Security Sector Governance: Turkey and Europe - DCAF

ç›kmas› durumunda “yeni güvenlik”
anlay›fl›na olan ihtiyaç da ortadan kalkard›.
Nitekim 11 Eylül sald›r›lar› sonras›nda bunu
iddia edenler olmufltur. Onlara verilebilecek
en uygun cevap, yeni güvenli¤in idealist
beyinlerin bir ürünü olmad›¤›d›r. “Yeni
güvenlik”, küreselleflmeye bütüncül bir
güvenlik yaklafl›m› ile cevap verilmesi
gere¤inin fark›na varan gerçekçi beyinlerin
ürünüdür. Güvenlik aç›s›ndan bak›ld›¤›nda,
küreselleflme, yeni tehditlerin oluflumuna
ivme kazand›ran ve baz› eski tehditleri
görmezden gelmeyi güçlefltiren bir süreç
olarak karfl›m›za ç›kmaktad›r. 41 Bu ortamda
gerçekçilikten as›l uzaklaflanlar, güvenli¤in
temel unsurlar›n›n de¤iflmezli¤ini varsayarak
geleneksel yaklafl›mlarla yetinmeyi
deneyenlerdir.
“Yeni güvenlik” yaklafl›m›n›n
flekillenmesinde kuflkusuz idealizmin de bir
nebze rolü olmufltur -idealler olmadan pek az
geliflme ve yenilenme olur-. Fakat duvarlar›n
y›k›lmas›yla küreselleflmenin ivme
kazanmas›, yani nesnel koflullar›n de¤iflmesi
bu süreçte çok daha büyük bir rol oynam›flt›r.
Çünkü küreselleflme, cevaplar›n› bildi¤imizi
sand›¤›m›z baz› sorular üzerinde yeniden
düflünmeyi zorunlu hale getirmifltir. fiu
sorular buna çok iyi birer örnektir:
“Güvenlik nedir?”, “kimin içindir?”, “nas›l
sa¤lan›r/sa¤lanmal›d›r?”, “kimin güvenli¤ine
(devletin mi, yurttafl›n m›, üzerinde
yaflad›¤›m›z gezegenin ve gelecek nesillerin
mi?) öncelik verilmelidir?”
fiimdiye kadar “yeni güvenlik” yaklafl›m›n›n
nas›l ortaya ç›kt›¤›n› aç›klad›m. fiimdi bu
yaklafl›m›n temel niteliklerinin ne oldu¤una
dönece¤im. Bunu da “yeni güvenlik”in ne
olmad›¤›ndan hareket ederek yapaca¤›m.
“Yeni Güvenlik” Ne De¤ildir?
“Yeni güvenlik” denildi¤inde ço¤unlukla,
eskinin askeri-odakl› (yani askeri tehditlere
41 Clark, Ian, 1997, Globalisation and Fragmentation: International Relations
Theory in the Twentieth Century, Oxford University Press, Oxford, s. 107-126;
Booth, Ken, 1998, ‘Conclusion: Security Within Transformation’, Ken Booth (der.),
Statecraft and Security: The Cold War and Beyond içinde, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, s. 338-353; Guéhenno, Jean-Marie, 1998/1999, ‘The Impact of
Globalisation on Strategy,’ Survival, cilt 40, say› 4, s. 5-19.
after the 9/11 attacks. The best answer to these
people is that the new security approach is
not a product of idealist thinking. The new
security approach is a creation of realist
thinkers who see the necessity of countering
globalization with a holistic security
approach. From the point of view of security,
globalization emerges as a process that has
accelerated the development of new threats
and that has made it difficult to overlook
some old threats. 41 In such an atmosphere, the
ones who stray from reality are those who
make do with a traditional approach
assuming that the basic elements of security
are not in need of modification.
Certainly, idealism played a role in the
formation of the new security concept; very
little transformation is possible without
ideals. However, the momentum
globalization gained after the walls came
down, in other words, the change in objective
circumstances has played a bigger role.
Because globalization led us to rethink about
the answers of some questions that we
thought we knew. Some of these questions
are, “What is security?”, “Who is it for?”,
“How can and should it be provided?”, and
“Whose security has priority (the state, the
citizen, the planet we live in, or future of
generations)?”
So far, I explained how the new security
approach emerged. Now I will go back to its
basic characteristics. My starting point will
be what new security is not.
What “New Security” is Not?
When the term “new security” is used, it is
usually taken as the expansion of militaryfocused
security (i.e. the kind of security that
41 Clark, Ian, 1997, Globalisation and Fragmentation: International Relations
Theory in the Twentieth Century, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 107-126;
Booth, Ken, 1998, ‘Conclusion: Security Within Transformation,’ in Statecraft and
Security: The Cold War and Beyond, Ken Booth (eds.), Cambridge University
Pres, Cambridge, pp. 338-353; Guéhenno, Jean-Marie, 1998/1999, ‘The Impact of
Globalisation on Strategy,’ Survival, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 5-19.
49