Suchergebnisse

On the centenary of the Turkish Republic, President Erdoğan, who has been ruling Türkiye for the last two decades, has announced a new perspective on foreign policy for Türkiye's second century. He has named the long-term foreign policy vision as the 'Century of Türkiye' and declared his determination for building a 'Türkiye Axis.' After a fierce struggle against both domestic and international tutelage, President Erdoğan has succeeded to attain autonomy in Turkish foreign policy. Ankara has built a powerful economy and increased its military capacity at the national level. Also, it has improved its relations with both Turkic and Muslim countries and begun to take initiatives and to play a leadership role at the regional level. Furthermore, Türkiye has diversified its relations with other actor and elevated its status at the global level. Within this perspective, it has begun to contribute to resolving global challenges and to play an influential role in international organizations. This article will provide a comprehensive analysis of the evolving foreign policy of Türkiye in recent years. It will delve deep into the shifts and transformations that have taken place and explore the underlying principles and objectives that define Türkiye's new foreign policy vision, the Century of Türkiye.

Sovyetler Birliği'nin çöküşü ve Soğuk Savaş'ın sona ermesi üzerine dünya siyasetinde tek süper güç olarak kalan Amerika Birleşik Devletleri değişen şartları esas alan yeni kavramlar ve politikalar ortaya atmıştır. Bir tek siyasal otorite altında birleşme sürecinde olan ve uluslararası sistemde daha merkezî bir rol oynamayı isteyen Avrupa ülkeleri kendilerini eskiden beri müttefikleri olan ABD ile rekabet eder durumda bulmuştur. Orta Doğu, ABD ile AB arasında rekabete sahne olan en önemli alanlardan biridir. Bölgedeki önemli güçlerden biri ve AB üyeliğine aday ülke olarak Türkiye bu rekabetten önemli ölçüde etkilenmektedir. Bu makalede savunulan görüş Türkiye'nin iki tarafı da reddetmeme siyaseti gütmesi gerektiğidir. Ancak, Türkiye'nin geleceği geniş çapta AB ile "karşılıklı bağımlılığa" yani dayanışmaya dayandığı ve Türkiye'nin ulusal çıkarları AB ülkelerinin çıkarlarıyla büyük çapta örtüştüğü için Türkiye, ABD ile ikili ilişkilerden ziyade, AB ile daha yakın ilişkiler kurmaya öncelik vermelidir. ; With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the United States remained as the only superpower in world politics and introduced new concepts and policies based on these changed conditions. European countries, in the process of uniting under one political entity and seeking for a more central role in the international system, found themselves competing with their long time allies, the US. The Middle East is one of the significant areas of competition between the US and the EU. As one of the major powers of the region and a candidate for the EU membership, Turkey is significantly influenced by this rivalry. This article argues that Turkey has to pursue a policy not rejecting either side. However, since the future of Turkey largely depends on its interdependence with the EU, and since Turkey's national interests overlap largely with those of the EU countries, Turkey has to prefer closer relations with the EU to its bilateral relations with the US.

Nach einem historischen Rückblick auf die von Kemal Atatürk geprägte Politik in Bezug auf die ethnische Identität der Türkei, untersucht der Autor die von Turgut Özal von 1983 bis 1993 verfolgte Politik. Wie der Autor zeigt, wandte sich diese von Atatürks Vorbild ab und griff zurück auf das osmanische Modell des "millet"-Systems, das eine Vielzahl von religiösen und ethnischen Identitäten umfasste und der heutigen Realität der Türkei damit besser entspricht. Özals Politik wird v.a. in Bezug auf die Kurden in der Türkei betrachtet, welche die größte ethnische Minorität innerhalb der Türkei ausmachen. (DÜI-Mjr)

Discusses policy shifts toward tolerance, 1983-1993, when Ozal served as prime minister & then president of Turkey. Kemalist ethnic policy was of assimilation & nationalism with the outlawing of all evidence of ethnic difference inside Turkey & the denying of any relationship with Turkish groups in foreign countries. Kemal Ataturk had repressed the Kurds by banning their language, both written & spoken, & all Kurdish educational activities. Despite violations, Ozal, improved Turkey's human rights record, & he accepted ethnic groups within Turkey & supported rapprochement with Turks in Iraq, Bulgaria, Caucasus, & Central Asia. As the post-Ozal government returns to Kemalist policies, it would be well for them to recognize that the repression of that era did not solve the Kurdish problem. L. A. Hoffman

Turkey's foreign
policy approach started to transform from a more liberal and humanitarian foreign
policy to a more realistic and pragmatic one in 2016, which was manifested in
the Syrian civil war. In this period Turkey started to prioritize the use of
hard power in order to prevent the threats resulting from the civil war. This
paper asserts that while Turkey's objectives in the Syrian crisis have remained
stable, its priorities have changed especially in recent years. So, while from
2011-2016 humanitarian norms dominated Turkey's Syria policy, after 2016, these
norms became secondary priorities, and were replaced by hard power-based
military assertiveness. To support this hypothesis, six main objectives of
Turkey's foreign policy are taken into consideration: Managing the humanitarian
crisis, materializing the fall of the Assad regime, aiding the opposition
forces, waging a proxy war with Iran, eliminating the threat of Daesh, and
preventing the PYD/YPG from creating an area of dominance.

Turkey's foreign policy approach started to transform from a more liberal and humanitarian foreign policy to a more realistic and pragmatic one in 2016, which was manifested in the Syrian civil war. In this period, Turkey started to prioritize the use of hard power in order to prevent the threats resulting from the civil war. This paper asserts that while Turkey's objectives in the Syrian crisis have remained stable, its priorities have changed especially in recent years. So, while from 2011-2016 humanitarian norms dominated Turkey's Syria policy, after 2016, these norms became secondary priorities, and were replaced by hard power-based military assertiveness. To support this hypothesis, six main objectives of Turkey's foreign policy are taken into consideration: Managing the humanitarian crisis, materializing the fall of the Assad regime, aiding the opposition forces, waging a proxy war with Iran, eliminating the threat of Daesh, and preventing the PYD/ YPG from creating an area of dominance. ; Türkiye'nin dış politika yaklaşımı, 2016 yılında liberal bir çerçeveden ayrılarak realist bir anlayışa sahip olmuştur. Bu değişimin en net göstergesi ise Suriye iç savaşıdır. Zira Türkiye, Suriye iç savaşından kaynaklı tehditleri önlemek amacıyla askeri güç kullanımını öncelemiştir. Bu makale, Suriye krizi karşısında Türkiye'nin hedeflerinin sabit kaldığını ancak son yıllarda önceliklerinin değiştiğini iddia etmektedir. Nitekim 2011-2016 yılları arasında insani normlar Türkiye'nin Suriye politikasını belirlerken, 2016 yılı sonrasında bu normlar ikincil öncelikler olmuş ve sert güç odaklı askeri operasyonlarla yer değiştirmiştir. Makale bu varsayımı desteklemek amacıyla Suriye krizine karşı Türk Dış Politikası'nın altı temel amacını merkeze almıştır. Bu amaçlar sırasıyla; Suriye'de ortaya çıkan insani krizi yönetmek, Esed Rejimi'nin yıkılması, muhalefet güçlerine destek, İran ile yapılan vekalet savaşı, DAEŞ tehdidini yok etmek ve PYD/YPG'nin hakimiyet alanı kurmasının engellenmesidir.

In a philosophy-themed book series pandering to a general audience and including pop cultural phenomena ranging from Harry Potter and Twilight to House and Game of Thrones (all relatively recent bestsellers, blockbusters, and hit TV series), Star Wars takes an honorary place, with its die-hard fan base spanning generations. Analogous to the seven episodes of the saga released by the time of its publishing, the book has seven parts, each containing three to five chapters which are grouped conceptually (morals, metaphysics, the non-human, etc.). ; WOS:000446419900024

Uluslararası örgütlerin, dünyanın herhangi bir yerindeki devlet-içi çatışmaya çeşitli gerekçelerle ya müdahil olmayı seçtikleri ya da müdahil olmadıkları görülmektedir. Başta Birleşmiş Milletler olmak üzere uluslararası örgütlerin uluslararası barış ve güvenliği sağlama adına devlet-içi çatışmaları sonlandırması arzu edilen bir durumdur. Müdahale etmeleri durumunda nadir de olsa başarılı sonuçlar alınabilmektedir. Bununla birlikte, devlet-içi çatışmaları sonlandırmak için harekete geçen uluslararası örgütlerin başarısız olduğu durumlar olabilmektedir. Uluslararası örgütlerin devlet-içi çatışmalara müdahalesinin başarısız olmasının bazı önemli nedenleri bulunmaktadır. Hangi durumlarda başarısız olduğuna dair literatürde farklı bakış açıları mevcuttur. Bu makalenin amacı da uluslararası örgütlerin devlet-içi çatışmalara müdahalelerinde başarısız olma nedenlerini sınıflandırmak ve analiz etmektir ; It appears that international organizations prefer to intervene or not to intervene in intra-state or internal conflict anywhere in the world for different reasons. It is expected that international organizations, especially the United Nations, solve internal conflicts to provide international peace and security. In case of intervention of international organizations, successful results can be obtained in some cases. However, there are many cases in which international organizations fail to resolve internal conflicts. There are some important reasons for the failure of the interventions of international organizations. There are different perspectives in the literature explaining in which circumstances do interventions of international organizations fail. The purpose of this paper is to analyze and classify causes of the failure of interventions of international organizations to intra-state conflicts