İkinci Dünya Savaşında Türk Dış Politikası: Tarafsızlık, Diplomasi Ve Devlet Yönetimi
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2019
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Selçuk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Bu makalenin amacı İkinci Dünya Savaşında Türkiye’nin nasıl ve niçin tarafsız kaldığı konusunu yeniden değerlendirmektir. Oldukça açıktır ki ne ekonomisi ne de askeri kapasitesi, Türkiye’nin böyle bir savaşa girmesi için müsaitti. Ancak bu süreçte diplomasinin ve devlet idaresi konusunun oynadığı rol hiç de küçümsenmemelidir. Gerçekten de dönemin -zaman zaman her iki rolü de oynayan- diplomatlarının ve siyasal liderlerinin tarihsel deneyimleri, onların bu savaşa girmemelerinde önemli bir rol oynamıştır. Buna rağmen, bugün bazıları hala İkinci Dünya Savaşı sırasında Müttefikler davet ettiğinde savaşa girmiş olsaydı Türkiye’nin birtakım avantajlar sağlamış olacağını iddia etmektedir. Oysa bu araştırma açıkça göstermektedir ki bu iddialar, ekonomik ve askeri gerekçelerin yanında, ne zaman, nasıl ve hangi tarafta Türkiye savaşta yer almalıydı sorularına bir cevap verilmeden basit birer iddia olmanın ötesine geçemezler. Öte yandan, hiç şüphe yok ki kiminle müttefik olduğuna bakmaksızın, Türkiye bu savaşta yer almış olsaydı, baştan ayağa yıkılmış bir ülkeye dönüşmenin yanında, kesinlikle milyonlarca insanını da kaybetmiş olacaktı. Eğer bunun böyle olmamış olması bir başarı ise, bu başarı tarihsel deneyimlerine yaslanarak ve esnek politikalar takip ederek diplomasi ve devlet idaresi görevlerini yerine getiren dönemin liderlerine ait olmalıdır.
The aim of this article is to revisit the questions of how and why Turkey stayed neutral during the Second World War. It was obvious that neither its economy nor its military capacity was enough powerful to afford such a big war for a long time. However, the role of diplomacy and statecraft cannot be ignored in this process, too. Indeed, Turkish decision-makers as political leaders and diplomats who experienced devastating effects of many wars were not in favor of entering into any war. Although some may think or argue that if Turkey had entered the war on the side of the Allies when they began to pressure for it, it could gain a lot of advantages after the war. However, as this research article has also demonstrated, such arguments are completely groundless for three significant reasons: When, how and in which side should Turkey join the war while the policies of warring parties and the winning side of the war appeared to change from time to time until towards the end of 1944? At that time none wanted Turkey to participate actively in the war on their side. On the other hand, there is no doubt that if Turkey fought in the war, this would cost many more million lives in Turkey, in addition to a ruined country from top to down. If there was a success in this war, they mostly belonged to the leaders who played both of the roles of diplomacy and statecraft according to their abilities, connections, experiences and flexible preferences in order to keep Turkey out of the war.
The aim of this article is to revisit the questions of how and why Turkey stayed neutral during the Second World War. It was obvious that neither its economy nor its military capacity was enough powerful to afford such a big war for a long time. However, the role of diplomacy and statecraft cannot be ignored in this process, too. Indeed, Turkish decision-makers as political leaders and diplomats who experienced devastating effects of many wars were not in favor of entering into any war. Although some may think or argue that if Turkey had entered the war on the side of the Allies when they began to pressure for it, it could gain a lot of advantages after the war. However, as this research article has also demonstrated, such arguments are completely groundless for three significant reasons: When, how and in which side should Turkey join the war while the policies of warring parties and the winning side of the war appeared to change from time to time until towards the end of 1944? At that time none wanted Turkey to participate actively in the war on their side. On the other hand, there is no doubt that if Turkey fought in the war, this would cost many more million lives in Turkey, in addition to a ruined country from top to down. If there was a success in this war, they mostly belonged to the leaders who played both of the roles of diplomacy and statecraft according to their abilities, connections, experiences and flexible preferences in order to keep Turkey out of the war.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Dış Politika, Tarafsızlık, Diplomasi ve Devlet İdaresi, Foreign Policy, Neutrality, Diplomacy and Statecraft
Kaynak
Selçuk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
Sayı
47
Künye
Çalış, Ş, H., Söker, Ç. (2019). İkinci Dünya Savaşında Türk Dış Politikası: Tarafsızlık, Diplomasi Ve Devlet Yönetimi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (47), 445-463.
