Search

Begin New Search Topic Regional Power Political Geography Turkey

1. Turkey’s Vision Transforms Post-Assad Syria

Author:
Hay Ertan Cohen Yanarocak
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Ankara aims to establish lasting influence through military expansion, strategic infrastructure projects, and economic agreements, including maritime treaties. Through its assertive Neo-Ottomanist policies Ankara aims become the primary architect of Syria’s future while countering rival powers like Iran and Russia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Infrastructure, Bashar al-Assad, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Syria

2. Turkey Wants to Stitch Iraq and Syria Back Together (Part 2)

Author:
Soner Cagaptay
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Ankara’s push for “soft recentralization” in Iraq will likely include more intensive efforts to establish the Development Road and prioritize Baghdad’s interests, though without abandoning the Kurdistan Region. As discussed in Part 1 of this PolicyWatch, Turkey’s Syria strategy is rather circuitous, potentially involving simultaneous negotiations with the Assad regime and the United States while running the risk of damaging relations with Washington if the two governments fail to coordinate their moves. In contrast, Ankara’s Iraq strategy—which boils down to promoting Turkish money over Iranian guns—is more straightforward and likely to receive U.S. backing. To this end, Ankara has conceived the Development Road, a proposed trade network that would run across Iraq and Turkey, connecting Asian and European markets via the Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Initially, the project ran counter to the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), a U.S.-proposed route stretching from India through the Arabian Peninsula and Levant to Europe. Yet the Gaza war and ongoing Houthi maritime attacks have raised security concerns about commercial shipping through the Red Sea, suddenly boosting the prospects of the Development Road at IMEC’s expense. With Gulf money behind the project, Turkish policymakers predict the Development Road’s initial routes could open as early as 2027. Washington should consider throwing its support behind this initiative as well, particularly if it needs to counterbalance Iranian influence in Baghdad following a full or partial U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Iraq, Turkey, Middle East, and Syria

3. Transatlantic Policies on China: Is There a Role for Türkiye?

Author:
Sinan Ülgen and Temur Umarov
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Türkiye is an important transatlantic actor in Sino-Western competition. It can add value to Western efforts aimed at synchronizing policies toward a rising China. And yet, at present, Ankara’s policies on China are not harmonized with those of its partners in the West.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Transatlantic Relations, Strategic Competition, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
China, Turkey, Middle East, and Asia

4. Turkey’s New Foreign Policy: Ankara’s Ambitions, Regional Responses, and Implications for the United States

Author:
Aaron Stein
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
Abstract:
For the past century, Turkey’s foreign policy has been driven by the need to preserve the achievements of the Lausanne Treaty in the face of often serious threats from major powers. As a result, Turkey was a predominantly status quo country, and its relations with neighboring states were largely shaped by its place in broader geopolitical struggles. With the end of the Cold War, however, and the subsequent growth of Turkey’s economic, military and diplomatic strength, this has changed. Turkish foreign policy has begun to focus on reshaping the regional order in accordance with its growing desire for influence. Going forward, the nature of Ankara’s efforts, and the response they provoke from Turkey’s neighbors, will be an increasingly crucial factor in determining Turkey’s relations with the United States and Europe. Turkey’s new dynamics will remain a source of tension under any future Turkish government, but they need not, if managed well by all sides, lead to a lasting rift between Turkey and the West. The more deeply embroiled Turkey becomes in disputes with key US allies from Western Europe to the Persian Gulf, the more difficult it will be for Washington and Ankara to have a cooperative, mutually beneficial relationship. And the more Turkey views itself as a revisionist power, the more it will come into conflict with America’s allies. As a result, it is more important than ever for US policymakers to understand the historic trajectory of Turkey’s place in its region. Turkey emerged from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire as a status quo power, an orientation that it maintained for the better part of the last hundred years. Though the new country had been shorn of its former territories in Southeastern Europe and the Middle East, it had also forcefully defeated foreign efforts to occupy the territory of Anatolia itself. For modern Turkey’s founders, the success in avoiding complete colonization far outweighed the failure to preserve the full geographic scope of the Ottoman Empire. As a result, they forged a pragmatic foreign policy tradition that prioritized preserving their achievement: a Turkish state sovereign and secure within its current borders. This goal remained constant over a long and turbulent 20th century, even as its implications changed, and allowed for Ankara to be flexible about which countries to work with to maximize its self-declared interests. In the inter-war period, when threats came largely from powerful European empires like France, Italy, and Britain, the defense of Turkish sovereignty called for a policy of neutrality and non-alignment. In the immediate aftermath of World War II, however, Turkey’s geopolitical position changed dramatically. Suddenly, the Soviet Union emerged as the most direct and dangerous threat to Turkey’s territorial integrity. In this new strategic context, seeking the support of the United States and NATO became the only feasible way to preserve the imperiled status quo, equip the country’s armed forces, and ultimately defend its borders. The result was a strong and mutually beneficial alliance with the United States and much of Europe. The success of this alliance, however, sometimes obscured the complex, constantly evolving and often paradoxical relationship between Turkey’s status quo orientation and its historically-grounded relationships with regional states. The circumstances surrounding the collapse of the Ottoman Empire created a bitter legacy, giving almost all of Turkey’s neighbors both emotional and practical reasons to feel hostility towards it. With other countries that shared a commitment to the status quo, however, Ankara had equally good reason to overcome this animosity. For countries that found themselves on the wrong side of Turkey’s geopolitical alignment, by contrast, these resentments and unresolved problems were consistently exacerbated. The history of Turkey’s regional relationships can be read through the ever-shifting dynamics of power politics and unsettled history. In the case of Greece, for example, Ankara and Athens began an ambitious rapprochement in the 1930s when they both felt their security was threatened by Italian irredentism in the Eastern Mediterranean. When this shared threat was supplanted by the Soviet Union, the two countries were brought into an even closer alignment under the NATO umbrella. Soon though, the growing rebellion against British rule on Cyprus rendered the status quo unsustainable, leaving Athens and Ankara with radically divergent views on what should come next. Only in this context were a number of longstanding questions re-opened, such as maritime borders and the status of historic minorities in both countries. Crucially, even as tensions over Cyprus worsened, both sides still had Washington to help remind them of their shared security interests. Throughout the Cold War, the United States was in a position to manage Turkish-Greek tensions in order to pre-empt the risk of an intra-NATO war between two allies that would benefit the Soviets. In other words, by acting as a forceful advocate for the status quo, Washington helped ensure that both Greece and Turkey maintained their shared commitment to it. With the end of the Cold War and the rise of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party, Turkey embraced not just a new foreign policy but a new foreign policy orientation. Ankara is no longer interested in maintaining the status quo—it now wants to transform it. Just as Turkey’s status quo orientation led to different policies as circumstances change, Turkey’s new anti-status quo orientation has also led Erdoğan’s government to pursue different strategies. But to make sense of these shifts, and the reaction they have provoked in the region, it is crucial to appreciate that, no less than in the previous century, Turkey’s neighbors have responded in light of their history but also, more importantly, their own orientation toward the regional status quo.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, NATO, AKP, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

5. Türkiye’s First 100 Years

Author:
W. Robert Pearson
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Modern Türkiye (the official spelling of Turkey since 2021) sprang like a phoenix from the ashes in 1923, overcoming daunting odds. Its predecessor, the Ottoman Empire, had foolishly joined the war with the Central Powers in 1914 and naively thought its Arab subjects would remain loyal, only to have been utterly defeated and then dismembered. A rebellion led by the empire’s most famous war hero and leader, Kemal Ataturk, overthrew the last sultan, rejected an unjust treaty to divide up the country and repelled the occupying Allies. He established a contemporary republic based on popular will and modern law to begin a new history for the Turkish people. Born from the wreckage of war and national chaos, Türkiye now, one hundred years on, has become a formidable player on the global stage. World War One witnessed four empires – the German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian, and Ottoman – disappear from history. Of the four, the Turks were the most severely treated by the European victors. Little of Germany and none of the Austro-Hungarian states were occupied. Türkiye was. The country also was originally forecast to become a League of Nations mandate, losing its sovereignty, a punishment not assessed against any other Central Power. Türkiye’s victory at the negotiating table in the early 1920’s over the European Allied Powers and on the battlefield principally against the Greeks, who were encouraged by the British to invade Türkiye to recover territories, was a singular achievement. The final agreement – the Treaty of Lausanne – gave Türkiye its complete independence on October 29, 1923, with Mustafa Kemal as its first president. It was the only such treaty negotiated by a WWI Central Power state with the Allies.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Religion, History, Democracy, Economy, Kurds, Ottoman Empire, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Turkey and Middle East

6. Role Conceptions and Leadership Rivalry in the Middle East: Transforming Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Gulf Relations

Author:
Muhammed Yakup İnan
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies
Institution:
Sakarya University (SAU)
Abstract:
In recent years, the Middle East has often been the subject of foreign interventions and the interests of superpowers. The effect of internal dynamics was pushed to the background in regional developments as a result of this situation. It is very important, however, to analyze the Middle East by understanding the power struggles between the regional powers Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran. This article examines the leadership struggle and role conceptualizations between the regional powers of the Middle East with a focus on the relations between Turkey and Saudi Arabia. It argues that Turkey is not a rival to Saudi Arabia's national role conceptions in the Gulf region, but rather a favorable partner when it comes to Gulf security and economic relations. Relations between Turkey and Saudi Arabia will follow a positive course with mutual normalization steps and Turkey's export-led growth and regional cooperation strategies.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Leadership, Economy, Regional Power, and Role Conceptions
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Gulf Nations

7. Lebanese-Turkish Relations after the 2000s and the Neo-Ottomanist Discourse in Lebanon

Author:
Tuba Yıldız
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies
Institution:
Sakarya University (SAU)
Abstract:
Lebanon, had non-visible relationships with Turkey after its independence and the post-civil war period. Although it lost the balance of political stability at times, the political affinity that emerged with the participation of Lebanon in the close relations, which Turkey sought to establish with Arab countries in the 2000s, continued with mutual negotiations at the point of cooperation. After the Lebanon-Israel war in 2006, which caused political and economic destruction in the country, Turkey increased its support for Lebanon. Accordingly, the crises appeared after the Arab Spring in the region led Turkey to follow the sensitive policy over the sectarian groups in the country. However, some reactions arose in Lebanon’s political arena against Turkey’s increasing regional activism, bringing several ideological questions on Turkey’s approach towards Lebanon. Regarding the relationship between Turkey and Lebanon, “Does Turkey desire to establish a new Ottoman administration in the Middle East?” was one of the questions asked. Moreover, a negative environment was created and used occasionally as a trump card against Turkey’s approach toward Lebanon, saying that even the Ottoman Empire did not play an active role in the Lebanon region. This study examines whether there are traces of Neo-Ottomanism and sectarianism in the political roadmap followed by the Turkish Government in its Lebanon policy. It discusses, the diplomatic response of Turkey to the anti-Ottoman rhetoric in Lebanese politics and its effect on bilateral relations. Accordingly, the study analyzes Turkey’s effort to maintain the balance against sectarian discourse that shapes Lebanon’s policy.
Topic:
Politics, Sectarianism, Neo-Ottomanism, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Lebanon

8. Turkey forever balances between East and West

Author:
Karolina Wanda Olszowska
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Nowa Polityka Wschodnia
Institution:
Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
Abstract:
When looking at contemporary Turkish politics, an incorrect notion is often circulated that Turkey has only in recent years, as far back as under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, begun a policy of balancing between East and West. The purpose of this article is to analyze Turkey’s posture – in terms of balancing between spheres of influence – after the end of World War II until Turkey joined NATO and then compare it with Turkey’s stance during the Justice and Development Party government in the context of relations with the United States and Russia. This will help answer the question: to what extent is Ankara’s current balkanizing attitude something surprising? Aren’t specific patterns of the 1945–1952 period similar to those of the 21st century, and the differences are the attitudes of Washington and Moscow rather than Ankara?
Topic:
History, Geopolitics, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Russia, Turkey, Soviet Union, and United States of America

9. Türkiye in the MENA Region: A Foreign Policy Reset

Author:
Valeria Talbot
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
In recent years, Türkiye's foreign policy has been driven by efforts to reset relations with regional competitors in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Against a backdrop of disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as well as the redefinition of the US role in the region, Ankara’s renewed diplomatic activism has been guided by the willingness to break from regional isolation, as well as the need to relieve Türkiye’s deteriorating economy. How did Türkiye ditch its ideological approach in the wake of the 2011 Arab uprisings to adopt a more pragmatic stance? And how is the process of rapprochement with other key actors in the MENA region playing out – namely Gulf monarchies, Israel and Egypt?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates

10. Hedge politics: Turkey’s search for balance in the Middle East

Author:
Asli Aydıntaşbaş
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
Turkey has spent much of the past decade trying to expand its influence and remake the Middle East in its own image. This created a major battle line between the country and its rivals that stretched from Libya to Syria and the eastern Mediterranean. Yet, since mid-2021, Turkey has attempted to normalise its relationships with Middle Eastern countries. This shift has been driven by Turkish domestic politics, the emergence of a multipolar Middle East, and intensifying geopolitical competition. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan remains politically vulnerable at home, with a deteriorating economy and the opposition leading in the polls. His government’s survival now depends on efforts to balance between great powers and draw financing from former rivals in the Gulf. The EU needs to adjust to this new Turkey by supporting the regional normalisation process, managing the Kurdish issue, and accepting that the country could join an expanded European community – albeit while retaining its strategic autonomy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Politics, European Union, Domestic Politics, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Turkey and Middle East