Search

Millions of Turkish voters are geared up for the twin (parliamentary and presidential) elections that are scheduled to take place in June 2023 at the latest. After nearly 20 years in power, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's rule may seem unassailable to many observers of Turkish politics. However, owing to the economic downturn and rifts in his ruling party, this will be the first election in which Erdoğan is not the clear favourite. Six oppo­sition parties of different ideological origins have come together to pick a joint presidential candidate to stand against Erdoğan and to offer a common platform for restoring parliamentary democracy. Although the opposition alliance has reasonable chances of defeating Erdoğan's ruling bloc, their victory would not guarantee a smooth process of transition to parliamentary democracy. If the opposition can defeat Erdoğan, the new government would need to undertake the arduous tasks of estab­lishing a meri­tocratic bureaucracy, restructuring Turkey's diplomatic course and economic policy, and switching back to parliamentary rule. Due to the opposition alliance's diverse com­position, accomplishing these goals may be as difficult as winning the elections.

Turkey's Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has both changed and molded to Turkish Foreign Policy since 2002. Ahmet Davutoglu was Senior Advisor in 2002, then he became Foreign Minister and finally the Prime Minister of Turkey in 2014. Within Davutoglu Turkish Foreign Policy has changed drastically. In this sense Turkey’s EU Policy under Davutoglu also seems to be important. Turkye-EU Relations lived glory days in the early 2000s. Negotiations between Turkey and the EU began in 2005. Relations has been seriously damaged because of Cyprus issue which took place in 2006. Moreover, the European Commission, states such as Cyprus and France froze the chapters. However Turkey has tired to spread many areas from Balkans to Caucasus, from The Middle East to Africa due to Davutoglu’s multidirectional, multidimensional and active foreign policy. This situation has led to a Western-style thought began to end in Turkey. Within the Davutoglu era, discussions that there would be a break in Turkey-EU relations has experienced. Because it was alleged that the relationship be like in the former times. On the other hand it has been shown that relations between Turkey and EU continued sluggish, to be expressed goal of full membership. However this article will try to examine whether Turkey’s EU Policy under Prime Minister Davutoglu has changed radically or not. This will be analyzed how to continue in the relations between the EU and Turkey.

The takeover of power in Turkey by the Justice and Progress Party in 2002 opened a new chapter for that country. The practical application of the doctrine of Ahmet Davutoğlu’s „strategic depth” and soft power resources has led to a redefinition of the state’s position in the international arena and a departure from the static foreign policy paradigm. This led to a change in the role and importance of Turkey as a participant in international relations and to its active involvement in global politics. This article attempts to answer a number of key questions relating to the issues in the title. First, it will answer what is the place and role of the soft power concept in international relations theory. Then, what role and significance did the doctrine of „strategic depth” play in Turkey’s foreign policy. Finally, how Turkey used the soft power concept in its foreign policy based on „strategic depth”. And what role did Ahmet Davutoğlu play in this. The historical method was used to achieve the research objective.

The Justice and Development Party [Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP], which emerged from the Turkish political Islam in 2002, has aroused the interest of international observers through an active foreign policy. While this seems to be consistent, it also underwent many changes between 2002 and 2016. The AKP's strategic and diplomatic vision derives from past government experiences, the conservative ideologies that marked the country in the 20th century and the thoughts of several intellectuals, with Ahmet Davutoğlu, advisor to the Prime Minister and later Minister of Foreign Affairs (2009-2014) being the most influential of them. The first mandate of the AKP (2002-2007) witnessed a series of strategic options being explored within the party. This was followed by the establishment of a doctrine based on a few major principles, such as the pacification of neighbourly relations, pro-active diplomacy and the use of all the tools at hand to influence the regional and subsequently the global level. The objective was to put Turkey at the heart of local trade, using its growing influence in the Middle East to influence its international partners. The Arab revolutions of 2011 pushed the AKP to rethink its doctrine. The country yearns now for being an example within which traditional values and conservative democracy can coexist, as well as support from the Muslim Brotherhood, which brings this vision to the Arab world. But in 2013, several crises weakened this vision and forced Turkey to renounce the doctrine developed by the AKP., Issu de l’islam politique turc, le Parti de la Justice et du Développement [Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP], arrivé au pouvoir en 2002, a suscité l’intérêt des observateurs internationaux par une politique étrangère active. Si celle-ci semble répondre à une certaine cohérence, elle a aussi connu, entre 2002 et 2016, de nombreuses évolutions. L’AKP tire sa vision stratégique et diplomatique des expériences de gouvernement antérieures, des idéologies conservatrices qui ont marqué le pays au XXe siècle et de la pensée de plusieurs intellectuels, dont le plus influent est Ahmet Davutoğlu, conseiller du Premier ministre puis ministre des Affaires étrangères (2009-2014). Le premier mandat de l’AKP (2002-2007) voit ce parti explorer différentes options stratégiques. Puis se met en place une doctrine qui s’appuie sur quelques grands principes, comme la pacification des relations de voisinage, une diplomatie pro-active et l’utilisation de tous les outils à disposition pour rayonner à l’échelle régionale puis globale. L’objectif est de mettre la Turquie au cœur des échanges commerciaux locaux, en s’appuyant sur son influence grandissante au Moyen-Orient pour peser auprès de ses partenaires internationaux. Les révolutions arabes de 2011 poussent l’AKP à repenser sa doctrine. Le pays se veut désormais un exemple au sein duquel valeurs traditionnelles et démocratie conservatrice peuvent cohabiter, ainsi qu’un soutien des Frères Musulmans, qui portent cette vision dans le monde arabe. Mais en 2013, plusieurs crises fragilisent cette vision et poussent la Turquie à renoncer à la doctrine élaborée par l’AKP.

This analysis examines and explains the way in which Turkey views its own NATO membership by making use of strategic culture theory, a constructivist approach to security studies. A strategic culture consists of a mixture of narratives that shape a country’s ideas on security which, in turn, form the basis for its foreign policy decision making. In the case of Turkey, it is pointed out that while its strategic culture has during most of the 20th century been dominated by a ‘national unity’ narrative, an alternative ‘regional power’ narrative has been gaining prominence since the 1980s. The years of Ahmet Davutoğlu as foreign and prime minister (2009-2016) mark a period during which the regional power narrative clearly gained influence in Turkey’s strategic culture. In this analysis it will be shown that Turkey’s evolving strategic culture is changing the way it sees itself as NATO member and the way it behaves within the alliance. While strategic culture theories cannot predict the future of Turkish foreign policy, it can offer us a certain range of probable behaviour. How this works exactly, is illustrated by looking at Turkey’s discourse and actions in relation to NATO’s involvement in conflicts in Libya, Ukraine and Syria during the Davutoğlu years., Die Arbeit untersucht und erklärt mithilfe der Strategic Culture Theory, einer konstruktivistischen Annäherung an Sicherheitsstudien, die Sichtweise der Türkei auf die eigene NATO-Mitgliedschaft. Eine strategische Kultur besteht aus einer Mischung von Narrativen, die die Vorstellungen eines Landes von Sicherheit beeinflussen und wiederum die Grundlage für seine außenpolitischen Entscheidungen bilden. Im Falle der Türkei lässt sich festgestellen, dass seit den 1980er Jahren ein alternatives Narrativ der ‘Regionalmacht’ zu dem während der längsten Phase des 20. Jahrhunderts gültigen Narrativ der ‘nationalen Einheit’ an Bedeutung gewinnt. Die Jahre, in denen Ahmet Davutoğlu Außen- und Premierminister war (2009-2016), markieren eine Zeitspanne, während derer das Regionalmachtsnarrativ eindeutig an Einfluss in der Strategiekultur der Türkei gewonnen hat. In der vorliegenden Analyse wird gezeigt, dass die sich herausbildende Strategiekultur der Türkei die Art der Selbstwahnehmung als NATO-Mitgliedsstaat und die Verhaltensweise innerhalb der Allianz verändert. Während Strategic Culture Theories die Zukunft der türkischen Außenpolitik nicht vorhersagen können, bieten sie doch eine Bandbreute möglicher erwartbarer Verhaltensweisen an. Die Arbeit veranschaulicht diese Verhaltensweisen und ihre Funktionen im Hinblick auf Diskurse und Handlungen der Türkei in Beziehung zur Einmischung der NATO in Konflikte in Libyen, der Ukraine und Syrien während der Davutoğlu-Jahre.

During the Cold War period, when world system was bipolar, Turkish foreign chose to state with the status quo between the two poles. As a reaction of being neighbors to the Soviets, Turkey became a member of NATO, and avoided active external politics that its geography and history required. After the Cold War, it has become clear that Turkey's passive, static and one-dimensional foreign policy cannot be effective in determining its strategic position. Instead of this, a need for a more influential, dynamic, and multidimensional foreign policy was arose. Turkey, which is located in the region where the most intense changes of history have been experienced, has struggled to determine its strategic position in this period without repeating the erroneous prior to the Cold War which was focusing to the EU targets by alienate other regions. Although Turkey had been late in determining its position in 1990s, multidimensional proactive foreign policy implementations began to be seen, particularly in the period of the AKP. Essential stones were laid during the consultancy period of Ahmet Davutoglu and settled as foreign policy principles during his ministry period. The purpose of this thesis is to express the need of Davutoglu’s six basic principles, which are to get rid of the passive foreign policy, and implement dynamic and effective policies in the region and in the international arena, not only to implement in the certain period but to make them a state policy.Taking Davutoglu’s period into consideration, the author emphasizes that Turkey should be active in the near land, sea, and continental basins with multi-dimensional proactive foreign policy. In this framework, the author attempted to examine the Turkish Foreign Policy during his Ministry in Foreign Affairs by considering Ahmet Davutoglu's Strategic Depth Book and six basic foreign policy principles. The foreign policy tools regard to this purpose and the decision-making process in foreign policy are examined in the first chapter. Davutoğlu's foreign policy principles are examined in the second part. In the last part, it is attempted to explain Turkey's near land, sea, and continental basins according to the principles of Davutoglu. Çift kutuplu dünya sisteminin yaşandığı Soğuk Savaş döneminde Türk dış politikası Sovyetlere karşı NATO’ya üye olarak iki kutup arasında tercih yapmak zorunda kalmıştır. Soğuk Savaş sonrasında ise Türkiye’nin stratejik konumunu belirleme çalışmalarında edilgen, statik ve tek boyutlu bir dış politika etkili olamayacağı açıkça görülmüştür. Bunun yerine daha etken, dinamik ve çok boyutlu bir dış politika gerekliliği doğmuştur. Tarihinin en yoğun değişimlerinin yaşandığı bölgenin içerisinde bulunan Türkiye, Soğuk Savaş öncesindeki AB hedefine odaklanıp diğer bölgelere yabancılaşmasındaki hatasını bu dönemde tekrarlamadan stratejik konumunu belirleme mücadelesine girişmiştir. Türkiye, 1990’lı yıllarda konumunu belirlemede geç kalmışsa da özellikle AKP döneminde çok boyutlu proaktif dış politika uygulamaları görülmeye başlanmış ve bunu temel taşları Ahmet Davutoğlu’nun danışmanlığı döneminde atılmış ve bakanlığı döneminde de dış politika ilkeleri olarak gündeme oturmuştur. Bu tezin amacı; Davutoğlu’nun bakanlığı döneminde edilgen dış politikadan kurtulup, etken ve dinamik bir politika uygulama ihtiyacında Davutoğlu’nun altı temel ilkesinin sadece belirli dönemde değil bir devlet politikası olma ihtiyacının dile getirilmesidir. Yazar özellikle Davutoğlu dönemi dikkate alındığında Türkiye’nin yakın kara, deniz ve kıta havzalarında etkin olmasının çok boyutlu proaktif dış politika ile olması gerektiğini vurgulamaktır. Bu çerçevede yazar tarafından Ahmet Davutoğlu’nun Stratejik Derinlik kitabı ve altı temel dış politika ilkeleri dikkate alınarak Dışişleri Bakanlığı dönemindeki Türk Dış Politikasının incelemesi yapılmaya çalışılmıştır. Bu amaca yönelik dış politika araçları ve karar verme süreçleri birinci bölümde incelenmiştir. İkinci bölümde ise Davutoğlu’nun dış politika ilkeleri incelenmiştir. Son bölümde ise Türkiye’nin yakın kara, deniz ve kıta havzalarının açıklanması ve Davutoğlu’nun ilkelerine göre değerlendirilmeye çalışılmıştır.

Bachelor Thesis under the title: "Neo-Ottomanism and Its Effects in the Western Balkans: The Comparison of Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina" analyses the attitude of Turkish foreign policy towards Western Balkan states. The aim of the thesis is to analyse the Turkish expansionary foreign policy not only from a military but from an economic point of view. The thesis is divided into three parts. The first part is dedicated to Turkey and how it has changed its position on the regional and world political scene. The following part deals with the development of both relations between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Turkey and relations between Serbia and Turkey over the last ten years. The last and most significant chapter analyses the economic aspect of neo-ottomanism. Based on the analysis of Turkish investments in the Western Balkan states and other economic parameters (exports and imports), Turkey has been using soft power to become a major player in this very turbulent region. Using a comparative analysis of two case studies, it was confirmed that Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is one of the most important Turkish partners in the Balkans, is still in the centre of Turkish interest. However, led by recent events which resulted in the opening of the Serbian market to Turkish investors, one can observe...

Url: http://sutad.selcuk.edu.tr/sutad/article/view/1124, This article argues that in the last decade there is a visible decline in the political, normative and economic power of the European Union (EU) as a dominant actor in the Western Balkans (WB). Particularly the slowing down of the EU’s hegemonic project of Europeanization in the region created space for maneuver for other global and regional players. In this power vacuum, Turkey, alongside with Russia and China has aspired to play a central role in a region that is drifting into multi-polarity. This study aims to analyze Turkey's relations with the Western Balkans under the AKP Government., Bu çalışma, Avrupa Birliği’nin Batı Balkanlar’daki devletler üzerindeki siyasi, normatif ve ekonomik gücünün son yıllarda düşüşe geçtiğini ileri sürmektedir. Özellikle Birliğin ‘Avrupalılaştırma ‘ politikasının etkilerinin azalmasıyla birlikte Batı Balkanlar’da diğer bölgesel ve global aktörler için bir manevra alanı oluşmuştur. Rusya ve Çin ile birlikte bölgesel bir aktör olan Türkiye’nin de bölgedeki faaliyetlerini arttırması neticesinde, Batı Balkanlar bölgesel alt sisteminde tek kutupluluktan çok kutupluluğa doğru bir geçiş yaşanmıştır. Bu çalışma, güç dengesindeki bu dönüşüm doğrultusunda, Türkiye’nin AKP döneminde bölge ile ilişkilerinde meydana gelen değişimi, analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır.

The twists and turns of Turkish foreign policy under Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule have been a matter of interest not only in the scholarly literature, but also in common discourse. This article traces the unfolding of this policy in Turkey’s neighbourhood and in relation to its quest for EU membership, particularly since 2006, and also discusses the milestones that have been shaping it. Drawing upon the categories of change Charles Hermann identified, this article illustrates the magnitude and direction of change in Turkish foreign policy during this period and critically evaluates its implications for this policy today.

International audience

Das Ziel dieser Arbeit ist die strukturellen Determinanten der türkischen Politik auf dem Balkan in der letzten Zeit zu erklären. Es wird versucht, mit einem konstruktivistischen Ansatz der internationalen Beziehungen und Alexander Wendts Auffassung über die Agentur-Struktur-Beziehungen in der internationalen Politik fol-gende Fragen zu beantworten: Ob und inwieweit werden das traditionelle Verständnis der Außenpolitik, die Identität und das Verhalten der neuen Akteure in der türkischen Außenpolitik beeinflusst?; Welche Elemente der "alten" idealistischen Struktur können in den aktuellen Beziehungen zwischen der Türkei und dem Balkan beobachtet werden? Ich benutze die außenpolitischen Grundsätze der Türkei, welche aus der Zeit der Grün-dung der Republik bis zum Ende des Kalten Krieges wahrnehmbar sind, als eine gegebene Struktur und ver-suche zu zeigen, wie sie die Gestaltung der sogenannten neuen türkischen Außenpolitik und das Verhalten der Türkei auf dem Balkan in der Zeit von 2009, als Ahmet Davutoğlu das Amt des Außenministers nahm, beeinflussen. Ich bin der Meinung, dass diese traditionellen Prinzipien ein grundlegender Teil Davutoğlus Vorstellung über die türkischen Beziehungen mit dem Balkan bilden und dass sie in den außenpolitischen Be-ziehungen zu den Balkan-Ländern sogar noch sichtbarer sind. In diesem Sinne unterstütze ich das Argu-ment, dass keine große Veränderung in der ideellen Struktur der Außenpolitik der Türkei seit dem Amtsan-tritt Davutoğlu passiert ist und dass die seit langem etablierten Prinzipien der türkischen Außenpolitik noch immer nachvollziehbar in der AKP - Ära liegen. The aim of this thesis is to use the constructivist approach to international relations and Alexander Wendt's conception of agency-structure relationships in international politics to explain structural determinants of Turkey's policy towards the Balkans in the recent period. I’ll try to answer the question of how and to what extent the traditional foreign policy understanding influences the identity and behavior of new actors in Tur-key’s foreign policy and which are the elements of the “old” ideational structure that could be observed in the current relations between Turkey and the Balkans. I take Turkey’s foreign policy principles, observable from the period of founding of the Republic till the end of the Cold War as a given structure, and try to show how they influence the formulation of what is called Turkey’s new foreign policy and the behavior of Turkey towards the Balkans in the period from 2009, when Ahmet Davutoğlu took office of Minister of Foreign Af-fairs. I argue that traditional principles constitutively participate in Davutoğlu’s imagination of Turkey’s rela-tion with the Balkans and are even more observable in its foreign policy behavior towards Balkan countries. In that sense I support the argument that there was no great shift in the ideational structure of Turkey’s for-eign policy since Davutoğlu took office and that long-established principles of Turkish foreign policy are still traceable in the AKP Era.

The paper analyzes Ahmet Davutoglu’s “Strategic Depth” doctrine and its implications for Turkey’s new foreign policy. The author explores determinants, historical framework and traditional inputs of Turkish foreign policy, as well as long-term strategic objectives, directions, dilemmas and limitations of modern Turkey in the quest for leadership role in the West Asian and the Balkans regions. Работа посвящена анализу концепции «стратегической глубины» Ахмета Давутоглу и ее влияния на формирование новой внешней политики Турции. Автор раскрывает ключевые факторы и исторические особенности внешнеполитического процесса в Турции, выявляет долгосрочные стратегические цели, направления, альтернативы и ограничения современной Турции в ее борьбе за лидерство в Западной Азии и на Балканах.

International audience

It is widely acknowledged that over the past decade, Turkey's foreign policy has undergone profound transformations, so that a lot of people use to talk about the "new Turkish foreign policy." The coming to power of the AKP has resulted in profound foreign policy changes, but these changes were probably miscalculated. In 2010, one of the most popular themes of international experts conferences on Turkey could be summarized by the famous controversy: " Is the Turkish foreign policy changing its axis and turning East? " Today, since Ankara facing the Syrian crisis argues its NATO membership and is found on close positions to those of its Western allies, similar debates wonder whether Turkey is back to the West? Time and the "Arab Spring" have not yet cleared the substantive changes experienced by the Turkish foreign policy, they simply allowed us to understand that they were not quite those we originally thought..., Tout le monde reconnaît qu'au cours de la décennie écoulée, la politique étrangère de la Turquie a connu de profondes transformations, au point qu'on a pris l'habitude de parler de " nouvelle politique étrangère turque ". L'arrivée au pouvoir de l'AKP a bien entrainé de profonds changements en matière de politique étrangère, mais ces changements ont probablement été mal évalués. En 2010, l'un des thèmes les plus prisées des conférences d'experts internationaux sur la Turquie pouvait être résumé par la question devenue célèbre : " La politique étrangère turque n'est-elle pas en train de changer d'axe et de se tourner vers l'Est ? " Aujourd'hui, alors qu'Ankara aux prises avec la crise syrienne, fait valoir sa qualité de membre de l'OTAN et se retrouve sur des positions voisines de celles de ses alliés occidentaux, des débats similaires se demandent si la Turquie n'est pas de retour à l'Ouest ? Le temps et les " printemps arabes " n'ont pourtant pas effacé les changements de fond vécus par la politique étrangère turque, ils nous ont simplement permis de comprendre que ces derniers n'étaient pas tout à fait ceux que l'on pensait initialement...

The rupture between Turkey and the Arab world has been the most obvious during the Cold War. The AKP government, in power since 2002, has pursued in the Arab world an active policy of economic openness, political mediation and soft power. Especially after 2007, in 2009-2010, the policy of "zero problems with neighbors" is deployed toward Iraq, but especially Syria. The "Arab Springs" brutally questioned this policy, and strongly reduced the ability of regional influence of Turkey. The Syrian crisis, the return of the Egyptian diplomacy, the activism of Qatar, tensions with Iran, Russia and Israel: all of which forced Ankara to follow more than to control the movement. The outcome of the Syrian crisis will obviously be decisive for the need to redefine the regional Arab policy of Ankara., Résumé: C'est pendant la Guerre froide que la rupture entre la Turquie et le monde arabe aura été la plus évidente. Le gouvernement de l'AKP, au pouvoir depuis 2002, a mené une politique d'ouverture économique, de médiation politique et de soft power active en direction du monde arabe. C'est surtout après 2007, en 2009-2010, que la politique de " Zéro problème avec les voisins " s'est déployée en direction de l'Irak, mais surtout de la Syrie. Les " printemps arabes " ont brutalement remis en cause cette politique, et fortement réduit la capacité d'influence régionale de la Turquie. La crise syrienne, le retour de la diplomatie égyptienne, l'activisme du Qatar, les tensions avec l'Iran, la Russie et Israël: autant d'éléments qui contraignent Ankara à subir le mouvement plus qu'à le maîtriser. L'issue de la crise syrienne sera évidemment décisive pour la nécessaire redéfinition de la politique régionale arabe d'Ankara.

Turkey has emerged as a major actor in the Middle East over the last decade, since the ruling party AKP came to power in 2002. Turkey is now playing a mediation role in regional conflicts and has been speaking out loudly on sensitive issues such as the Iranian nuclear program and the Palestinian- Israeli conflict. Furthermore, Turkey has established close ties with the Arab world which has suffered the relationship with its long-time ally Israel. This new presence in Middle East has been criticized by Turkey's allies in west. Critics argue that the country is about to abandon its former western relationship and strengthen their ties with the Arab world instead. This thesis has two main purposes. First, an empirical purpose which is to describe and explain changes in Turkish foreign policy towards Middle East. Second, this thesis has a theoretical purpose, aiming to make a contribution to the study field also on a theoretical level. The ambition is therefore to provide with ideas and/or modify the model of Gustavsson in order to make it more applicable of other cases of foreign policy change. The theoretical framework applied on this thesis is Jakob Gustavsson's model for explaining foreign policy change. Turkey's foreign policy change will be analyzed through a qualitative case study that focuses on the country's relations with the Middle East. Based on Gustavsson's model, possible explanations to Turkey's foreign policy change towards Middle East are structural changes in the international and national system. The end of the bipolarity system during the cold war resulted in a major structural change, thus Turkey had to adapt to the new system by hammering out a new foreign policy doctrine. In addition to this, the growing opposition to a Turkish membership within the EU is considered to be another explanation to Turkey's improved relations with the Middle East. The results shows furthermore possible explanations on a national level such as growing economy, a strong Turkish public opinion, new actors and also AKP:s ideological affinity with Muslim aspirations. The Iraq crisis, which arose in 2003 when Turkey rejected a resolution authorizing the deployment of American forces in Turkey in a war against Iraq, functions as a catalysts for the changes in Turkish foreign policy. One of the main components in the model emphasizes that the individual key actor needs to go through a change within its belief system, however the author have not found such evidence in this case and thus suggests that this part of the model becomes slightly modified or even removed. Keywords: Turkey, AKP, Ahmet Davutoglu, Middle East, foreign policy change, zero problems towards neighbors

Türk dış politikası cumhuriyetin kurulmasından itibaren genel olarak üç temel politika üzerine kurulmuştur. Bunlar `Statükocu', `Batıcı' ve `Güvenlikçi' yaklaşımlar olmuştur. Cumhuriyetin kuruluş aşamasında hem Türkiye'nin içinde bulunduğu koşullar hem de dünya konjonktürü bu politikaların yürütülmesinde belirleyici olmuştur. Atatürk dönemi, 2. Dünya Savaşı ve Soğuk Savaş boyunca bu politikalar Türk dış politikası yapımında temel taşlar olmuştur. Soğuk Savaş'ın sona ermesiyle birlikte dünya konjonktürü değişirken, özellikle Türkiye'nin de içinde bulunduğu coğrafya yeni etnik, dini ve bölgesel çatışmalara sahne olmuştur. Türkiye bu yeni konjonktürde, Sovyet tehdidini de hissetmeyecek olmanın verdiği bir rahatlıkla, alternatif politikalar yürütmeye çalışmıştır. Ancak 1990'lar boyunca devam eden zayıf koalisyon hükümetleri ve Türkiye'nin, başta ekonomik olmak üzere, kendi imkânlarının buna elverişli olmaması `çok yönlü dış politika' yapımına izin vermemiştir. 2002 ile birlikte AK Partinin tek başına iktidar olması, uzun süre devam eden siyasi istikrarsızlığı geride bırakarak siyasi olarak bir istikrar getirmiştir. Özellikle Türkiye'nin AB üyeliği çerçevesinde iç politikada yaptığı reformlar yeniliği ve değişimi de beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu bağlamda 2002 sonrası Türk dış politikasında yürütülen `Çok Yönlü Dış Politika' ve `Komşularla Sıfır Sorun' politikaları tartışma konusu olmuştur. Özellikle son dönemde `Arap Baharı' olarak ortaya çıkan gelişmeler Türkiye'nin yürüttüğü politikaları Suriye örneği üzerinden yeniden tartışılır hale getirmiştir. Bu çalışma, geleneksel Türk dış politikasından son dönem Türk dış politikasındaki değişikliğe ve `Komşularla Sıfır Sorun' politikasına; Yunanistan, Suriye ve Ermenistan örneklerinden hareketle bir değerlendirme çalışmasıdır., Turkish foreign policy, since the foundation of the Republic, has been established on the three basic policies in general. These have been Statusquoist, Western-Oriented and Security-Oriented approaches. Both the conditions in which Turkey was and the conjuncture of the world at the period of the foundation of the Republic have been determinative for the execution of these policies. These policies, during the period of Ataturk, the World War II and the Cold War, have been the basic foundations in the making of Turkish foreign policy. While the conjuncture of the world was changing by the end of the Cold War, the geography in which especially Turkey is too has witnessed new ethnic, religious and regional clashes. Turkey, in this new conjuncture, with a comfort coming by it would not feel a Soviet threat, has tried to manage alternative policies. Nevertheless, the weak coalition governments in the administration during 1990?s and that Turkey?s own capabilities, economical conditions at the top most, were not suitable to this have not let the making of a ?multi-directional foreign policy?. That the AKP is in power alone by 2002 has brought a political stability, leaving the political instability that continues for a long time back. This has also brought an economical stability by itself. Particularly, the reforms that Turkey makes in the domestics policy in the framework of the membership of EU has carried improvement and change with it, besides. In this context, the politics of ?Multi-Directional Foreign Policy? and ?Zero-Problem with Neighbors?, which are carried on Turkish foreign policy after 2002, have been in discussion. Especially, some issues emerging as Arab Spring in the recent times have made the politics, which Turkey follows, a highly controversial topic on the example of Syria. This Study is an evaluation study about the change from the traditional Turkish foreign policy to the recently Turkish foreign policy and about the policy of Zero-Problem with Neighbors; with a motive from the examples of Greece, Syria and Armenia.