Pub Date : 2022-11-15DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143859
B. Balci
ABSTRACT Both coming from conservative Anatolia, Fethullah Gülen and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan have, respectively, set up a movement and a political party that continue to make their mark on Turkey. Based upon the same vision of Islam and with a strategy of neutralizing their common opponent, the Kemalist establishment, an alliance, was founded between the two in 2002 when the AKP came to power. However, as it had been ambiguous from the start, this alliance did not resist the gradual emergence of numerous political and social differences between the two leaders. Less than 10 years after it was founded, the alliance between the two cracked and then shattered in 2013. Since then, the Gülen movement has been banned in Turkey and its representatives exiled abroad, particularly in Western countries. Under Gülen’s leadership, still based in the United States, they are trying to reorganize themselves into a new political structure.
{"title":"Islam and Politics in Turkey: Alliance and Disunion Between the Fethullah Gülen Movement and the Justice and Development Party of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan","authors":"B. Balci","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143859","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143859","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Both coming from conservative Anatolia, Fethullah Gülen and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan have, respectively, set up a movement and a political party that continue to make their mark on Turkey. Based upon the same vision of Islam and with a strategy of neutralizing their common opponent, the Kemalist establishment, an alliance, was founded between the two in 2002 when the AKP came to power. However, as it had been ambiguous from the start, this alliance did not resist the gradual emergence of numerous political and social differences between the two leaders. Less than 10 years after it was founded, the alliance between the two cracked and then shattered in 2013. Since then, the Gülen movement has been banned in Turkey and its representatives exiled abroad, particularly in Western countries. Under Gülen’s leadership, still based in the United States, they are trying to reorganize themselves into a new political structure.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"506 - 521"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43173187","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-15DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143839
David Kaufman
ABSTRACT This paper will investigate the development of the War Guilt Question in interwar Europe through an examination of the dispute between two of Britain’s leading experts on the Balkans, Mary Edith Durham and R.W. Seton-Watson. The locus of their disagreement centred on the question of Serbian complicity in the plot to murder Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in June 1914, and the subsequent debate over their responsibility for the outbreak of War. The dispute was prompted by revelations published by Ljuba Jovanović, former Serb Minister of Public Instruction. The debate over the Serb complicity in the Sarajevo crime, fundamentally shifted the debate over responsibility for the failure of peace in 1914, moving the focus away from Berlin, back to the Balkans.
{"title":"The “One Guilty Nation” Myth: Edith Durham, R.W. Seton-Watson and a Footnote in the History of the Outbreak of the First World War","authors":"David Kaufman","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143839","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143839","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper will investigate the development of the War Guilt Question in interwar Europe through an examination of the dispute between two of Britain’s leading experts on the Balkans, Mary Edith Durham and R.W. Seton-Watson. The locus of their disagreement centred on the question of Serbian complicity in the plot to murder Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in June 1914, and the subsequent debate over their responsibility for the outbreak of War. The dispute was prompted by revelations published by Ljuba Jovanović, former Serb Minister of Public Instruction. The debate over the Serb complicity in the Sarajevo crime, fundamentally shifted the debate over responsibility for the failure of peace in 1914, moving the focus away from Berlin, back to the Balkans.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"70 10","pages":"297 - 321"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41308449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-11DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143778
Bahar Rumelili, S. Aydın-Düzgit, Seçkin Barış Gülmez
ABSTRACT This article scrutinizes the role of women’s rights and women actors in Turkey’s public diplomacy strategy in the 1930s and discusses whether and if so how it managed to change the long-standing European prejudices against Turkey. Accordingly, first, the article discusses the early reforms of the Turkish Republic and their European reception. Then, relying on critical discourse analysis, it examines two prominent cases; namely, Keriman Halis’ victory in the ‘Miss Universe’ beauty contest in 1932 and the organization of the 12th Congress of the International Alliance of Women in Istanbul in 1935, comparatively to observe how they resonated in Europe. The article will conclude by assessing whether the changing status of women in Turkish society has played a role in shifting the European perceptions of the newly established Turkish Republic.
{"title":"Gendering Public Diplomacy: Turkey and Europe in the 1930s","authors":"Bahar Rumelili, S. Aydın-Düzgit, Seçkin Barış Gülmez","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143778","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143778","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article scrutinizes the role of women’s rights and women actors in Turkey’s public diplomacy strategy in the 1930s and discusses whether and if so how it managed to change the long-standing European prejudices against Turkey. Accordingly, first, the article discusses the early reforms of the Turkish Republic and their European reception. Then, relying on critical discourse analysis, it examines two prominent cases; namely, Keriman Halis’ victory in the ‘Miss Universe’ beauty contest in 1932 and the organization of the 12th Congress of the International Alliance of Women in Istanbul in 1935, comparatively to observe how they resonated in Europe. The article will conclude by assessing whether the changing status of women in Turkish society has played a role in shifting the European perceptions of the newly established Turkish Republic.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"239 - 256"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49387079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-11DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143965
D. Gönenç, Emre Iseri, Qingan Huang
This special issue examines the increasing engagement of Asian countries in the Eastern Mediterranean. The region stands at the heart of many significant issues. While warming 20% faster than the global average, 1 the region has significant and largely unexploited renewable energy potential. At the crossroads of key global maritime and land trade routes connecting Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, the region is also bestowed with remarkable hydrocarbon reserves, fuelling geopolitical tension between Turkey and the Republic of Cyprus (the RoC) 2 /Greece in the absence of a delimitation regime agreed upon by all littoral states. Moreover, the region serves as a prominent irregular migration source and route to Europe. Along with the protracted Israel-Palestine conflict, ongoing regional tensions (e.g., Syria, Libya), poor governance, and environmental degradation all serve as push factors for migrants. Asian actors’ increasing political economic penetration in the region will likely trans-form the geopolitical economic landscape of the Eastern Mediterranean conundrum. Hence it is useful to set out a general framework at global and regional levels, before elaborating on the articles included in this special issue.
{"title":"Editorial to the special issue on ”Asian Powers in the Eastern Mediterranean”","authors":"D. Gönenç, Emre Iseri, Qingan Huang","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143965","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143965","url":null,"abstract":"This special issue examines the increasing engagement of Asian countries in the Eastern Mediterranean. The region stands at the heart of many significant issues. While warming 20% faster than the global average, 1 the region has significant and largely unexploited renewable energy potential. At the crossroads of key global maritime and land trade routes connecting Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, the region is also bestowed with remarkable hydrocarbon reserves, fuelling geopolitical tension between Turkey and the Republic of Cyprus (the RoC) 2 /Greece in the absence of a delimitation regime agreed upon by all littoral states. Moreover, the region serves as a prominent irregular migration source and route to Europe. Along with the protracted Israel-Palestine conflict, ongoing regional tensions (e.g., Syria, Libya), poor governance, and environmental degradation all serve as push factors for migrants. Asian actors’ increasing political economic penetration in the region will likely trans-form the geopolitical economic landscape of the Eastern Mediterranean conundrum. Hence it is useful to set out a general framework at global and regional levels, before elaborating on the articles included in this special issue.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"40 - 47"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44913168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-11DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143852
Berdal Aral
ABSTRACT This article traces the Turkish voting preferences in the UN General Assembly during the AK Party era between 2002 and 2020. It seeks to understand as to whether there is a congruence between Turkey’s critical view of international society as epitomized by Tayyip Erdoğan’s motto, 'The World is Bigger Than Five', and the way Turkish representatives voted during the same period in the UN General Assembly on questions such as nuclear disarmament, self-determination, search for a new international order, and human rights. Based on primary materials, this paper concludes that there exists an undisputable contradiction between Turkey’s anti-establishment posture and behavioural attitude towards the outside world since 2002 on the one hand and it’s voting orientation in the UN General Assembly on the other. The latter is largely the outcome of the ‘Europeanization’ of Turkish foreign policy based on Turkey’s candidacy for EU membership and its NATO commitments. Hence, during the period under investigation, Turkey was broadly allied to the European position in the context of its voting pattern in the UN General Assembly which was conspicuous with its aloofness towards calls for substantial changes intended to bring about a more just and peaceful international order.
{"title":"Turkey’s Voting Preferences in the UN General Assembly During the AK Party Era as a Counterchallenge to Its ‘New’ Foreign Policy","authors":"Berdal Aral","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143852","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143852","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article traces the Turkish voting preferences in the UN General Assembly during the AK Party era between 2002 and 2020. It seeks to understand as to whether there is a congruence between Turkey’s critical view of international society as epitomized by Tayyip Erdoğan’s motto, 'The World is Bigger Than Five', and the way Turkish representatives voted during the same period in the UN General Assembly on questions such as nuclear disarmament, self-determination, search for a new international order, and human rights. Based on primary materials, this paper concludes that there exists an undisputable contradiction between Turkey’s anti-establishment posture and behavioural attitude towards the outside world since 2002 on the one hand and it’s voting orientation in the UN General Assembly on the other. The latter is largely the outcome of the ‘Europeanization’ of Turkish foreign policy based on Turkey’s candidacy for EU membership and its NATO commitments. Hence, during the period under investigation, Turkey was broadly allied to the European position in the context of its voting pattern in the UN General Assembly which was conspicuous with its aloofness towards calls for substantial changes intended to bring about a more just and peaceful international order.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"399 - 439"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44959988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-10DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143776
Carolin Liebisch-Gümüş, A. Yenen
ABSTRACT The international recognition of Turkey through the Treaty of Lausanne is often seen as the foundational moment of Turkey in international diplomacy. This article approaches diplomatic history from a decentred perspective. It highlights the activities of various non-state actors and semi-official figures who became engaged in international politics during the Turkish War of Independence (1919–1923). They used citizen diplomacy, public propaganda, as well as other clandestine and public channels of transnational diplomacy to strive against the Allied peace terms. Notwithstanding their divergent political visions and agendas, these unofficial diplomats strengthened—though not always intentionally—the international recognition of the Turkish nation-state formation, only to be absorbed by the Ankara government’s growing monopoly on foreign policy. Informed by the New Diplomatic History approach, this article illustrates the important role of unofficial, transnational dynamics that escapes state-centred accounts of Ottoman-Turkish diplomacy during the aftermath of the First World War.
{"title":"Petitions, Propaganda, and Plots: Transnational Dynamics of Diplomacy During the Turkish War of Independence","authors":"Carolin Liebisch-Gümüş, A. Yenen","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143776","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143776","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The international recognition of Turkey through the Treaty of Lausanne is often seen as the foundational moment of Turkey in international diplomacy. This article approaches diplomatic history from a decentred perspective. It highlights the activities of various non-state actors and semi-official figures who became engaged in international politics during the Turkish War of Independence (1919–1923). They used citizen diplomacy, public propaganda, as well as other clandestine and public channels of transnational diplomacy to strive against the Allied peace terms. Notwithstanding their divergent political visions and agendas, these unofficial diplomats strengthened—though not always intentionally—the international recognition of the Turkish nation-state formation, only to be absorbed by the Ankara government’s growing monopoly on foreign policy. Informed by the New Diplomatic History approach, this article illustrates the important role of unofficial, transnational dynamics that escapes state-centred accounts of Ottoman-Turkish diplomacy during the aftermath of the First World War.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"185 - 206"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48152500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-08DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143789
Deniz Kuru
ABSTRACT This study deals with the surprising participation of the Turkish ambassador in Croatia at the country’s well-known annual Sinj Alka, an equestrian competition with a long tradition that relates to a famous victory over the Ottoman Turks in the 18th century. While the bilateral relations between Croatia and Turkey have developed since 1992 on a rather stable and positive level, the historical background has yet been marked by the legacy of the Ottoman occupation over large territories making up today’s Croatia. The 2012 attendance of a Turkish ambassador at the annual festivities in Sinj, themselves also marked by Croatian nationalist frames, was the first time that a Turkish representative was among the official guests. This study employs the concept of diplomatic courage and offers a history of the present in order to show how the lenses of new diplomatic history provide a useful means to approach this historical attendance, relying most importantly on the notion of diplomatic practices. It does this via an analysis of news reports and commentaries from Croatia and Turkey while underlining the historical dimension of the bilateral relationship. The conclusion pinpoints the limits of such practices in other contexts, depending on states’ foreign political choices.
{"title":"‘Diplomatic Courage’: A Turkish Ambassador in Sinj","authors":"Deniz Kuru","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143789","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143789","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study deals with the surprising participation of the Turkish ambassador in Croatia at the country’s well-known annual Sinj Alka, an equestrian competition with a long tradition that relates to a famous victory over the Ottoman Turks in the 18th century. While the bilateral relations between Croatia and Turkey have developed since 1992 on a rather stable and positive level, the historical background has yet been marked by the legacy of the Ottoman occupation over large territories making up today’s Croatia. The 2012 attendance of a Turkish ambassador at the annual festivities in Sinj, themselves also marked by Croatian nationalist frames, was the first time that a Turkish representative was among the official guests. This study employs the concept of diplomatic courage and offers a history of the present in order to show how the lenses of new diplomatic history provide a useful means to approach this historical attendance, relying most importantly on the notion of diplomatic practices. It does this via an analysis of news reports and commentaries from Croatia and Turkey while underlining the historical dimension of the bilateral relationship. The conclusion pinpoints the limits of such practices in other contexts, depending on states’ foreign political choices.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"278 - 296"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46502828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-08DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143841
Mustafa Yetim, I. Telci
ABSTRACT For some time, the three-alliance reality consisting of Turkey-Qatar, Saudi Arabia-United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Iran-Syria shaped the socio-political relations in the Middle East region. Therefore, tracking the principal factors behind the emergence and recent stability of these dominant alliances informs the theoretical and empiric dimensions of this study. In this context, this study displays the different motivations of the mentioned countries in these three alliances by drawing primarily on the challenging approach of May Darwich. Darwich’s analysis of the alliances with the recognition of equal weight on the ideational and material forces, albeit their varying impacts on the decision-making process, and her subsequent four-case scenario enabled intriguing and required elucidation of the divergent concerns of the countries in the formation of these alliances. Accordingly, this study finds that while some countries like Iran and Syria privilege material threats over ideational ones, other allied countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia mostly concentrate on the elimination of ideational threats. Furthermore, Darwich’s approach helps us to find out mainly material-first orientation of Turkey’s partnership with Qatar, whereas Qatar’s case implies a somewhat unique example with its equal consideration of both concerns.
{"title":"Another “Third Way” to Narrate the Existing Alliances in the Middle East: Turkey-Qatar, Saudi Arabia-UAE, and Iran-Syria","authors":"Mustafa Yetim, I. Telci","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143841","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143841","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT For some time, the three-alliance reality consisting of Turkey-Qatar, Saudi Arabia-United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Iran-Syria shaped the socio-political relations in the Middle East region. Therefore, tracking the principal factors behind the emergence and recent stability of these dominant alliances informs the theoretical and empiric dimensions of this study. In this context, this study displays the different motivations of the mentioned countries in these three alliances by drawing primarily on the challenging approach of May Darwich. Darwich’s analysis of the alliances with the recognition of equal weight on the ideational and material forces, albeit their varying impacts on the decision-making process, and her subsequent four-case scenario enabled intriguing and required elucidation of the divergent concerns of the countries in the formation of these alliances. Accordingly, this study finds that while some countries like Iran and Syria privilege material threats over ideational ones, other allied countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia mostly concentrate on the elimination of ideational threats. Furthermore, Darwich’s approach helps us to find out mainly material-first orientation of Turkey’s partnership with Qatar, whereas Qatar’s case implies a somewhat unique example with its equal consideration of both concerns.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"484 - 505"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46566436","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-08DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143773
Hazal Papuççular
ABSTRACT This article analyzes Turkey’s complex relationship with the Straits Commission in the interwar period. The Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits that was signed in Lausanne in 1923 stipulated the formation of an international commission under the auspices of the League of Nations. This institution became a locus that Turkey, the other members of the Commission and the League of Nations negotiated the sovereignty of the Straits and discussed the authority over its administration. This article shows that Turkey perceived the Commission detrimental to its sovereignty. However, this article also portrays an interesting case study that Turkey conducted diplomacy with this intergovernmental organization in which it actually played a leading role. The vague relationship of the Commission with the League of Nations that Turkey was not a member of until 1932 further complicates the narrative which emphasizes the multiple layers that diplomacy was formed and performed, thereby necessitating new approaches to the study of foreign policy. In this regard, this study aims to transcend the traditional accounts on interwar Turkish diplomacy, which have been dominated by the interstate bilateral relations.
{"title":"Contested Sovereignties: Turkish Diplomacy, the Straits Commission, and the League of Nations (1924–1936)","authors":"Hazal Papuççular","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143773","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143773","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyzes Turkey’s complex relationship with the Straits Commission in the interwar period. The Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits that was signed in Lausanne in 1923 stipulated the formation of an international commission under the auspices of the League of Nations. This institution became a locus that Turkey, the other members of the Commission and the League of Nations negotiated the sovereignty of the Straits and discussed the authority over its administration. This article shows that Turkey perceived the Commission detrimental to its sovereignty. However, this article also portrays an interesting case study that Turkey conducted diplomacy with this intergovernmental organization in which it actually played a leading role. The vague relationship of the Commission with the League of Nations that Turkey was not a member of until 1932 further complicates the narrative which emphasizes the multiple layers that diplomacy was formed and performed, thereby necessitating new approaches to the study of foreign policy. In this regard, this study aims to transcend the traditional accounts on interwar Turkish diplomacy, which have been dominated by the interstate bilateral relations.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"207 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41483696","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-08DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2022.2143862
Betül Özyilmaz Kiraz
ABSTRACT This article is concerned with multidirectionality in the Turkish foreign policy (TFP). It discusses how multidirectionality attempts in the TFP in different times, with different purposes and instruments can be differentiated and conceptualized. It is argued that there have been three waves of multidirectionality in the TFP: compensatory multidirectionality in the 1960s and 1970s; complementary multidirectionality from the end of the Cold War approximately till 2015; and reactionary multidirectionality since 2015. They are analysed through a comparative perspective in terms of the causative role of the Western factor, the main motivation behind and foreign policy instruments employed. It is further argued in the article that contrary to the conventional wisdom states can adopt multidirectionalism as a mean to further enhance their relations with the ‘direction’ state or alliance. In this sense, beyond its contribution to the TFP literature, the article makes contribution to the Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) in general.
{"title":"Multidirectionality(ies) in the Turkish Foreign Policy: Compensatory, Complementary and Reactive Multidirectionality","authors":"Betül Özyilmaz Kiraz","doi":"10.1080/19448953.2022.2143862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2022.2143862","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article is concerned with multidirectionality in the Turkish foreign policy (TFP). It discusses how multidirectionality attempts in the TFP in different times, with different purposes and instruments can be differentiated and conceptualized. It is argued that there have been three waves of multidirectionality in the TFP: compensatory multidirectionality in the 1960s and 1970s; complementary multidirectionality from the end of the Cold War approximately till 2015; and reactionary multidirectionality since 2015. They are analysed through a comparative perspective in terms of the causative role of the Western factor, the main motivation behind and foreign policy instruments employed. It is further argued in the article that contrary to the conventional wisdom states can adopt multidirectionalism as a mean to further enhance their relations with the ‘direction’ state or alliance. In this sense, beyond its contribution to the TFP literature, the article makes contribution to the Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) in general.","PeriodicalId":45789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"558 - 581"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44409227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：