JEOPOLİTİK STRATEJİ - Deneme Sınavı - 7

Scholars have pointed out that Venezuela, under the Chávez presidency, emerged as the strongest candidate to challenge Brazil’s regional hegemony, leading to the emergence of a new rivalry in South America. Venezuela’s active foreign policy caused both cooperation and conflict with Brazil. Venezuela’s Petróleos de Venezuela and Brazil’s Petrobras oil companies participated in a joint investment in the strategic energy sector, whereas the two countries confronted each other regarding the energy sector in Bolivia. Therefore, the correct option is C.

Reprimarisation refers to an increasing participation of agrarian and mining products in exports. Therefore, the correct option is E.

Geopolitics and geostrategy are two very closely related concepts that are difficult to differentiate. In
many cases, the concepts are used interchangeably, which leads to confusion. Geostrategy defines the relation between strategy and geography. Geostrategy then is the analysis and evaluation of geographical factors in order to define goals and strategies that will be adopted in certain cases. Therefore, the correct option is A.

Geoculture on the other hand is about the relation between cultural elements and foreign policy goals. These goals vary from global hegemony to be a more influential actor in international politics, become a regional leader or develop good bilateral relations. The cultural elements in question also vary. Although it generally refers to historical, linguistic, religious, and ethnic bonds, ideological bonds are also considered as a geocultural element. Therefore, the correct option is C.

Geoculture on the other hand is about the relation between cultural elements and foreign policy goals. These goals vary from global hegemony to be a more influential actor in international politics, become a regional leader or develop good bilateral relations. The cultural elements in question also vary. Although it generally refers to historical, linguistic, religious, and ethnic bonds, ideological bonds are also considered as a geocultural element. Therefore, the correct option is E.

Turkey tends to see itself as part of Europe and has furthered this tendency with the westernization policies it has been following since the late periods of the Ottoman Empire. As for the Turkish Republic westernization has been one of the main lines of continuity. It has positioned itself with Europe and the West from the beginning. But this has never been an easy relation for Turkey since not all groups in Turkey see Turkey as part of Europe or the West and are in favor of this inclination. Therefore, the correct option is B.

Turkish Republic neither feels the need nor has the capacity to influence the whole world and thus does not develop strategies in this scope. Its interests mostly lie with its neighboring regions and thus its strategies concern these regions as well. In that sense, Turkey is not a global actor, but a regional one, or as Brzezinski defines it a geopolitical pivot. It is also not a great power, but a medium one. Its status is defined by its geographical position and historical and cultural ties that are attached to this position. These are the dynamics that give Turkey a chance to influence its neighborhood. Thus, its capabilities do not allow Turkey to pursue a global policy. Therefore, the correct option is D.

A sustainable geostrategy must distinguish between the short-run perspective (the next five or so years), the middle term (up to twenty or so years), and the long run (beyond twenty years). Moreover, these phases must be viewed not as watertight compartments but as part of a continuum. The first phase must gradually and consistently lead into the second—indeed, be deliberately pointed toward it—and the second must then lead subsequently into the third.

Geopolitical pivots are the states whose importance is derived not from their power and motivation but rather from their sensitive location and from the consequences of their potentially vulnerable condition for the behavior of geostrategic players. Most often, geopolitical pivots are determined by their geography, which in some cases gives them a special role either in denning access to important areas or in denying resources to a significant player. In some cases, a geopolitical pivot may act as a defensive shield for a vital state or even a region. Sometimes, the very existence of a geopolitical pivot can be said to have very significant political and cultural consequences for a more active neighboring geostrategic player. Therefore, the correct option is D.

for the United States and the NATO alliance, Turkey is an indispensable country, mainly because of its geopolitical, geostrategic and geocultural position again. This was especially the case in the Cold War years. Turkey, as a member of the Western bloc, had land and sea borders with the leader of the other bloc. At a time when intercontinental missiles or satellites had not appeared on the scene, this was a great opportunity for the Western alliance and a great threat for the Eastern Bloc. Therefore, the correct option is D.

One of the most famous analyses in this context is made by Zbigniew Brzezinski, who defines Eurasia as the world’s axial supercontinent. Brzezinski’s widely discussed The Grand Chessboard, has placed Eurasia at the center of his geopolitical analysis, which seeks American hegemony in the new world order. The “chessboard” Brzezinski refers to in his analysis, is Eurasia itself. Therefore, the correct option is A.

The theory that the state could control the human and physical resources of the Eurasion landmass between Germany and central Siberia would be in a position to rule the world. The Heartland Theory was developed by British geographer Sir Halford J. Mackinder in his paper “The Geographical Pivot of History” (1904) and his best known work Democratic Ideals and Reality: A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction (1919). The heartland theory emerged from Mackinder’s detailed study of the global relationship between land and sea power.

Mackinder postulated the dominating influence of certain geographic “realities” on the course of world politics. His realities included (1) “world island” (Europe, Asia and Africa) surrounding the Eurasian “heartland” or “pivot area,” which is inaccessible from the sea; (2) its coastlands, called the “inner” or “marginal crescent,” made up of maritime powers; and (3) insular power bases composed of North and South America and Australia, called the “insular” or “outer crescent”. Based on his assumptions of the growing ascendancy of land power over sea power, Mackinder warned that “who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; who rules the World Island command the World. Mackinder advocated policies aimed at creating an equilibrium of power between the land and sea powers so that no single country would be in a position to dominate the pivot area. Therefore, the correct option is B.

Turkey
has territories on two continents; Europe and Asia,
which makes it possible to approach Turkey from the
Eurasian perspective. It stands on the intersection
of three continents; Europe, Asia and Africa. It
neighbors three regions; Middle East, Balkans,
Caucasus.

“Turkey, a post-imperial state still in the
process of redefining its identity, is pulled in
three directions: the modernists would like to
see it become a European state and thus look
to the west; the Islamists lean in the direction
of the Middle East and a Muslim community
and thus look to the south; and the historically
minded nationalists see in the Turkic peoples of
the Caspian Sea basin and Central Asia a new
mission for a regionally dominant Turkey and
thus look eastward. Each of these perspectives
posits a different strategic axis, and the clash
between them introduces for the first time
since the Kemalist revolution a measure of
uncertainty regarding Turkey’s regional role.
Moreover, Turkey itself could become at least a
partial victim of the region’s

In that sense,
Turkey is not a global actor, but a regional one, or
as Brzezinski defines it a geopolitical pivot. It is also
not a great power, but a medium one. Its status is
defined by its geographical position and historical
and cultural ties that are attached to this position.

Such Strategic Medium Powers (SMP) can
also be described as regional powers. Their
ability to influence events does not allow
them to resist major powers successfully or to
engage in armed conflicts with them. SMPs
under threat from a major power either
resort to the balance of power
by playing one major power against another
or seek protection within an alliance. This
choice is not always easy. The balance of
power can shift. or, after joining an alliance,
the SMP can find itself reduced to being a
satellite of the major power of that alliance.
Sometimes it is not within an SMPs ability to
exercise these choices because of the nature
of the international system at that particular
time or because of the circumstances of that
SMP within the international system. In
a rigid bipolar system an SMPis very likely
to be forced to adhere to one of the two
camps, especially it its geostrategic location
is considered

Turkey stabilizes the Black Sea region,
controls access from it to the Mediterranean
Sea, balances Russia in the Caucasus,
still offers an antidote to Muslim
fundamentalism, and serves as the southern
anchor for NATO. A destabilized Turkey
would be likely to unleash more violence in
the southern Balkans, while facilitating the
reimposition of Russian control over the
newly independent states of the Caucasus
(Brzezinski, 1997b: 41

The most
remarkable geocultural initiative of Turkey in the postCold War period was the establishment of Turkish
Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TIKA) in
1992 as “an implementing intermediary of Turkish
foreign policy, particularly in the countries with
whom we have shared values, as well as in many other
areas and countries.”

List of TIKA Coordination Offices
Afghanistan (3), Albania, Algeria, Azerbaijan,
Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Cameroon, Chad, Colombia, Comoros,
Croatia, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Georgia,
Guinea, Hungary, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan,
Kenya, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon,
Libya, Macedonia , Mexico , Moldova ,
Mongolia , Montenegro, Mozambique,
Myanmar, Namibia, Niger, Pakistan (2)
,Palestine Philippines, Romania, Senegal,
Serbia, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan
,Sudan, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Turkish
Republic of Northern Cyprus, Turkmenistan,
Uganda, Ukraine (2), Uzbekistan, Yemen

The “chessboard” Brzezinski refers to in his analysis, is Eurasia itself. According to Brzezinski, Eurasia is “the chessboard on which the struggle for global primacy continues to be played” and
“a power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world’s three most advanced and economically
productive regions. […] control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa’s subordination,
rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world’s central continent.”
(Brzezinski, 1997b: 31)