Suchergebnisse

Following the Arab Spring, all the nations in the Middle East started to pursue a phase of regional softness after a protracted era of strife and rivalry. In many areas of the Middle East, the normalization agenda is being implemented in a coordinated manner based on specific concerns. For a number of reasons, Türkiye has emerged as both a participant in the brand-new normalization process in the Middle East and as a nation making an effort to regulate it. This research article attempts to elaborate on the dynamics of the normalization process ushered in by the Arab Spring and Türkiye's role in spearheading this process with projected outcomes aimed at long term stability in the region. Overall, the pursuit of normalization is encouraging but not without flaws due to the persistence of ideological differences and conflicts of interest among regional actors and between major international powers.

This article attempts to understand the outcomes of the crackdown on the Arab revolts and the lessons learned thereof. There is no doubt that the Arab revolts were corrupted shortly after their start and used to serve the interests of counterrevolutionaries. The economic, social, and political problems, which triggered the riots in 2011, have not been mitigated a decade later. In this respect, Turkey's respect for popular demands, the attractiveness of its democratic model, and it proactive foreign policy have concerned the Gulf states leading them to view Turkey as a country that they had to contain. However, Turkey's post-2016 efforts to restore the balance of power through the use of hard power prevented Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates from developing a new regional blueprint under the Trump administration. Right now, there are indications that all regional powers are engaging in a fresh strategic assessment.

This article attempts to understand the outcomes of the crackdown on the Arab revolts and the lessons learned thereof: There is no doubt that the Arab revolts were corrupted shortly after their start and used to serve the interests of counterrevolutionaries. The economic, social, and political problems, which triggered the riots in 2011, have not been mitigated a decade later. In this respect, Turkey's respect for popular demands, the attractiveness of its democratic model, and it proactive foreign policy have concerned the Gulf states leading them to view Turkey as a country that they had to contain. However, Turkey's post-2016 efforts to restore the balance of power through the use of hard power prevented Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates from developing a new regional blueprint under the Trump administration. Right now, there are indications that all regional powers are engaging in a fresh strategic assessment. ; WOS:000664082400013

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the domestic and foreign policy agendas of all countries have been turned upside down. The pandemic has brought new problems and competition areas to states and to the international system. While the pandemic politically calls to mind the post-World War II era, it can also be compared with the 2008 crisis due to its economic effects such as unemployment and the disruption of global supply chains. A debate immediately began for a new international system; however, it seems that the current international system will be affected, but will not experience a radical change. That is, a new international order is not expected, while disorder is most likely in the post-pandemic period. In an atmosphere of global instability where debates on the U.S.-led international system have been worn for a while, in the post-pandemic period states will invest in self-sufficiency and redefine their strategic areas, especially in health security. The decline of U.S. leadership, the challenging policies of China, the effects of Chinese policies on the U.S.-China relations and the EU's deepening crisis are going to be the main discussion topics that will determine the future of the international system.

The identity and ideology of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party), and more importantly, the transformation thereof, which came to power just one year after its establishment and has ruled Turkey for 18 consecutive years, has been the subject of heated debate. At home and abroad, there is an ongoing discussion about where the AK Party 'wants to take Turkey.' In this regard, a number of ideologically- charged criticisms have been voiced over the years. The most extreme lines of criticism include the accusation that the movement was a sub-contractor of Washington's Greater Middle East Project and the charge of turning Turkey's back on the West to join the Eurasian axis. It is important to note that the same critics identify the AK Party in various ways, ranging from 'democratic Islamist' to 'religious authoritarian' to 'counter-revolutionary' and 'religious Kemalist'. In the wake of the 2009 World Economic Summit in Davos, Switzerland and the 2010 Mavi Marmara incident, the AK Party was charged with 'returning to Islamism' and 'taking an authoritarian turn'. Since the 2013 Gezi Park protests, that narrative became commonplace in the Western media. Amidst those accusations, how the AK Party views its actions vis-à-vis its political platform and identity references is often ignored.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the domestic and foreign policy agendas of all countries have been turned upside down. The pandemic has brought new problems and competition areas to states and to the international system. While the pandemic politically calls to mind the post-World War II era, it can also be compared with the 2008 crisis due to its economic effects such as unemployment and the disruption of global supply chains. A debate immediately began for a new international system; however, it seems that the current international system will be affected, but will not experience a radical change. That is, a new international order is not expected, while disorder is most likely in the post-pandemic period. In an atmosphere of global instability where debates on the U.S.-led international system have been worn for a while, in the post-pandemic period states will invest in self-sufficiency and redefine their strategic areas, especially in health security. The decline of U.S. leadership, the challenging policies of China, the effects of Chinese policies on the U.S.-China relations and the EU's deepening crisis are going to be the main discussion topics that will determine the future of the international system. ; WOS:000569358000007

This article argues that the Ukraine war is the first major conflict since the end of the Cold War to bring the two major nuclear powers, the U.S. and the Russian Federation, into conflict with one another. The intense U.S. support for the Zelenski Administration in the power struggle in Ukraine and the heavy American sanctions against Russia have pitted Washington and Moscow against each other at a level never seen since the end of the Cold War. The U.S., which was silent on Russia's intervention in Georgia in 2008, reacted very harshly against Moscow in Ukraine, leading to tension similar to that of the Cold War period. Therefore, this article argues that the impact of the Ukraine war on the international system has been enormous. As a close neighbor of Russia and an ally of the U.S., Türkiye is also significantly affected by this war.

This article essentially posits that Türkiye took advantage of the deepening competition between global powers under the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) to part ways with its traditional foreign policy tradition and pursue a more independent approach. That the country expanded its economic and military capacity significantly during the relevant period to support a balanced policy between the West, Russia, and China is another major argument. To put those claims to the test, this article primarily analyzes the expansion of Türkiye's economic and military capacity and proceeds to focus on its policy toward the deepening rivalry between the West and Russia (due to the Ukraine war) and how it responded to the "rise of Asia." Last but not least, this piece analyzes Türkiye's pursuit of a more independent foreign policy, how the country clashed with the U.S., the European Union, and Russia as well as their allies on the ground, and how Ankara used its policy of balance to keep a lid on those tensions.