Kimlik-Güvenlik İlişkisini Anlamak: Toplumsal Kimlik, Sosyal Psikoloji ve Toplumlar-Arası Güvenlik İkilemi

Soğuk Savaş ve 11 Eylül sonrası dönem, dünya siyasetinde ve Uluslararası İlişkiler disiplininde yeni tartışmaların ve yeni yaklaşımların yolunu açtığı gibi, Güvenlik Çalışmaları alanında da yeni arayışların ortaya çıkmasına sebep olmuştur. Bu çalışma, Kopenhag Okulu’nun güvenlik anlayışını genişleten ve derinleştiren yaklaşımı altında; uluslararası ilişkilerin en köklü kavramlarından olan güvenlik ikilemini, kimlik güvenliği perspektifiden ele almakta ve “toplumsal/toplumlar arası güvenlik ikilemi” kuramı ışığında yeniden değerlendirmektedir. Çalışmanın iki iddiası vardır. Birincisi, toplumlar arası çatışmayı anlamak bir bakıma kimlik dinamiklerini anlamak olduğundan, sosyal psikoloji disiplini alanına girilmesi kaçınılmazdır. Bu yüzden çalışma disiplinler arası bir yaklaşımla toplumsal güvenlik ikilemini çözümlemekte ve kimlik güvensizliğinin nasıl ortaya çıktığını bütüncül bir yaklaşımla irdelemektedir. İkincisi, bu çalışmaya göre Paul Roe tarafından geliştirilmiş olan toplumsal güvenlik ikileminin ortaya çıkma aşamalarında bir boşluk/geçişsizlik vardır. Mevcut çalışma, bu boşluğu sosyal psikoloji disiplininden bir kavram -cepheleşme- ile doldurmayı önermektedir.

К пониманию взаимосвязи «идентичность-безопасность»: социальная идентичность, социальная психология и дилемма межобщественной безопасности

Мировая политика после «холодной войны» и после 11 сентября открыла многообещающие новые направления исследований, дискуссий и подходов. Эта статья посвящена одному конкретному направлению; а именно, концепции социальной безопасности Копенгагенской школы и переоценке одной из самых старых концепций в исследованиях безопасности: дилемма безопасности в контексте взаимосвязи идентичности и безопасности. В статье есть две установки. Во-первых, изучение социальных конфликтов требует изучения динамики групповой идентичности и посещения дисциплины социальной психологии. Используя такой междисциплинарный подход, статья предлагает лучшее понимание динамики социальной нестабильности и незащищенности личности. В этом контексте он критически связан с теорией Пола Роу о дилемме межобщественной безопасности. Во-вторых, в статье утверждается, что подход дилеммы межобщественной безопасности имеет пробел в его четырехсторонней аналитической структуре. Чтобы восполнить этот пробел, в настоящем исследовании используется промежуточная переменная, новая концепция, основанная на социальной психологии, а именно «конфронтация», чтобы лучше объяснить, почему общества конфликтуют.

Kaynakça

Abulof, Uriel (2009). “Small Peoples: Th Existential Uncertainty of Ethnonational Communities”. International Studies Quarterly 53: 227-248.

Aktürk, Şener (2012). Regimes of Ethnicity and Nationhood in Germany, Russia, and Turkey. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Azar, Edward (1990). Th Management of Protracted Social Conflct: Thory and Cases. Aldershot: Dartmouth.

Balci, Ali ve Tuncay Kardas (2012) “Th Changing Dynamics of Turkey’s Relations with Israel: An Analysis of’Securitization”. Insight Turkey 14 (2): 99-120.

Balci, Ali (2017). Writing the World into Counter-Hegemony: Identity, Power, and ‘foreign policy’ in Ethnic Movements. International Relations 31 (4): 466-483.

Bar-Tal, Daniel vd. (1989). Stereotyping and Prejudice. New York: Springer.

Bar-Tal, Daniel (1990). “Causes and Consequences of Delegitimization: Models of Conflct and Ethnocentrism”. Journal of Social Issues 46: 65-81.

Brewer, Marilyn B. (1991). “Th Social Self: On Being the Same and Diffrent at the Same Time”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17 (5): 475-482.

Boulding, Kenneth (1969). “National Images and International Systems”. International Politics and Foreign Policy: A Reader in Research Thory. Ed. N. Rosenau. New York: Free Press.

Buzan, Barry (1991). People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Studies in the Post-Cold War Era. Boulder: Lynnne Rienner.

Buzan, Barry (1993). “Societal Security, State Security and Internationalization”. Identity, Migration and the New Security Agendas in Europe. London: Pinter

Buzan, Barry, Ole Waever ve Jaap de Wilde (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. London: Lynne Reinner.

Buzan, Barry ve Lene Hansen (2009). Th Evolution of International Security Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Campbell, Donald (1965. “Ethnocentric and Other Altruistic Motives”. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Ed. D. Levine. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Cohen, Raymond (1978). “Theat Perception in International Crisis”. Political Science Quarterly 93 (1): 93-107.

Deutsch, Morton (1973). Th Resolution of Conflct: Constructive and Destructive Processes. London: Yale University Press.

Ersoy, Tuğçe (2018) “İsrailli Olmak: Kolektif Bir Kimlik Geliştirmenin Zorlukları”. Türkiye Ortadoğu Çalışmaları Dergisi 5 (1): 73-100.

Ersoy Ceylan, Tuğçe (2019). “19. Yüzyıl Sonunda Filistin’de Arap-Yahudi Karşılaşmasının Bir İncelemesi: Komşudan Hasıma Dönüşümün Tarihsel Sosyolojisi”. Journal of Islamicjerusalem Studies 19 (3): 293-316.

Fisher, Ronald J. (1990). Th Social Psychology of Intergroup and International Conflct Resolution. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Gross Stein, Janice (2013). “Theat Perception in International Relations”. Th Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology. Ed. Leonie Huddy, David O. Sears and Jack S. Levy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Huysmans, Jef (1998). “Th Question of Limit: Desecuritization and the Aesthetics of Horror in Political Realism”. Millenium: Journal of International Studies 27 (3): 569-589.

Huysmans, Jef (1998). “Security! What do you mean? From concept to thick signifir”. European journal of international relations 4 (2): 226-255.

Kardaş, Tuncay (2007) “Güvenlik: Kimin Güvenliği ve Nasıl?”. Uluslararası Politikayı Anlamak:‘Ulus-Devlet’ten Küreselleşmeye. Der. Zeynep Dagı. İstanbul: Alfa Yay.

Kardaş, Tuncay (2012) “No Laughing Matter: Visualizing Turkey’s Ergenekon in Political Cartoons”. Middle East Critique 21 (2): 203-223.

Kardaş, Tuncay ve Ali Balci (2016) “Inter-societal Security Trilemma in Turkey: Understanding the Failure of the 2009 Kurdish Opening”. Turkish Studies 17 (1): 155-180.

Kardaş, Tuncay ve Murat Yesiltaş (2017) “Rethinking Kurdish Geopolitical Space: the Politics of Image, Insecurity and Gender”. Cambridge Review of International Affirs 30 (2-3): 256-282.

Kardas, Tuncay ve Ali Balci (2019) “Understanding the July 2016 Coup: Th Contemporary Security Dilermma in Turkey”. Digest of Middle Eastern Studies 28 (1): 144-163.

Korostelina, Karina V. (2007). Social Identity and Conflct: Structures, Dynamics and Implications. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

Leonardelli, Geoffey J. vd (2010). “Optimal Distinctiveness Thory: A Framework for Social Identity and Intergroup Relations”. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 43: 63-113.

McSweeny, Bill (2004). Security, Identity, Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Miş, Nebi (2011). “Güvenlikleştirme Teorisi ve Siyasal Olanın Güvenlikleştirilmesi”. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi 6 (2): 345-381.

Peoples Columba ve Nick Vaughan-Williams (2010). Critical Security Studies: An Introduction. London: Routledge.

Roe, Paul (2005). Ethnic Violence and Societal Security Dilemma. London: Routledge.

Roe, Paul (1999). “Th Intrastate Security Dilemma: Ethnic Conflct as A Tragedy?”. Journal of Peace Research 36 (2): 183-202.

Roe, Paul (2002).“Misperception and Ethnic Conflct: Transylvania’s Societal Security Dilemma”. Review of International Studies 28: 57-74.

Rumelili, Bahar (2015) “Identity and Desecuritisation: the Pitfalls of Conflting Ontological and Physical Security”. Journal of International Relations and Development 18 (1): 52-74.

Spears, Russell (2011). “Group Identities: Th Social Identity Perspective”. Handbook of Identity Thory and Research. Ed. S. J. Schwartz vd. London: Springer.

Stephan, Walter S. ve Cookie Stephan (2000). “An Integrated Theat Thory of Prejudice”. Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination. Ed. S. Oskamp. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tajfel, Henri ve John C. Turner (1979). “An Integrative Thory of Intergroup Conflct”. Th Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Ed. W. G. Austin ve S. Worchel. Belmont: Brooks.

Tajfel, Henri ve John C. Turner (1979). “Th Social Identity Thory of Intergroup Behavior”. Th Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Ed. W. G. Austin and S. Worchel. Belmont: Brooks.

Tang, Shiping (2008). “Fear in International Politics: Two Positions”. International Studies Review 10: 451-471.

Thiler, Tobias (2003). “Societal Security and Social Psychology”. Review of International Studies 29 (2): 249-268.

Turner, John C. et al. (1987). Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self Categorization Thory. Oxford: Blackwell.

Van Rythoven, Eric (2015). “Learning to Feel, Learning to Fear? Emotions, Imaginaries and Limits in the Politics of Securitization”. Security Dialogue 46 (5): 458-475.

Waever, Ole vd. (1993). Identity, Migration and the New Security Agendas in Europe. London: Pinter.

Waever, Ole vd. (1993). “Societal Security: Th Concept”. Identity, Migration and the New Security Agendas in Europe. London: Pinter.

Waever, Ole vd. (1995). “Securitization and Desecuritization”. On Security. Ed. Ronnie Lipshutz. New York: Columbia University Press.

Waever, Ole vd. (1996). “European Security Identities”. Journal of Common Market Studies 34 (1): 103-132.

Warning, Martina ve Tuncay Kardaş (2011) “Th Impact of Changing Islamic Identity in Turkeys New Foreign Policy”. Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations 10 (2-3): 123-140.

Williams, Michael (2003). “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics”. International Studies Quarterly 47: 511-531.

Williams, Michael (1998). “Modernity, Identity and Security: A Comment on the Copenhagen Controversy”. Review of International Studies 24: 435.

Zur, Ofer (1991). “Th Love of Hating: Th Psychology of Enmity”. History of European Ideas 13 (4): 345-369.

Kaynak Göster