JEOPOLİTİK STRATEJİ - Deneme Sınavı - 11

Geography, territory as a political construct, is also relevant from the perspective of international law as well. According to Montevideo Convention which sets out the parameters of a state spells out four aspects for a political entity to be properly called a state: defined territory, permanent people, centralized authority and sovereignty. All these aspects and characteristics are basic criteria to define the modern nation state and to distinguish it from other political entities. Both “defined” and “territory” in the term defined territory deserve close attention as they bear significance for a proper definition. Territory refers to a physical space, mostly to land. But it should be noted that territory is not an ordinary type of land and that it is a qualified and political component. As a physical space, territory is an integral element of the state which cannot possibly be separated from it.

Because it is different from an ordinary type of land, territory appears to be a significant criterion to define the state. For this reason, to make distinction between the modern nation state and the states before the arrival of nation state, the first is also referred to as territorial state. The difference is that in the definition of modern nation state, physical space is attributed to the state as an integral and indispensable element. In other words, only a state has territory which holds a political connotation and implies a monopolistic political control. In other words, a state, by definition and out of legal necessity, has to have a territory; and it is not possible to speak of a state without a defined territory.

Additionally, only one state has monopoly and control over a territory; therefore, there is connection between territory and the exclusive jurisdiction of a state. This jurisdiction and monopolistic authority by a state over a certain territory is assured under international law which, by the cardinal principle of non-intervention, protects the territorial integrity of all sovereign states. This means that territory, associated with the state and considered an inseparable part of it, is legally protected and that violations directed against its integrity lead to legal responsibility. Thus, it is fair to argue that territory holds a political, as well as legal meaning.  “Defined” complements the nature of protection and certainty ascribed to the territory under international law. “Defined territory” implies that the borders of a state are properly identified and ascertained and that their inviolability is stressed and protected by the community of states. The borders of nation states are specified with utmost certainty, often by imagined lines that exist as constructions. Ideally, natural sites are taken as points of references; but legally speaking, they are not the borders. So, it is reasonable to take a mountain that separates two states as point of reference in identifying the borders.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements above related to the concept of defined territory are correct.

Even though international law prescribes territory as a major component of statehood without adding any certain elements or attributes, the nature of the territory often determines the quality of geopolitical advantage associated with the geography. Among other things, the natural resources, proximity or remoteness to conflict areas, the climatic characteristics, neighborhood with prosperous or politically stable (or unstable) nations are all factors that contribute to the geopolitical inventory. Some of these factors might be controllable or changeable through implementation of certain policies, especially by use of innovative tools in this age of information and globalization whereas some others remain as constant and unchangeable. Innovative strategies, for instance, might be devised to make better use of natural resources which could be made an integral part of a coherent policy of industrialization and development. On the other hand, geopolitical disadvantages associated with being located in a fairly precarious area might be addressed by a constructive policy vis-à-vis the neighboring states.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements related to dynamics of geopolitics and its relevance in a changing global world in the options are correct.

Hence, it is fair to argue that in a changing world and in an era of complex interdependence, the geopolitical assets and accumulation of the state will not remain constant and unchanged. Political actors have to be creative in order to improve their geopolitical status and advantages. This tells us that geopolitics is not all about territory per se. Even though international law prescribes territory as a major component of statehood without adding any certain elements or attributes, the nature of the territory often determines the quality of geopolitical advantage associated with the geography. Among other things, the natural resources, proximity or remoteness to conflict areas, the climatic characteristics, neighborhood with prosperous or politically stable (or unstable) nations are all factors that contribute to the geopolitical inventory.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the factors in the options are among the factors that contribute to the geopolitical inventory. Some of these factors might be controllable or changeable through implementation of certain policies, especially by use of innovative tools in this age of information and globalization whereas some others remain as constant and unchangeable. Innovative strategies, for instance, might be devised to make better use of natural resources which could be made an integral part of a coherent policy of industrialization and development. On the other hand, geopolitical disadvantages associated with being located in a fairly precarious area might be addressed by a constructive policy vis-à-vis the neighboring states.

Diversification and complexity in the international affairs further led to specialization and compartmentalization in the definitions and the contents of other relevant areas and disciplines, including geopolitics. By nature, geopolitics is already associated with a number of relevant fields; but this connection and association became stronger in the era of globalization. While this could be an asset for the discipline itself, divisions have also emerged among analysts studying different aspects of geopolitics. For instance, who study the classical geopolitics, placing emphasis upon the deterministic nature of geography, are of the view that the field focuses on space, land, water and outer space because these are the vital elements for the political supremacy in the world (Cohen, 1964). For others, geopolitics is a research field that pays particular attention to not only geography but also dynamics leading up to clashes and rivalries between great powers. In fact, this is how particular strands of geopolitics came into life: the geopolitics of oil (Klare, 2009), the geopolitics of religion (Dijkink, 2006), the geopolitics of water (Selby, 2005), the geopolitics of propaganda and the geopolitics of internet (Hlihor, 2014).

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of them are strands of geopolitics led by specialization and compartmentalization in the definitions and the contents of geopolitics.

In case the community of states has developed common agreements and strong norms, sovereignty is transformed into a source of responsibility. The term responsible sovereignty refers to this novel advancement in the understanding of international politics (KiMoon, 2008). Responsible sovereignty is based on a prior idea of sovereignty as responsibility which deals with the notion of sovereignty from a normative perspective rather than a free pass for the independent states in the conduct of their foreign policies (Deng et al., 1996). This approach suggests that a state is responsible vis-à-vis its people in terms of honoring the universal human rights rules in all practices and actions and complying with its international legal and moral obligations. More concretely, the minimum requirement of fulfilling this responsibility is to comply with the humanitarian norms for legitimacy, to build capacity in an effort to protect the people against severe threats and to offer proper conditions for their survival and betterment (Falk, 2000: 60-65). Sovereignty as responsibility led to the emergence of the concept of human security which is based on the recognition of freedom from fear, freedom from want and human dignity (Gasper and Gomez, 2015).

As also udnerstood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements in the options related to responsible soverieignty are correct.

Association between geopolitics and globalization can be maintained in three different levels in the era of globalization. The first is the geopolitics of globalization. There is a need to focus on globalization as a term that can be analyzed from a geopolitical perspective. The second takes place at the national level where geopolitics develops with reference to the difference between states and can be called geopolitics of development. The third is an increasingly complex system governed by globalization which can be called “low geopolitics.” This is the type of geopolitics without consideration of military strategies but with real impacts on everyday life of the people.

As aslo understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements above related to the association between geopolitics and globalization are correct.

Within the study of geopolitics, national security, particularly the military security of the state, could be evaluated from the perspective of several major factors including historical territory, nationalities, the structure of the state, the possession of and ability to use natural, material and human resources as effectively as possible (Logunov, 1993, 20-22). In other words, these factors shape the national security issues of each nation state and significantly impact upon the formulation and realization of its national interests. Without taking geopolitics into consideration, a definition of national interest will be missing some core components.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of them are several major factors from which national security, particularly the military security of the state, could be evaluated within the study of geopolitics.

One general premise of the scholarship of international relations underlines that the international system is anarchic as there is no centralized authority to make and enforce the rules that would apply to the actions of the states. A corollary of this premise is that in such an anarchic environment, states will have to rely on their own resources to survive, often referred to in the IR literature as “self-help.” For a very long time, nation states have counted on nothing but themselves. Because every state had similar motivations and considerations, the domain of international relations has been depicted as a venue of constant warfare or power struggle.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements above related to interplay between geopolitics and interests of nation states are correct.

In the first stage of geopolitical thinking, geopolitics was understood as an objective scientific exercise whose primary reason was to offer ironclad statements on the impact of geographical location and physical terrain on the ability of states to maximize their power in international politics.

All of the items are correct.

By periodically increasing the price of oil and gas and by pushing further for the construction of alternative pipelines tying Russia to individual European countries, such as the Nord Stream II pipeline, Russia has been forcing the countries lying in its neighborhood to toe its line in foreign policy.

The kind of rivalry between the Soviet Union and Peoples’ Republic of China during the Cold War era also evinces strong doses of ideological geopolitics. 

Turkey asked western security protection against the Soviet Union in the second half of the 1940.

Third generation geopolitics began with the end of the Cold War rivalry between two opposing power blocks adopting diverging political ideologies. The fall of the Berlin Wall
in 1989, the unification of Germany in 1990 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 epitomized the end of ideological geopolitics.

The wars in the Balkans and the Caucasus during the 1990s demonstrated that the major threats to regional and global security would stem from internal conflicts rather than interstate power competitions. During this time period many states across the globe, saving the United States, decreased their military spending in proportion to their Cold War era spending and armies went through a transformation process thereby their peacekeeping and peacemaking capabilities improved.

China’s gains from the liberalcapitalist global order have mainly emanated from western sponsorship, rather than from China acting as a convicted disciple. So long as the western powers, particularly the United States, assumed that China would turn out to become a responsible stakeholder and gradually transform into a liberal democratic polity, they tolerated China’s rise and its inappropriate trade practices and non democratic political values. The West was able to endure some economic losses relative to emerging powers, so long as it had self-confidence.

In today’s international order, the ideological polarization of opposing power blocks is not as sharp and rigid as it was during the Cold War era.

The correct answer is "national."

Chinese leaders also avoid taking global responsibilities. This is a challenge mainly because the costs of maintaining global stability and providing global commons will dramatically increase absent the Chinese contribution. On the other hand such a reluctant approach to global governance might suggest that China is not resolved to replace the United States as the global hegemon.

Since the second half of the nineteenth century till the onset of the Cold War era, geopolitics was mainly an imperial exercise undertaken by great powers. Mackinder, a geographer in the United Kingdom, is considered to be the first important geopolitical thinker. Doğru cevap " A " dır.

Similarly Turkey feels itself exposed to myriad security challenges emanating from the wider Middle East due to its proximity to the region. Turkey also tries to leverage its transit country role in its relations with the European Union. One of the core arguments of those who think the European Union would do well to admit Turkey to membership is that Turkey would help lessen EU’s excessive reliance on Russian gas and oil resources. Turkey would simply connect the energy thirsty European Union members to energy abundant countries in the Caucasus, Central Asia and Middle East. Doğru cevap " B " dir.