Turkey’s Middlepowermanship, Foreign Policy Transformation and Mediation Efforts in the Russia-Ukraine War

• Authors: Jakub Wódka

Abstracts

EN

This article provides insight into Turkey’s strategic pursuit of a more active and influential role as a mediator in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Turkey, positioning itself as a middle power, seeks to elevate its global standing. This involves a delicate diplomatic balancing act in its foreign policy approach towards both Russia and Ukraine. The equilibrium thus achieved positions Turkey as a natural mediator, serving as a catalyst for brokering a peace initiative among the conflicting parties. Ankara’s diplomatic activism is not just a tactical move but also a manifestation of Turkey’s broader global ambitions, underlining its commitment to playing a more significant role in shaping international affairs. These aspirations clash with a rising penchant in Turkey to pursue a more militaristic and coercive foreign policy, which stands in contradiction to the role of a benign power.

Keywords

EN

Turkey; Russia; Ukraine; Mediation; Middle Powers

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Centrum Europejskie
• Journal: Studia Europejskie - Studies in European Affairs
• Year: 2023
• Volume: 27
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 215-233

Dates

published

2023

Contributors

author

Jakub Wódka

• Institute of Political Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences

• https://orcid.org/0000000339260814

References

• Akpinar, P. (2022) “Between securitization and diplomacy: Türkiye’s mediation in the Russia-Ukraine war”, GLOBE Project.
• European Commission. Available at: www.globe-project.eu/en/betweensecuritization-and-diplomacy-turkiye-s-mediation-in-the-russia-ukraine-war_15921 (Access 23.10.2023).
• Altunışık, M.B. (2023) “The trajectory of a modified middle power: an attempt to make sense of Turkey’s foreign policy in its centennial”, Turkish Studies. Vol. 24(3–4), pp. 658–672. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2022.2141624.
• Anadolu Agency (2023) Russia, Ukraine to exchange more than 40 prisoners. 11.01.2023. Available at: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/russia-ukraine-war/russia-ukraine-to-exchange-more-than-40-prisoners/2785128 (Access 18.09.2023).
• Aras, B. (2009) “The Davutoglu era in Turkish foreign policy”, Insight Turkey. Vol. 11(3), pp. 127–142.
• Aras, B. and Fidan, H. (2009) “Turkey and Eurasia: Frontiers of a new geographic imagination”, New Perspectives on Turkey. Vol. 40, pp. 193–215.
• Aras, B. and Karakaya Polat, R. (2007) “Turkey and the Middle East: frontiers of the new geographic imagination”, Australian Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 61(4), pp. 477–481. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10357710701684930.
• Aydın, U. (2021) “Emerging middle powers and the liberal international order”, International Affairs. Vol. 97(5), pp. 1377–1394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab090.
• Bayer, R. and Keyman, E.F. (2012) “Turkey: An Emerging Hub of Globalization and Internationalist Humanitarian Actor?”, Globalizations. Vol. 9(1), pp. 73–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2012.627721.
• Butler, M. (2023) “Ripeness obscured: inductive lessons from Türkiye’s (transactional) mediation in the Russia–Ukraine war”, International Journal of Conflict Management. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-12-2022-0215.
• Cooper, A.F. (1997) Niche Diplomacy: A Conceptual Ooverview in Cooper, A.F. (ed.) Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers after the Cold War. Basingstoke: Macmillan. ISBN: 9780333681862.
• Cooper, A. and Parlar Dal, E. (2016) “Positioning the third wave of middle power diplomacy: Institutional elevation, practice limitations”, International Journal. Vol. 7(4), pp. 516–528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0020702016686385.
• Coşkun, B.B. (2015) Neighbourhood narratives from “zero problems with neighbours” to “precious loneliness”: Turkey’s resecuritized Middle East policy after the Arab Spring in Monier, E. (ed.) Regional insecurity after the Arab Uprisings. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 187–203. ISBN: 978023000216–6.
• Davutoğlu, A. (2008) “Turkey’s Foreign Policy Vision: An Assessment of 2007”, Insight Turkey. Vol 10(1), pp. 77–95.
• Daily Sabah (2021) Ukraine’s use of Turkish drones could be a game changer: Fukuyama, 28.11.2021. Available at: https://www.dailysabah.com/business/defense/ukraines-use-of-turkish-drones-could-be-a-game-changer-fukuyama (Access 18.09.2023).
• Fels, E. (2016) Shifting power in Asia-Pacific? The rise of China, Sino-US Competition and regional middle power allegiance. Cham: Springer. ISBN: 978-3319456881.
• France24 (2023) Erdogan takes grain diplomacy to Putin in Sochi. 4.09.2023. Available at: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230904-erdogan-takes-grain-diplomacy-to-putin-in-sochi (Access 20.09.2023).
• Frappi, C. (2018) The Russo-Turkish entente: A tactical embrace along strategic and geopolitical convergences in Talbot, V. (ed.) Turkey: Towards a Eurasian shift? ISPI Report. 26 April, pp. 45–69. Available at: https://www.ispionline.it/sites/default/fi les/pubblicazioni/turkey_report_.pdf (Access 18.09.2023).
• Higgott, R. (1997) Issues, institutions and middle-power diplomacy: Action and agendas in the post-Cold War eras in Cooper, A.F. (ed.) Niche diplomacy: Middle powers after the Cold War. New York: St. Martin’s Press. ISBN: 9780333681862.
• Hitchcock, W. I. (2016) Introduction. Making national strategy in the twenty-first century in Hitchock, W.I., Leffler, M.P., Legro J.W. (eds.) Shaper nations. Strategies for a changing world. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN: 9780674660212.
• Hurrell, A. (2000) Some reflections on the role of intermediate powers in international institutions in Hurrell, A. et al. (ed.) Paths to power: Foreign policy strategies of intermediate states. Woodrow Wilson International Center, Working Paper no. 24.
• Hurrell, A. (2006) “Hegemony, liberalism and global order: what space for would-be great powers?”, International Affairs. Vol. 82(1), pp. 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2006.00512.x.
• Isachenko, D. (2021) Turkey and Russia: The Logic of Conflictual Cooperation. Berlin: SWP Research Paper 7, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik. Available at: https://www.swp-berlin.org/publications/products/research_papers/2021RP07_TurkeyAndRussia.pdf (Access 13.10.2023).
• Jordaan, E. (2003) “The concept of a middle power in international relations: Distinguishing between emerging and traditional middle powers”, Politikon: South African Journal of Political Studies. Vol 30(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0258934032000147282.
• Karim, M.F. (2018) “Middle power, status-Seeking and role Conceptions: The cases of Indonesia and South Korea”, Australian Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 72(4), pp. 343–363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718. 2018.1443428.
• Keyman, E.F. (2009) “Globalization, modernity and democracy: In search of a viable domestic polity for a sustainable Turkish foreign policy”, New Perspectives on Turkey. Vol. 4, pp. 7–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0896634600005197.
• Keyman, E.F. and Gümüşçü, Ş. (2014) Democracy, identity, and foreign policy in Turkey. Hegemony through transformation. New York: Palgrave. ISBN: 9780230354272.
• Kök, H. and Öner, I. (2016) Turkey’s motives for mediating the Iranian nuclear deal in Eralp, D.U. (ed.) Turkey as a mediator. Stories of success and failure. Lanham: Lexington Books. ISBN: 9780739193631.
• Köstem, S. (2022) “Managed Regional Rivalry Between Russia and Turkey after the Annexation of Crimea”, Europe-Asia Studies. Vol. 74(9), pp. 1657–1675. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2022.2134308.
• Kutlay, M. and Öniş, Z. (2021) “Turkish foreign policy in a post-western order: strategic autonomy or new forms of dependence?”, International Affairs. Vol. 97(4), pp. 1085–1104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab094.
• Kutlay, M. and Öniş, Z. (2021) “Understanding oscillations in Turkish foreign policy: pathways to unusual middle power activism”, Third World Quarterly. Vol. 42(12), pp. 3051–3069. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2021.1985449.
• Lyon, P.V. and Tomlin, B.W. (1979) Canada as an international actor. Toronto: Macmillan.
• MFA Turkey (2022) Türkiye-Russia-Ukraine Trilateral Foreign Ministers Meeting. 10.03.2022. Available at: https://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkiye-rusya-ukrayna-uclu-disisleri-bakanlari-toplantisi–10-mart-2022.en.mfa (Access 18.09.2023).
• Murinson, A. (2006) “The Strategic Depth doctrine of Turkish foreign policy”, Middle Eastern Studies. Vol 42(6), pp. 945–964. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00263200600923526.
• Narlikar, A. and Kumar, R. (2012) “From pax americana to pax mosaica? Bargaining over a new economic order”, The Political Quarterly. Vol. 83(2), pp. 384–394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2012.02294.x.
• Oğuzlu, T. (2023) “Turkey as a restrained middle power”, Turkish Studies. Vol. 24(3–4), pp. 673–690. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2023.2171870.
• Oran, B. (2001) Türk dış politikası: Kurtuluş savaşı’ndan bugüne olgular, belgeler, yorumlar. İstanbul: Iletşim. ISBN: 9789750500015.
• Öniş, Z. and Kutlay, M. (2013) “Rising powers in a changing global order: the political economy of Turkey in the age of BRICs”, Third World Quarterly. Vol 34(8), pp. 1409–1423. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2013.831541.
• Öniş, Z. and Kutlay, M. (2017) “The dynamics of emerging middle-power influence in regional and global governance: the paradoxical case of Turkey”, Australian Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 71(2), pp. 164–183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2016.1183586.
• Öniş, Z. and Kutlay, M. (2020) “The new age of hybridity and clash of norms: China, BRICS, and challenges of global governance in a postliberal international order”, Alternatives: Global, Local, Political. Vol. 45(3), pp. 123–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754209210.
• Ongur, H.Ö. and Zengin, H. (2016) “Transforming habitus of the Foreign Policy: A Bourdieusian analysis of Turkey as an emerging middle power”, Rising Powers Quarterly. Vol 1(2), pp. 117–133.
• Parlar Dal, E. (2016) “Conceptualising and testing the emerging regional power of Turkey in the shifting ınternational order”, Third World Quarterly. Vol. 37(8), pp. 1425–1453. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2016.1142367.
• Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye (2022) President Erdoğan: Russia’s decision to recognise the so called Donetsk and Luhansk Republics is unacceptable. 22.02.2022. Available at: https://www.iletisim.gov.tr/english/haberler/detay/president-erdogan-russias-decision-torecognise-the-so-called-donetsk-and-luhansk-republics-is-unacceptable (Access 18.09.2023).
• Reuters (2022) Russia, Ukraine announce major surprise prisoner swap. 22.09.2022. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-releases-10-foreigners-captured-ukraine-after-saudi-mediation-riyadh-2022-09-21/ (Access 18.09.2023).
• Reuters (2023) Black Sea grain deal: Russia refuses to renew and says no guarantees for ships now. 17.07.2023. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-halts-participation-black-sea-grain-deal-kremlin-says-2023-07-17 (Access 20.09.2023).
• Secrieru, S., Saari, S. and Bechev, D. (2021) “Fire and Ice: The Russian–Turkish partnership”, Chaillot Paper 168. European Union Institute for Security Studies June 2022. Available at: https://www.iss.europa.eu/content/fi re-and-ice (Access 13.10.2023).
• Soyaltin-Colella, D. and Demiryol, T. (2023) “Unusual middle power activism and regime survival: Turkey’s drone warfare and its regime-boosting effects”, Third World Quarterly. Vol. 44(4), pp. 724–743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2022.2158080.
• Süleymanoğlu-Kürüm, R. (2019) Conditionality, the EU and Turkey. From transformation to retrenchment. Abingdon: Routledge. ISBN: 978-0815379898.
• Tow, W. and Rigby, R. (2011) “China’s pragmatic security policy: The middle-power factor”, The China Journal. Vol 65, p. 157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/tcj.65.25790562.
• Ungerer, C. (2007) “The Middle Power concept in Australian foreign policy”, Australian Journal of Politics & History. Vol. 53(4), p. 539. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2007.00473.x.
• Welsh, J. (2004) “Canada in the 21st century: Beyond dominion and middle power”, The Round Table. The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 93(376), pp. 583–593. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0035853042000289164.
• Zakaria, F. (2008) The post-American world. New York: Norton. ISBN: 978-0393062359.
• Zarakol, A. (2012) “Problem areas for the new Turkish foreign policy”, Nationalities Papers. The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity. Vol. 40(5), pp. 739–745. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2012.715146.
• Zartman, W. and Touval, S. (1985) “International mediation: Conflict resolution and power politics”, Journal of Social Issues. Vol 42(2), pp. 27–45.

Identifiers

DOI

10.33067/SE.4.2023.12

Biblioteka Nauki

53589919