Bulent Aras
Bülent Aras is Visiting Researcher at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and Senior Scholar at Istanbul Policy Center. He was the academic advisor to H.E. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Davutoğlu, then Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey from 2009 to 2014. As a leading expert on Turkish foreign policy, Middle Eastern politics, and Central Asia, he has worked as a consultant for numerous organizations, such as Oxford Analytica, Microsoft, and Human Rights Watch. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the International Centre for Black Sea Studies.
Before joining IPC, Aras worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Center for Strategic Research (SAM) and served as chairman at the Diplomacy Academy between 2010 and 2013. He also taught in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Sabanci University and Department of Humanities and Social Sciences at Istanbul Technical University. In 2010, he was Senior Visiting Professor of Turkish Studies at St. Anthony’s College, Oxford. He was a research scholar at the Paris-based European Union Institute of Security Studies in the summer of 2004, at Oxford University’s St. Anthony’s College in 2003, and at Indiana University’s Center for Eurasian Studies in 1998.
Aras has published 13 books both abroad and at home. His writings include Palestinian- Israeli Peace Process and Turkey (Novascience, 1998), New Geopolitics of Eurasia and Turkey’s Position (Frankcass, 2002), Turkey and the Greater Middle East (TASAM, 2004) and, as co-editor, Oil and Geopolitics in the Caspian Sea Region (Praeger, 1999), and September 11 and World Politics (FUP: 2004).
His articles have appeared in numerous magazines and newspapers and have been translated into several languages, such as Persian, Russian and Arabic. His articles have appeared in Middle East Policy, Journal of Third World Studies, Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Third World Quarterly, Political Science Quarterly, International Journal, Futures, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Mediterranean Quarterly, Nationalism and Ethnic Policy and Central Asia/Caucasus. He wrote a weekly column on foreign policy at Sabah daily in 2009 and 2010. He is editor-in-chief of Perceptions and founding editor of Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations. He serves on the editorial boards of Turkish Studies, Journal of Balkans and Near Eastern Studies, Insight Turkey, Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, and Central Asia/Caucasus, International Law and Politics, Orta Asya ve Kafkasya Araştırmaları, Ortadoğu Etüdleri, Stratejik Öngörü.
Aras has also organized a series of conferences on several issues relating to Turkish foreign policy, security in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, and became a member of several congressional scientific committees. He contributed to the establishment of the Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies (ASAM) and the Center for Turkish-Asian Strategic Studies (TASAM).
Aras received his B.A (1994), MA (1996) and Ph.D (1999) in Political Science and International relations at Boğaziçi University.
Address: Turkey
Before joining IPC, Aras worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Center for Strategic Research (SAM) and served as chairman at the Diplomacy Academy between 2010 and 2013. He also taught in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Sabanci University and Department of Humanities and Social Sciences at Istanbul Technical University. In 2010, he was Senior Visiting Professor of Turkish Studies at St. Anthony’s College, Oxford. He was a research scholar at the Paris-based European Union Institute of Security Studies in the summer of 2004, at Oxford University’s St. Anthony’s College in 2003, and at Indiana University’s Center for Eurasian Studies in 1998.
Aras has published 13 books both abroad and at home. His writings include Palestinian- Israeli Peace Process and Turkey (Novascience, 1998), New Geopolitics of Eurasia and Turkey’s Position (Frankcass, 2002), Turkey and the Greater Middle East (TASAM, 2004) and, as co-editor, Oil and Geopolitics in the Caspian Sea Region (Praeger, 1999), and September 11 and World Politics (FUP: 2004).
His articles have appeared in numerous magazines and newspapers and have been translated into several languages, such as Persian, Russian and Arabic. His articles have appeared in Middle East Policy, Journal of Third World Studies, Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Third World Quarterly, Political Science Quarterly, International Journal, Futures, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Mediterranean Quarterly, Nationalism and Ethnic Policy and Central Asia/Caucasus. He wrote a weekly column on foreign policy at Sabah daily in 2009 and 2010. He is editor-in-chief of Perceptions and founding editor of Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations. He serves on the editorial boards of Turkish Studies, Journal of Balkans and Near Eastern Studies, Insight Turkey, Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, and Central Asia/Caucasus, International Law and Politics, Orta Asya ve Kafkasya Araştırmaları, Ortadoğu Etüdleri, Stratejik Öngörü.
Aras has also organized a series of conferences on several issues relating to Turkish foreign policy, security in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, and became a member of several congressional scientific committees. He contributed to the establishment of the Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies (ASAM) and the Center for Turkish-Asian Strategic Studies (TASAM).
Aras received his B.A (1994), MA (1996) and Ph.D (1999) in Political Science and International relations at Boğaziçi University.
Address: Turkey
less
InterestsView All (21)
Uploads
SSCI-AHCI Articles by Bulent Aras
and revolutionary and counter-revolutionary currents, among others,
are intertwined within the Arab Spring process, compelling old and
emerging regional actors to operate in the absence of a regional
order. The emergent geopolitical picture introduces the poisonous
mix of loss of state authority spiralling toward instability, defined by
sectarianism, extremism, global rivalries, and ultimately irredentism
within interdependent subregional formations. This assertion is
substantiated by detailed and specific evidence from the shifting
and multi-layered alliance formation practices of intra- and interstate
relations, and non-state and state actors. Analysis of the relations
and alliances through a dichotomous flow from domestic to regional
and regional to global also sheds light on prospective future order. A
possible future order may take shape around a new imagination of the
MENA, with porous delimitations in the form of emerging subregions.
North Africa (MENA) after the Arab Spring. The transformative
impact of the popular upheavals appeared to put an end to longterm
authoritarian regimes. Today, the region is far from stable since
authoritarian resilience violently pushed back popular demands for
good governance and is pushing to restore former state structures.
However, the collective consciousness of the popular revolts endures,
and a transformative prospect may emerge on the horizon. The chaotic
situation is the result of an ongoing struggle between those who seek
change and transformation and others in favour of the status quo
ante. A critical evaluation of the Arab Spring after five years indicates
a continuous process of recalculation and recalibration of policies and
strategies. There are alternative routes for an eventual settlement in
the MENA region, which are in competition against both regional and
transregional quests for a favourable order.
world politics under the guidance of the foreign policy vision of former Foreign Minister and current Prime Minister Ahmet Davutog˘lu. This paper analyses the extent to which Turkey’s Foreign Ministry has been able to transform itself in accordance with the new geopolitical thinking under Davutog˘lu. It focuses on the capacity building and reform of
the Foreign Ministry to understand how policymakers bridge the gap between ideas and institutions to ensure that the geopolitical perspective is an enduring and long-term project.
small state, Qatar seeks to enhance its security and sovereignty and become an
indispensable regional middle power. The Arab Spring protests have created an ideal
context for both actors to realize their geopolitical goals. However, adverse political
developments have turned most Arab Spring countries into battlegrounds wherein old
geopolitical rivalries deepened and new regional alliances were constructed. Taking Gaza,
Syria and Egypt as cases in point, this paper investigates how Ankara and Doha’s
evolving practical geopolitical reasoning and its domestic and international
representations converged to create venues for cooperation and promotion of relations
to a level of political alignment.
of politicizing the aid. While some of their key features such as flexibility, absence of conditionality, ensuring sustainability, relying on private donations and pursuing advocacy follow the mainstream peacebuilding lines, others such as culture and religion as catalysts and representing and promoting Turkey abroad demonstrate a deviation. Although the institutional consolidation of these HNGOs as a sector remains a distant goal, they are not likely to disappear given the considerable societal and political will behind theirwork. Their success depends on building a comprehensive strategy with efficient coordination and cooperation in a pluralist environment.
and revolutionary and counter-revolutionary currents, among others,
are intertwined within the Arab Spring process, compelling old and
emerging regional actors to operate in the absence of a regional
order. The emergent geopolitical picture introduces the poisonous
mix of loss of state authority spiralling toward instability, defined by
sectarianism, extremism, global rivalries, and ultimately irredentism
within interdependent subregional formations. This assertion is
substantiated by detailed and specific evidence from the shifting
and multi-layered alliance formation practices of intra- and interstate
relations, and non-state and state actors. Analysis of the relations
and alliances through a dichotomous flow from domestic to regional
and regional to global also sheds light on prospective future order. A
possible future order may take shape around a new imagination of the
MENA, with porous delimitations in the form of emerging subregions.
North Africa (MENA) after the Arab Spring. The transformative
impact of the popular upheavals appeared to put an end to longterm
authoritarian regimes. Today, the region is far from stable since
authoritarian resilience violently pushed back popular demands for
good governance and is pushing to restore former state structures.
However, the collective consciousness of the popular revolts endures,
and a transformative prospect may emerge on the horizon. The chaotic
situation is the result of an ongoing struggle between those who seek
change and transformation and others in favour of the status quo
ante. A critical evaluation of the Arab Spring after five years indicates
a continuous process of recalculation and recalibration of policies and
strategies. There are alternative routes for an eventual settlement in
the MENA region, which are in competition against both regional and
transregional quests for a favourable order.
world politics under the guidance of the foreign policy vision of former Foreign Minister and current Prime Minister Ahmet Davutog˘lu. This paper analyses the extent to which Turkey’s Foreign Ministry has been able to transform itself in accordance with the new geopolitical thinking under Davutog˘lu. It focuses on the capacity building and reform of
the Foreign Ministry to understand how policymakers bridge the gap between ideas and institutions to ensure that the geopolitical perspective is an enduring and long-term project.
small state, Qatar seeks to enhance its security and sovereignty and become an
indispensable regional middle power. The Arab Spring protests have created an ideal
context for both actors to realize their geopolitical goals. However, adverse political
developments have turned most Arab Spring countries into battlegrounds wherein old
geopolitical rivalries deepened and new regional alliances were constructed. Taking Gaza,
Syria and Egypt as cases in point, this paper investigates how Ankara and Doha’s
evolving practical geopolitical reasoning and its domestic and international
representations converged to create venues for cooperation and promotion of relations
to a level of political alignment.
of politicizing the aid. While some of their key features such as flexibility, absence of conditionality, ensuring sustainability, relying on private donations and pursuing advocacy follow the mainstream peacebuilding lines, others such as culture and religion as catalysts and representing and promoting Turkey abroad demonstrate a deviation. Although the institutional consolidation of these HNGOs as a sector remains a distant goal, they are not likely to disappear given the considerable societal and political will behind theirwork. Their success depends on building a comprehensive strategy with efficient coordination and cooperation in a pluralist environment.
policy, and associated conflict resolution capability
is to a considerable extent the result of the failure to
accommodate the rivalry between the bureaucratic
and societal-pluralist modes of policymaking. The
rivalry and inability to institutionalize either mode
has resulted in the political and institutional crises in
foreign policy. The political crisis is the direct result of
policy actors losing touch with, and to a certain extent
disregarding, societal demands for policy making,
utilizing a populist attitude in a way to reflect deepseated
divisions and polarization in the country, as well
as feeding into these divisions in order to extend one’s
domestic hold on power. The institutional crisis has
resulted from the sidelining of the bureaucracy, as well
as its loss of agency in major issues, in the wake of state
crisis and from continuous blows to the political class’
struggle against “bureaucratic tutelage” in Turkey.
Against this backdrop, this paper traces the roots of the
crisis, attempts to make sense of the twin institutional
and political crises in foreign and security policy, and
provides guidelines for the reform and reset of foreign/
security policy in Turkey.
in conflict resolution (CR). The validity of conflict
resolution depends on implementing immediate or
time-sensitive measures toward a temporary or lasting
solution. The state’s conflict resolution roles emanate
from the state’s capabilities, usage of power, and strategic
environment. This paper addresses the following
questions to make sense of the role of state in conflict
resolution in Turkey: What is the role of state in conflict
resolution? What defines this role? In what ways do the
state’s conflict resolution roles differ in domestic and
foreign policy? What are the repercussions of these
roles? It concludes that the need for change in the
state’s CR role is essential and in many ways paramount
to the provision of basic public goods such as security
and stability. The current approach harms Turkish
interests and deprives Turkey of its ability to solve
deep-rooted socio-political problems. It would be wise
for policy makers to work toward the consolidation of
democracy and rule of law in order to set the stage for
a more constructive and results-oriented, state-led CR
effort in Turkey.
Bu kitabın yazılması düşüncesi geleneksel güvenlik yaklaşımları dışı bir bakış açısı ile güvenliğin ikilemleri üzerinde yazarların yaptığı tartışmalar sonucu ortaya çıktı. Daha sonra güvenliğin açmazları üzerine teorik bir çalışmanın ülke örnekleri üzerinden genişletilmesi gerektiği üzerinde uzlaştık. Sonuçta Afganistan ve Suriye’de gerçekleştirilen alan araştırmalarıyla kitap mevcut halini aldı. Bu kitabın ortaya çıkışı bir dizi kurumsal ve entelektüel destek olmasaydı mümkün olamazdı.
Bu çalışmanın tamamlanmasında TÜBİTAK tarafından sağlanan araştırma desteği büyük bir katkıda bulunmuştur. Bu nedenle öncelikle TÜBİTAK’a sağladığı destek için teşekkür ederiz. Bununla birlikte araştırma, Işık Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Programı tarafından da desteklenmeye layık görülmüştür. Işık Üniversitesi’nin ilgili programına ve yöneticilerine araştırmaya verdikleri önem ve destekten dolayı teşekkür ederiz. Afganistan alan araştırması Dışişleri Bakanlığı Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezinin (SAM) Afganistan Dışişleri Bakanlığı bünyesinde gerçekleştirilen bir eğitim programı ile ilgili görevlendirmesi vesilesiyle gerçekleştirildi. SAM Başkanı Bülent Karadeniz ve bu kuruma teşekkür ederiz. Suriye alan araştırması ise Türk İşbirliği ve Kalkınma Ajansı’nın (TİKA) desteği ile gerçekleşti. Dönemin TİKA Başkanı Hakan Fidan ve Başkan Yardımcısı Mustafa Şahin’e teşekkür ederiz.
Çalışmanın çeşitli aşamalarında ulaşılan sonuçlar uluslararası ilişkiler alanı ile ilgili çeşitli seminer ve toplantılarda tartışılmıştır. Türk-Asya Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi (TASAM) ve ARI Hareketi düzenledikleri konferanslarda sonuçların değerlendirilmesi ve ilgili camiaya ulaştırılması için imkân sağladılar. Bu katkılarından dolayı Işık Üniversitesi Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü, ARI Hareketi ve TASAM’daki meslektaşlarımız ve uzmanlara teşekkür ederiz. Değerli görüşleriyle bize yön veren Afganistan’dan Büyükelçi Aziz Arianfar, Afgan Dışişleri Bakanlığı uzmanları Yasin Rasuli ve Wahidullah Furmuli, Afganistan Ticaret Odası Başkanı Prof.Dr. Hamidullah Faruki, Suriye’den İnsan Hakları Derneği Başkanı Dr. Redwan Ziadeh, ekonomist Samir Seifan, değerli akademisyen Dr. Sami Moubayed, Şark Araştırmaları Merkezi Başkanı Samir Taqi, Şam Üniversitesi öğretim üyesi Doç. Dr. Mehmet Yuva ve isimlerinin açıklanmasını istemeyen diğer dostlarımıza teşekkürü borç biliriz. Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Toplum Araştırmaları (SETA) Başkanı Dr. İbrahim Kalın’a çalışma ile ilgili yapıcı yorumları ve kitabın SETA yayınları arasından çıkmasını sağladığı için teşekkür ediyoruz.
Bu kitapta yer verilen düşünceler bize destek veren kurumları ve görüşmeler gerçekleştirdiğimiz kişileri hiçbir şekilde bağlamamakta ve temsil etmemektedir. Tüm sorumluluk yazarlara aittir. Ayrıca doğal olarak bu destek ve katkılara karşın hata ve konunun özelliği nedeniyle kaçınılmaz olarak var olduğuna inandığımız eksikliklerin sorumluluğu sadece bize aittir.
Bülent Aras & Şule Toktaş
Ocak 2008
İstanbul""""
1. BİRİNCİ BÖLÜM: GÜVENLİK ÇALIŞMALARINDA GÜNCEL YAKLAŞIMLAR: ULUSAL GÜVENLİĞİN TANIMLANMASINDA VE GÜVENLİKLEŞTİRME SÜREÇLERİ
1.1 GİRİŞ
1.2 GÜVENLİKLEŞTİRME, ULUSAL GÜVENLİK VE GÜVENLİK KÜLTÜRÜ
Şekil 1. Güvenlikleştirme Süreci
1.3 GÜVENLİĞİN TANIMINDAKİ TARİHSEL DÖNÜŞÜM VE YENİ GÜVENLİK ANLAYIŞI
1.4 ÇEŞİTLİ DÜŞÜNCE EKOLLERİNE GÖRE GÜVENLİĞİN TANIMI
1.4.1 Geleneksel Güvenlik Çalışmaları: Realist ve Neo-Realist Yaklaşımlar
1.4.2 Eleştirel Güvenlik Okulu
1.4.3 İngiliz Güvenlik Okulu
1.4.4 Yapısalcılar ve Post-Yapısalcılar
1.4.5 Kopenhag Okulu
1.4.6 Feminist Güvenlik Çalışmaları
1.5 ULUSAL GÜVENLİK VE ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİ: YENİ BİR TEORİK ÇERÇEVE
1.5.1 Aktör-Yapı İlişkisi: Ulusal Güvenliğin Oluştuğu Çoğulcu Ortamın İnşası
1.5.2 Güvenlik Kültüründe Araştırma Merkezleri
1.6 SONUÇ
2. İKİNCİ BÖLÜM: ULUSAL GÜVENLİK, GÜVENLİKLEŞTİRME VE ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİ: TÜRKİYE ÜZERİNE BİR ÇALIŞMA
2.1 GİRİŞ
2.2 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN TANIMI VE GÖREVLERİ
2.3 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN ÇEŞİTLERİ
2.4 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN TARİHÇESİ: KUZEY AMERİKA DENEYİMİ VE DİĞER BÖLGELER
2.5 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN ULUSLARARASILAŞMASI
2.6 TÜRKİYE’DE ULUSAL GÜVENLİK VE GÜVENLİKLEŞTİRME: GELENEKSEL YAKLAŞIMLAR VE YENİ DİNAMİKLER
2.6.1 Türkiye’de Geleneksel Güvenlik Anlayışı
2.6.2 Geleneksel Güvenlik Anlayışında Değişimler
2.7 TÜRKİYE’DE ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİ
2.7.1 Türkiye’de Araştırma Merkezlerinin Tarihsel Gelişimi
2.7.2 Araştırma Merkezlerinin Güncel Durumu
2.8 SAHA ÇALIŞMASI: ARAŞTIRMANIN KONUSU, KAPSAMI VE YÖNTEMİ
2.8.1 Türk-Asya Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi (TASAM)
2.8.2 Türkiye Ekonomik ve Sosyal Etütler Vakfı (TESEV)
2.8.3 Marmara Grubu Stratejik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Vakfı
2.8.4 Arı Grubu
2.8.5 Avrasya Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi (ASAM)
2.8.6 Dış Politika Enstitüsü
2.8.7 Liberal Düşünce Derneği (LDD)
2.8.8 Uluslararası Stratejik Araştırma Kurumu (USAK)
2.8.9 Siyasi, Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Araştırmalar Vakfı (SETA)
2.8.10 Türkiye Ulusal Güvenlik Stratejileri Araştırma Merkezi (TUSAM)
2.8.11 Global Strateji Enstitüsü / Orta Doğu Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi (ORSAM)
2.8.12 İktisadi Kalkınma Vakfı (İKV)
2.8.13 Bilge Adamlar Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi (BİLGESAM)
2.8.14 Heinrich Böll Vakfı (Heinrich Böll Stiftung)
3. ÜÇÜNCÜ BÖLÜM: SAHA ARAŞTIRMASI BULGULARI I: ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ YÖNETİCİLERİ VE SEKTÖRÜN GENEL YAPISI
3.1 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN KURULUŞ YAPISI: HUKUKİ STATÜ
3.2 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNDE İDARİ YAPI VE İNSAN KAYNAKLARI
3.3 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN BÜTÇE BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ VE MALİ KAYNAKLARI
3.4 FAALİYETLER
3.4.1 Faaliyet Alanı
3.4.2 Faaliyetlerin Amacı
3.4.3 Faaliyetlerin Karar Verilme Süreci
3.4.4 Faaliyetlerin Hedef Kitlesi
3.5 SEKTÖRÜN İŞLEYİŞİ: ARAŞTIRMA SİPARİŞLERİ, İHALELER VE PROJELER
3.6 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİ ARASINDA İŞBİRLİĞİ VE REKABET
3.7 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN YURTDIŞI İLİŞKİLERİ
3.8 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN BAŞARI ÖLÇÜTLERİ VE KURUMSAL İTİBAR/GÜVENİRLİK KAYNAKLARI
3.9 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN SİYASİ GÜNDEMİ VE KARARLARI ETKİLEME POTANSİYELİ
3.10 GÜVENLİĞİN YAPIMINDA ÇOĞULLUK
3.11 ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİNİN YAŞADIĞI GÜÇLÜKLER
4. DÖRDÜNCÜ BÖLÜM: ALAN ARAŞTIRMASI BULGULARI II: ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ UZMANLARI VE TÜRKİYE’DE GÜVENLİK KÜLTÜRÜ
4.1 GÜVENLİK SEKTÖRÜNÜN AKTÖRLERİ: MEVCUT VE İDEAL DURUM 4.1.1 Mevcut Durum: Türkiye’de Ulusal Güvenliğin Aktörleri Kimlerdir?
4.1.2 İdeal Durum: Türkiye’de Ulusal Güvenliğin Aktörleri Kimler Olmalıdır?
4.2 TÜRKİYE'DE GÜVENLİK POLİTİKALARININ BELİRLENME SÜRECİ: MEVCUT VE İDEAL DURUM
4.2.1 Güvenlik Politikalarının Belirlenmesinde Var Olan Resim
4.2.2 Güvenlik Politikalarının Belirmesinde İdeal Tasavvuru
4.3 GÜVENLİK POLİTİKALARININ YÖNTEM VE DENETİM MEKANİZMALARI
4.4 KÜRESELLEŞME VE ULUS DEVLETİN GELECEĞİ
4.5 TÜRK SİLAHLI KUVVETLERİ VE ULUSAL GÜVENLİK
4.6 İÇ TEHDİT/DÜŞMAN EKSENLİ ULUSAL GÜVENLİK
4.7 DIŞ DÜŞMAN EKSENLİ ULUSAL GÜVENLİK
4.8 AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ ÜYELİK SÜRECİ, REFORMLAR VE ULUSAL GÜVENLİK
4.9 SAVAŞ SEBEPLERİ (CASUS BELLİ): SÖYLEM VE REALİTE
4.10 KUZEY IRAK’IN STATÜSÜ VE KÜRT DEVLETİ KONUSU
4.11 TÜRKİYE’DE KÜRT SİYASETİNİN ULUSAL GÜVENLİĞE ETKİSİ
4.12 İRAN VE NÜKLEER SİLAHLANMA
4.13 NATO VE TÜRKİYE’NİN ULUSAL GÜVENLİĞİ
4.14 TÜRKİYE-ERMENİSTAN İLİŞKİLERİ
4.15 TÜRKİYE-YUNANİSTAN İLİŞKİLERİ
4.16 KIBRIS
4.17 TÜRKİYE-ABD İLİŞKİLERİ
5. BEŞİNCİ BÖLÜM: TÜRKİYE’DE GÜVENLİK KÜLTÜRÜ VE ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZLERİ
5.1 KÜRESEL ÇAĞDA TÜRKİYE'NİN ULUSAL GÜVENLİĞİ MESELESİNİ YENİDEN DÜŞÜNMEK
5.2 TÜRKİYE’DE GELENEKSEL GÜVENLİK ANLAYIŞININ DEĞİŞİM DİNAMİKLERİ
5.3 ARAŞTIRMA BULGULARININ GENEL ÖZETİ
5.4 SONUÇ"
area of health aid.
NGOs play a substantial role.