Date

2021-08-01

Author

Çoban, Mehmet İlbey

Metadata

Show full item record

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Item Usage Stats

207
views

0
downloads

Cite This

This research is based on explaining the dynamics that led the Iran, Russiaand Turkey to initiate Astana Process within the framework of the Syrian CivilWar’schanging 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 derivedfrom its ontological foundation. Especially the variety and diversity of actors, theirinterconnection, interdependence, and co-adaptation to the situation can be a solutionagainst the reductionism of this phenomenon. Actors in the Syrian crisis are verydiverse, and it can be observed that actors like ISIS can profoundly affect the policiesin this process, and the Syrian issue can affect varied actors’ security and foreign policiesthat are also based on power competition. Complexity paradigm assumes systemas complex, more dynamic and living that many actors (which are not exogenous asclosed units) interact with many feedback loops; thus the outcome of the events maynot be predicted. IR is also impacted by many various parameters and variables whichare interconnected and interdependent, indeed, also the main actors in the systemcannot be limited by only states which are socializing and affected by the structurein their interactions considering the critical impact of the substate factors, transnationalterrorist groups, and many other variable causes as well as their interactions inthe international changing and co-evolutionary dynamics. Russia, Turkey, and Iran(the guarantors of the Astana Process) have followed different policies and demonstrateddivergent outlooks regarding the crisis. Indeed the priorities and set agendasdiffered from one another as well as objectives to pursue in the disorder occurredby fragmented and diversified dynamics in Syria. However “unpredictable” eventsof changing dynamics resulted in diversification of states’ agendas. The prolongationof the civil war led to the introduction of new actors along with it, and especiallythe states sharing the border with Syria were also exposed to new threats. Itcan be seen that with the emergence of ISIS and Russian activism in the Syriancomplexity, especially her intervention in Syria as well as other actors’ policies onthis complexity, the regional and global powers have also co-adapted their policieson the changing dynamics. This co-adaptation also derives from the intertwinedcausalities in the complexity which is between the order and disorder. The Astanaprocess is also an expression of this co-adaptation in Iranian, Russian and Turkishpolicies in Syrian Complexity. The complexity paradigm offers an alternative frameworkin order to understand the process-oriented interconnected power struggle indisorder. The characteristics of the “processes” in the Syrian disorder symbolizes thefracturing component in the power struggle that brings non-linear orientation. Thepower struggle shaped by the non-linear dynamics by the time and processes in thechanging dynamics brings about flexibility in the behaviors of the actors in order tomaintain their initial priorities in their foreign policies or their main objectives inthe changing dynamics. That results in the co-evolutionary dynamics in the interactionsbetween the relative power distributed actors restrained or allowed activism instructure, and between the actors and structure that co-shaped each other in the area.

URI

https://hdl.handle.net/11511/92331

Collections

Department of International Relations, Book / Book chapter