. Working
  • Papers of Centre for German and European Studies. Centre for German and European Studies. https://publications.hse.ru/ en/preprints/143476248
  • Karam, A. (2005). Terror and patriotism in the United States: A critical analysis of governmental discourses surrounding the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the introduction of the Patriot Act in the United States of America [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. University of Ottawa.
  • Klingova, K. (2013). Securitization of Cyber Space in the United States of America, the Russian Federation and Estonia. [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Budapest Central European University.
  • Krahmann, E. (2008). Security: Collective good or commodity? European Journal of International Relations, 14(3), 379-404.
  • Lawson, S. and Gehl, R.W. (2011). Convergence security: Cyber-surveillance and the biopolitical production of security. Cyber-Surveillance in Everyday Life: An International Workshop. https://www. robertwgehl.org/text/convergsec.pdf
  • Lawson, S. (2013). Motivating sybersecurity: Assessing the status of critical infrastructure as an object of cyber threats. Cyber Behavior: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. IGI Global, 168-189. doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-2659-1.ch007
  • Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. Basic Books.
  • Libicki, M. C. (2009). Cyber deterrence and cyber war. RAND Corporation.
  • Lyon, D. (2013). Gözetim çalışmaları: Genel bir bakış. (A. Toprak, Çev.). Kalkedon.
  • Manley, R. (2015). The fifth domain: Cyber-metaphors and apocalyptic rhetoric. Brown Political Review. https://brownpoliticalreview. org/2015/03/the-fifth-domain-cyber-metaphors-and-apocalyptic-rhetoric/
  • Mayasari, M., Darmayanti, N. and Riyanto, S. (2013). Critical discourse analysis of reporting on “Saweran for KPK Building” in media Indonesia Daily Newspaper. International Journal of Linguistics, 5(4), 213-224.
  • Neocleous, M. (2012). Güvenlik, şiddet ve savaş. (E. Embel ve G.
  • Çorbacıoğlu, Çev.). Dipnot Yayınları.
  • Powers, S. M. ve Jablonski, M. M. (2015). The Real Cyber War: The Political Economy of Internet Freedom. University Of Illinois Press.
  • President, U. S. (2009). Cyberspace Policy Review: Assuring a Trusted and Resilient Information and Communications Infrastructure. https://fas.org/irp/eprint/cyber-review.pdf
  • Raab, C. D. (2012, 2005). Governing the safety state. Inaugural Lecture at the University of Edinburgh. www.prescient-project.eu/prescient/ inhalte/download/5-Raab.pdf
  • Thee, M. (1977). Militarism and militarization in contemporary international relations. Bulletin of Peace Proposal, 8(3), 296-309.
  • Thibault, P. J. (1994). Intertextuality. R.E. Asher (Ed.) The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Pergamum Press, 4, 1751-54.
  • Tsui, C. (2014). Tracing the discursive origins of the war on terror: President Clinton and the construction of new terrorism in the post-cold war era. [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi] University of Otago.
  • Ulmer, K. (2014). Cyber risks and Cyber security – risk communication and regulation strategies in the U.S. and Germany.
  • WorkinSWPBerlingPaper. www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/ contents/products/arbeitspapiere/Ulm_WP_Cyber_Risks.pdf
  • Wagner, B. (2014). The politics of internet filtering: The United Kingdom and Germany in a comparative perspective. Politics, 34(1), 58–71.
  • Williams, R. (2003). Televizyon, Teknoloji ve Kültürel Biçim. (A.U. Türkbağ, Çev.). Dost Yayınları.
  • WSIS (2005). WSIS Outcome Documents. https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/ outcome/booklet.pdf.