Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Kaos, Karmaşıklık ve Liderlik 2020 Disiplinlerarası Perspektiften Doğrusal Olmayan Dinamiklerin Uygulanması, Emir Vajzovi´c,Sefika Sule Erçetin,Suay Nilhan Açıkalın, Editör, Springer, London/Berlin , Zug, ss.291-315, 2021
This research is based on explaining the dynamics that led the Iran, Russia
and Turkey to initiate Astana Process within the framework of the Syrian CivilWar’s
changing dynamics. The article intends to combine power politicswith the “complexity”
paradigm. Linear ontology is problematic in explaining the changing dynamics.
On the other hand, the complexity paradigm explains non-linear processes derived
from its ontological foundation. Especially the variety and diversity of actors, their
interconnection, interdependence, and co-adaptation to the situation can be a solution
against the reductionism of this phenomenon. Actors in the Syrian crisis are very
diverse, and it can be observed that actors like ISIS can profoundly affect the policies
in this process, and the Syrian issue can affect varied actors’ security and foreign policies
that are also based on power competition. Complexity paradigm assumes system
as complex, more dynamic and living that many actors (which are not exogenous as
closed units) interact with many feedback loops; thus the outcome of the events may
not be predicted. IR is also impacted by many various parameters and variables which
are interconnected and interdependent, indeed, also the main actors in the system
cannot be limited by only states which are socializing and affected by the structure
in their interactions considering the critical impact of the substate factors, transnational
terrorist groups, and many other variable causes as well as their interactions in
the international changing and co-evolutionary dynamics. Russia, Turkey, and Iran
(the guarantors of the Astana Process) have followed different policies and demonstrated
divergent outlooks regarding the crisis. Indeed the priorities and set agendas
differed from one another as well as objectives to pursue in the disorder occurred
by fragmented and diversified dynamics in Syria. However “unpredictable” events
of changing dynamics resulted in diversification of states’ agendas. The prolongation
of the civil war led to the introduction of new actors along with it, and especially
the states sharing the border with Syria were also exposed to new threats. It
can be seen that with the emergence of ISIS and Russian activism in the Syrian
complexity, especially her intervention in Syria as well as other actors’ policies on
this complexity, the regional and global powers have also co-adapted their policieson the changing dynamics. This co-adaptation also derives from the intertwined
causalities in the complexity which is between the order and disorder. The Astana
process is also an expression of this co-adaptation in Iranian, Russian and Turkish
policies in Syrian Complexity. The complexity paradigm offers an alternative framework
in order to understand the process-oriented interconnected power struggle in
disorder. The characteristics of the “processes” in the Syrian disorder symbolizes the
fracturing component in the power struggle that brings non-linear orientation. The
power struggle shaped by the non-linear dynamics by the time and processes in the
changing dynamics brings about flexibility in the behaviors of the actors in order to
maintain their initial priorities in their foreign policies or their main objectives in
the changing dynamics. That results in the co-evolutionary dynamics in the interactions
between the relative power distributed actors restrained or allowed activism in
structure, and between the actors and structure that co-shaped each other in the area.