Kalkınma tartışmasında Avrupa-merkezcilik: Uluslararası ilişkilerde Avrupa-merkezcilik eleştirisi

This research aims to critically examine how Eurocentrism has taken place in the IR literature and especially in the development debate. Besides, it has been discussed what kind of alternative understandings have been developed and what suggestions they offer to mainstream ideas. Nevertheless, the post-development understanding that started to develop in the mid-1990s and the need to reconstruct a new concept by deconstructing the term development have been brought forward. In the light of these developments, the main question of the thesis is that are the alternatives to development or post-development thinking strong enough to replace Eurocentric development understanding. Accordingly, this study made a historical analysis of the development debates. It then examined the effects of the Eurocentric perspective in the IR literature and analyzed insights on how this one-way thinking could be improved. Finally, the transformation of Eurocentrism in the development field, the emergence of local-based alternatives to development thinking, the post-development perspective in this debate, and the criticisms of the post-development understanding were examined. This study has gathered the separate subjects in literature together, made a criticism of Eurocentrism in the IR literature and the development field, and was also critical about how feasible the alternative ideas presented against them. Therefore, this study concludes on two main arguments. Firstly, no matter how different transformations occurred historically in the development debate, it stays on the same Eurocentric path. Secondly, the second argument is that the weakest point of the Global South is not to propose a strong alternative vision or visions as against to mainstream development project.