Number of results to display per page
Search Results
12. Russia at War and the Islamic World
- Author:
- Marlène Laruelle
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
- Abstract:
- While Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine has resulted in a decoupling with the West on a scale not seen since the worst years of the Cold War, Russia has not been isolated from the non-Western world and has even reinvested its diplomatic energy toward the Global South. This paper focuses on Russia’s relationships with the Islamic world and how they have been transformed — or not — by the Ukraine war. It discusses both Russia’s “internal” Islamic realm and how the Middle East has reacted to the strategic tectonic shift unleashed by the war and Western sanctions. It explains that the role and place of Islam in Russia have been reinforced by the war context, as Islamic institutions and Muslims are seen by the Russian regime as among the most loyal constituencies. It concludes that the main Middle Eastern regional powers have been able to consolidate their transactional foreign policies and use the war to assert their autonomy toward Western actors so that Russia’s weakening does not result in the West’s increased influence but in a more multipolar order.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Islam, Multipolarity, Regional Power, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, and Middle East
13. 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
14. Russia Is Down, But Not Out, in Central Asia
- Author:
- Maximilian Hess
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
- Abstract:
- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has weakened its influence in Central Asia, especially in Kazakhstan. Russia is no longer a regional hegemon, which may increase regional instability. Tensions between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are especially dangerous. Despite Moscow’s diminished influence in Central Asia, regional states cannot afford to completely ignore Russian interests. Western hopes for Central Asian gas resources to be pumped westwards and circumvent Russia remain unlikely to be fulfilled.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Gas, Political stability, Regional Power, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Central Asia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan
15. Russia Is Down, But Not Out, in Central Asia
- Author:
- Maximilian Hess
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
- Abstract:
- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has weakened its influence in Central Asia, especially in Kazakhstan. Russia is no longer a regional hegemon, which may increase regional instability. Tensions between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are especially dangerous. Despite Moscow’s diminished influence in Central Asia, regional states cannot afford to completely ignore Russian interests. Western hopes for Central Asian gas resources to be pumped westwards and circumvent Russia remain unlikely to be fulfilled.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Gas, Regional Power, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Central Asia, Eurasia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan
16. 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
17. 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
18. 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
19. A Critical Appraisal of China’s Power in South Asia: Strengths and Achievements
- Author:
- Arfan Mahmood
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- South Asian Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- With its rising power, China has been spreading its clout in almost every corner of the world. South Asia, owing to its rising significance, has caused new-found interest of China in this region. Amidst many assumptions, this paper attempts to trace out the rationale behind China‘s increasing presence in South Asia. Then, it primarily tries to analyze China‘s base of power in South Asian region and to explore its strengths and weaknesses. This study is designed to identify the factors that have attracted South Asian countries towards China. This study employs a case study method in general and ‗focused comparison‘ in particular. This method is considered highly appropriate as it brings various perspectives which are rooted in a particular context. China‘s transforming statecraft towards South Asia is the context and focused comparison comes into play while exploring the commonalities and differences associated with Chinese strategies towards South Asian countries. The study concludes that Chinese base of power in the South Asian region comes from the economic, security, and diplomatic support for the South Asian countries and China has capitalized on this opportunity to transform its resources into power.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Regional Power, Statecraft, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- China, South Asia, and Asia
20. Saudi Arabia’s Balancing Game: The Palestinian Cause and Regional Leadership
- Author:
- Giulia Daga and Luigi Simonelli
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- In the hours following Hamas’s violent attack on Israel of 7 October, the Saudi authorities called for “an immediate de-escalation”, while noting that they had previously warned against the outcomes of “the continued occupation and depriving Palestinians of their legitimate rights and the repeated systematic provocations against their sanctities”.[1] In a more recent declaration, the Saudi Foreign Minister has reiterated the country’s “categorical rejection of calls for the forced displacement of the Palestinian people from Gaza, and its condemnation of the continued targeting of defenceless civilians there”.[2] Reportedly, the heavy retaliation measures adopted by Israel, whose bombing campaign against Gaza has been one of the most intense of this century,[3] also including the apparent use of white phosphorus,[4] resulted in the halt of the normalisation process between Saudi Arabia and Israel, which should have followed suit on the 2020 Abraham Accords. Only a few weeks before, on 20 September, the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had announced on US television that “every day, we get closer” to an agreement with Israel.[5] A few days later, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had reiterated the same optimism in front of the United Nations General Assembly general debate, insisting that the Palestinians should not be given “a veto over new peace treaties with Arab states”.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Leadership, Regional Power, and October 7
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Saudi Arabia