Search

Copyright of SIRIUS - Zeitschrift fur Strategische Analysen is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Public Administration & Civil Service / Memlekettìk Basķaru Ža̋ne Memlekettìk Ķyzmet is the property of Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan / Akademiya Gosun and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Bulletin of the 'Carol I' National Defence University / Buletinul Universitatii Nationale de Aparare 'Carol I' is the property of Carol I National Defence University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Turkey is strategically positioned at the crossroads of Europe, Asia, and Africa, and is considered an important geopolitical actor in the global arena. Since Turkey embraced neoliberal economic policies in the 1980s, it has emerged as one of the leading emerging economies with major trade links with the US, Russia, EU, and Asia. Turkey has been a longstanding member of the NATO alliance and signed the European Customs Union Agreement in 1995. With the advent of Asia as the global economic powerhouse, Turkey's foreign and economic policy horizons today extend to the Asia-Pacific Region. Turkey plays a key role in China's Belt and Road Initiative and with the launching of the Asia Anew Initiative in late 2019, Ankara has redoubled efforts to forge closer ties with the ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and with ASEAN itself. This paper will explore and evaluate Turkey's foreign policy over the last two decades and the shift from the principle of Strategic Depth to that of Strategic Autonomy. The article will also review Turkey's current change in international orientation and its international re-orientation toward Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy & Peace is the property of Ihsan Dogramaci Peace Foundation, Center for Foreign Policy & Peace Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article will discuss Turkey's interests in resolving the Syrian conflict from the perspective of defense management. The Syrian conflict that demanded the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad made all countries in the world want to participate in conflict resolution. Turkey is no exception. Turkey is one of Syria’s close neighbors and is interested in it. National defense and economic interests are the main factors of Turkey in the Syrian conflict. The deployment of strategic depth of foreign policy has become the benchmark for conflict resolution. National defense management is a new science for realizing national interests, and its strategic environment must be reviewed. Therefore, as one of the important actors in the Middle East, Turkey has the aforementioned policies in realizing its national interests. This article uses qualitative methods in the conclusion. This article uses assumptions from realism to constructivism, national interest theory of national defense theory and national defense management theory. The conclusion of this article is that defense management (Assad's call for resignation) is based on preventing Syrian refugees from going to Turkey. A large number of refugees from Syria may undermine Turkey's security and stability. The aim is to maintain Turkey’s social and economic stability, which may be shaken by the existence of these refugee groups. Achieving this goal by providing support and weapon assistance to the Syrian rebels is considered a form of preventing the spread of the Syrian conflict. In addition, Turkey also hopes to join NATO

This article interrogates and extrapolates Iran's bilateral relationship with the Assad government and Hezbollah in the context of the so‐called Resistance Axis, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps's objective of enhancing its strategic depth in Syria after the onset of conflict in 2011. Utilizing a complex realist conceptual framework, and with reference to constructivism, it argues that Iran's strategic depth in Syria could have been addressed as part of a dialogue on regional security after the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran nuclear deal) in 2015. However, it has been reinforced by the legacy of past warfare, the Trump administration's "maximum pressure" policy, and a regional trend toward the creation of enclaves in conflict zones. This trend, including Turkey's forward‐defense strategy in Syria, could create further instabilities as state and nonstate actors vie for security and political influence and as long as enclaves remain untethered to broader interests and alliances. The case of Pakistan highlights enduring themes such as how shifting US diplomatic and military strategy and dependency could impact strategic depth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the strategic analysis of the reasons and outcomes of the aggravation of the relations between Russia and Turkey after the catastrophe with the Russian military plane Su-24. The author outlines the most critical problems which have led to this tragic event using the philosophical approach. The article analyses the relations between the two countries from the strategic point of view on the assumption of the necessity to build up fruitful cooperation in the future. According to the author, purely economic factors because of which bilateral relations could be defined as strategic partnership, have proven to be insufficient when it has come to the political rapprochement of Russia and Turkey based on the commonly understood values of the regional cooperation amid the formation of the multipolar world. The author claims that Russia and Turkey could together become one of the poles using their regional cooperation in the regions of the Black sea and the Middle-East. Nevertheless, extra idealization of the two countries' rapprochement, taking into account the events of the 24th November, 2015, has caused political disenchantment with the perspective of taking the bilateral relations to the real level of strategic partnership which would include not only economic but other factors as well. The tragic event is not only about our plane being shut down but also about the murder of our soldiers what, also considering the reluctance of the Turkish elite to make apologies and its aspiration to postpone the normalization of the relations, makes it difficult to at least bring the relations back to their initial level.

The article examines the strategic analysis of the reasons and outcomes of the aggravation of the relations between Russia and Turkey after the catastrophe with the Russian military plane Su-24. The author outlines the most critical problems which have led to this tragic event using the philosophical approach. The article analyses the relations between the two countries from the strategic point of view on the assumption of the necessity to build up fruitful cooperation in the future. According to the author, purely economic factors because of which bilateral relations could be defined as strategic partnership, have proven to be insufficient when it has come to the political rapprochement of Russia and Turkey based on the commonly understood values of the regional cooperation amid the formation of the multipolar world. The author claims that Russia and Turkey could together become one of the poles using their regional cooperation in the regions of the Black sea and the Middle-East. Nevertheless, extra idealization of the two countries' rapprochement, taking into account the events of the 24th November, 2015, has caused political disenchantment with the perspective of taking the bilateral relations to the real level of strategic partnership which would include not only economic but other factors as well. The tragic event is not only about our plane being shut down but also about the murder of our soldiers what, also considering the reluctance of the Turkish elite to make apologies and its aspiration to postpone the normalization of the relations, makes it difficult to at least bring the relations back to their initial level.

Copyright of International Relations / Uluslararasi Iliskiler is the property of International Relations Council and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article is devoted to the study of Ahmet Davutoğlu’s foreign policy views, which formed the basis of the Turkish Republic’s strategy on the international arena in the 21st century. The purpose of the work is to implement comprehensive study of the theoretical provisions on which his vision of the world order and Turkish place in it were based. The article emphasizes the theorist’s refusal of the traditional views of the Turkish political elite on international relations, which was based on the implementation of the pro–Western course. Instead, he emphasizes the uniqueness of Ankara’s strategic position, which naturally ensure Turkish ambitions and claims for the role of a regional leader. Thus, the significance of the theoretical provisions of Davutoğlu as a decisive milestone in the recent history of the Turkish Republic, as they radically revise existing approaches to thestate positioning in the international arena, is stressed out. The main principles and sources that shaped the views of Davutoğlu – such as Turkey’s historical heritage and geopolitical position, its religious identity and the potential of the Turkish Model to become an example for other states of the Muslim world – are determined. The Neo–Ottoman character of the proposed course, which is primarily based on the restoration of the Ankara’s influence on the post–Ottoman regions (the Balkans, the Caucasus, the Middle East, North Africa), is emphasized. Special attention is given to the characterization of methodological principles and tools for practical implementation of the foreign policy proposed by Davutoğlu for the achievement of foreign policy ambitions. In this context, the doctrine of «Zero Problems with the Neighbors», which was the basis of Turkey’s bilateral relations with other states in the second half of 2000 – early 2010, is considered. Also Turkish mediation efforts in resolving international disputes and the practice of using soft power in international activities is described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the Justice and Development Party came to power, Turkey has taken another direction in the international scene, based primarily on the ideas of Ahmet Davutoglu, architect of Turkish foreign policy. Different from Turkey's conduct during the Cold War, Davutoglu developed a new foreign policy with specific principles, with their implementation still open to debates. After Davutoglu's exit, it should be noted that Turkey found itself in another political context, and began recalibrating its foreign policy, as president Erdogan has undertaken a more active role under the essentials of a de facto presidential foreign policy. It is worth mentioning some shifts from Davutoglu's framework, such as: from soft power to hard power, from multilateralism to strategic security alliances, from zero problems with neighbours to a policy of regaining friends, from strategy of active globalisation through multilateralism to strategic security alliances, and from civilisationalist realism of Strategic Depth to proactive moral realism. The article aims to shed light on how effective the principles of Turkish foreign policy devised by Davutoglu were, whether Turkey continues implementing his policies or has abandoned them and what the dynamics of the new Turkish Foreign Policy are (after Davutoglu's exit). This article argues that there has been a reorientation of the foreign policy of Turkey as a result of structural and contextual changes in the regional and international political landscape. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay analyzes two phases of recent Turkish history: the rising of Turgut Özal (1982) and the current government led by Erdoğan and his party AKP. Some elements, aimed at a common reference to the past Ottoman identity, emerge from their own politics. It, described by many analysts as a politics of neo-Ottoman, has begun to develop in the eighties with another phenomenon, the re-emergencing of Islam in the public and political context. Turkish developments are favoured by the choices made by Özal who first tried to revive the Turkey ambitions through a gradual reconciliation with the imperial legacy. Ideas were taken up and developed in the last decade by political Prime Minister Erdoğan and his ideologue, Foreign Minister Davutoğlu, who raised the idea of neo-Ottoman Turkey. They both think that their country will revive the past glories, regaining the role of regional and global power.

This paper questions Turkey’s “soft power” capacity in the Arab world and Middle East region. It attempts to analyse the role of the different actors involved in the projection of Turkey’s “soft power” vis-à-vis the Arab world. The paper distinguishes between public/governmental and private/non-governmental agents producing “soft power” and examines the interaction between them. The analysis first focuses on the conceptual framework that underlies Turkey’s paradigm shift from hard power to cultural, or “soft,” power in the Middle East. In particular, it examines the key elements of the “strategic depth” theory, or the so-called “Davutoğlu doctrine,” and shows how a new vision for Turkey’s international role and cultural attractiveness has been formulated. The paper then examines the tools and instruments used to project Turkey’s cultural power in the Middle East: in particular, the export of soap operas [diziler] to the Arab world and the launching of an Arabic-language TV channel (TRT Al Arabiyya). The author attempts to identify the actors involved in each of these strategies. Finally, the paper offers an assessment of the real impact of Turkish soap operas and TRT channel in the Middle East. It stresses the limits of Turkey’s “soft power” in the region both in terms of conceptual/theoretical relevance and contextual efficacy, and examines the impact of the Arab uprisings on Turkey’s projection of soft power vis-à-vis the region. The author concludes that Turkey’s cultural power has thus far produced limited outcomes and has had few tangible positive effects in increasing Turkey’s general power capacity in the Arab world.

The aim of this research paper is to explain the concept of neo-Ottomanism as a Turkish foreign policy doctrine, as it was formulated by the ruling Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP). The paper follows two distinct yet interrelated themes. First, it explains how the neo-Ottoman discourse used by AKP today differs from the civic proto-nationalist discourse of Ottomanism developed by political reformers around 1839-1908, in order to construct an overarching identity formula for the multi-confessional and multi-ethnic Empire which sensed its demise. Second, it discusses the current understanding of neo-Ottomanism in relation to economic, political and cultural interests that the AKP pursues in the Middle East. The argument is that today's AKP's interpretation of the Ottoman past as a justification for its growing political, economic and cultural presence in the region is very selective and makes a radical departure from the original 19th century concept. Besides these key analytical concerns, the paper also addresses major changes in Turkish foreign policy, between 2002 and 2013, as well as relevant political transformations in the region. The empirical material consists of documents in both Turkish and English in the form of press releases and public statements of key AKP representatives available online from newspapers, thinktanks, the Republic of Turkey's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Presidency of the Republic of Turkey and AKP websites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The provided paper describes main features of the Turkish foreign policy towards Macedonia after the Cold War. The strategic character of the bilateral Turkish‑Macedonian partnership has been underlined. This partnership has its roots in the pragmatic tendency of the Turkish foreign policy to strengthen its influence and provide stability in the Balkan Peninsula. It is also a part of the broader context of the Turkey’s foreign policy which is determined by global factors and centuries‑lasting history of bilateral relations. A particular dynamism of the Turkey’s foreign policy under Justice and Development Party’s rule has been underlined in this paper. It has been clarified that implementation of the “strategic depth” conception – that forms a normative base for Turkey’s foreign activities under prime minister R.T. Erdoğan’s rule – has largely contributed to the deepening of bilateral relations.

As the coalition forces prepare to exit Afghanistan, concerns regarding peace and stability in the country and future power balance after their departure are becoming paramount. While there will be a considerable American presence, focus has now shifted to local infrastructure and services - civil, military and political and their ability to further peace and progress in the country. Owing to the geostrategic landscape of Afghanistan, in addition to its long conflict ridden history with a significant presence of the Taliban, concerns regarding revival of conflict and violence are coming to the fore -- particularly from traditional South Asian rivals i.e. India and Pakistan. Through an in-depth study of the political, economic, cultural and regional dimensions of this tri-lateral relationship, the following paper examines how there is a significant clash of interests and how there can cooperation between India and Pakistan in Afghanistan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Being located at the crossroads of Asia, Europe and Africa, connecting Middle East, Balkan and Caucasus alongwith its historical legacy of Ottoman Empire, Turkey plays an important role in the regional and global politics as well as determines its foreign policy accordingly. Justice and Development Party (AKP) led by Erdogan with Islamic ideological background entering to Turkish politics in 2001, got victory in the elections of 2002, since then hitherto ruling the country. AKP government's foreign policy followed 'zero problem' and 'strategic depth' principles with Turkish vicinity. Turkish-Syrian interactions had begun in the 8th century under Umayyad caliphate. The Turks gradually occupied higher ranks in Umayyad state and settled down at the territories today called Syria. During Seljuk time, Turks captured Syria which replaced with Mamluks. The Ottomans regained sovereignty in Syria at the 16th century which continued till the end of First World War. Then, Turkish-Syrian relations developed as mandate shaped by France. Since then, some conflicting issues affecting Turkish-Syrian relations such as the Hatay (Sanjak) issue, water sharing issues. During Syria's independence in 1936, Turkey demanded Hatay's independence too, which was denied by France. On the eve of Second World War in 1939, Hatay was ceded to Turkey. Since then, it became an issue of conflict. The water sharing has also been another issue of debate. Concerning security issues, both countries situated at opposite sites. Syria supported PKK, which Ankara regarded as terrorist group operating against Turkey. This hostile attitude gradually changed under AKP's soft foreign policy towards Syria. Potential Kurdish state risk after Iraq war, common security perceptions after 9/11, compelled both the countries to adopt collective security measures. This article is exclusively aimed at discovering the factors which prompted Turkey to shift its policy towards Syria during the crises caused by Arab Spring. It will also include the nature and historical developments of Turkish-Syrian relations with a view to understanding the driving factors behind shifting policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study explores, first of all, two different meanings of geopolitics and geostrategy: the traditional one, saying that we are speaking about a highly specialized science; and a second one, stating that there are, anytime and anywhere, not only geopolitically / geostrategically significant ideas, but also geopolitically significant activities (we call all these activities geopolitical praxis). Then, the study briefly lists the quite important number of major foreign influences which shaped, along Romania's entire history, the geopolitical praxis of the ruling elites of the states place on the territory of contemporary Romania. Then the study explores, with some details, three major episodes in the long history of geopolitical praxis on the territory of Romania. The first takes place in 292 before Christ; a second one is the astonishingly successful geostrategic activity of the Medieval prince Mircea the Elder, one of the most important Romanian princes in the Middle Ages; and the third one takes place in 1859, when Alexandru Ioan Cuza threatens, by mobilizing at Floreşti the armies of both Romanian principalities which had had been recently united, the strategic rear areas of the Austrian Empire, confronted at that very moment with a major war in northern Italy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The provided paper describes main features of the Turkish foreign policy towards Macedonia after the Cold War. The strategic character of the bilateral Turkish -Macedonian partnership has been underlined. This partnership has its roots in the pragmatic tendency of the Turkish foreign policy to strengthen its influence and provide stability in the Balkan Peninsula. It is also a part of the broader context of the Turkey's foreign policy which is determined by global factors and centuries -lasting history of bilateral relations. A particular dynamism of the Turkey's foreign policy under Justice and Development Party's rule has been underlined in this paper. It has been clarified that implementation of the "strategic depth" conception -- that forms a normative base for Turkey's foreign activities under prime minister R.T. Erdoan's rule -- has largely contributed to the deepening of bilateral relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates Ahmet Davutoğlu’s geopolitical imagination in the context of his magnum opus ‘Strategic Depth'. It argues that competing geopolitical imaginations in Turkish geopolitical culture needs to be classified in accordance with their respectice political ontology. By mapping its intellectual and philosophical lineage, its powerfull mode of political thought and its distinct geopolitical conceptual framework, this study seeks to provide a critical geopolitical foundation of Strategic Dept's peculiar geopolitical self-perception and its distinctive approach to the Turkey's international position. In the fisrt section, the article examines Davutoğlu’s critism of Kemalist political ontology. In the second section, the article analyses geopolitical methodology of Strategic Depht by taking into consideration Davutoğlu’s sense of geography (space) and history (time). In the final seciton, the article tries to explain geopolitical imagination of Stragic Depth by problematizing its geographical representation of Turkey as ‘geographical super-complex'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The notion of security widening from traditional to non-traditional threats and the changing geo-economic strategies, has resulted in revamping foreign policies of the contemporary nation-states. Realizing this, India also comprehended new outlooks and orientations to deal with rest of the world. Nevertheless, her foreign policy aspirations for socio-economic development, security and peace are dependent on a peaceful and prosperous neighbourhood. Its 'Connect Central Asia Policy' and 'Peaceful Co-existence Principle' provides due recognition to the core and peripheral neighbourhood, particularly, Central Asia in relation to geo-economic, geo-strategic and geo-political aspects. In this respect, Afghanistan also provides a suitable route for India to achieve her foreign policy aspirations in the regional and global context, because of the geo-strategic location of Afghanistan in between South, Central, West and East Asia, as well as the involvement of world powers in this war-torn nation since 9/11. India's assistance to rebuild Afghanistan reaches US $ 2 billion with the recognition of being largest regional and fifth international donor in this process. India has completed various projects in this troubled country regarding socio-economic development, science and technology upgradation, civil infrastructure, human resource development and capacity building in the areas of education, health, agriculture etc. India attempts to work for a stable, secure, peaceful, democratic and prosperous Afghanistan that holds the political, strategic and economic significance for her to assure a strong foothold for regional aspirations as Afghanistan falls in both South as well as Central Asian region. However, there are various constraints before India to meet and promote her interests in Afghanistan. These challenges have become more complex with the resurgence of Taliban, the return of Pakistan factor in Afghan politics and the US-led ISAF withdrawal. Thus, the study is an attempt to explore India's changing foreign policy aspirations, in general, and her Afghan policy, in particular, to provide an insight towards 'emerging India' as a significant regional and global player of current day international politics. With the vision of 'Asian Century,' India has a major role to play making this dream a reality where, in addition of investment and assistance, efforts for converting hatred into love, improving the efficacy of regional organizations as well as resolving amicably the international and inter-regional issues - all needs a humane approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Alternative Politics / Alternatif Politika is the property of Alternatif Politika and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The term Indian Ocean States is applied to both coastal and landlocked states. In the connection total 51 states are remained under discussion in the Indian Ocean strategies. Their issues and problems are diverse. These issues have made the India Ocean an area of conflict. The wealth and the resources of the Indian Oceans have significantly involved the extra regional actors in the ocean. The present study focuses that this involvement of extra regional actors and the competition between the regional powers has shaped the policies and designs of global political settings regarding Indian Ocean. The study concludes that, Politics and strategies are an ongoing phenomena but the reality is that Indian Ocean is having the name of the India but is not totally in Indian control and custody. In this world of power and competition things and patterns keep on changing hence the command of Oceans. The changing power pattern round the globe is affecting the politics of Indian Oceans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Government of Turkey which claims that it is a successor of Ottoman Empire tries to be leader of changes in political movements in the region which rises with starting of Arab spring in the Middle East. In any Arab states which protest has been begun, US and Europe and other countries like Turkey support protesters. Turkey's claim on the leadership of changes and the formation of new Middle East which is approved by powerful Arab states has theoretical bases and there are many paradoxes in its act and theory. This paper demonstrates how turkey emphasizes on its historical ottoman heritage and national interests. Turkey demands higher and better position in the region by using the events related to Arab spring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Alternative Politics / Alternatif Politika is the property of Alternatif Politika and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The accelerated growth of Sino-Turkish relations indicates their increasing convergence on foreign, economic and security policies, despite several constraints. The deterioration of Turco-American relationship and frustrated Turkish ambitions of EU membership, coupled with a desire to diversify its arms acquisitions and balance its foreign policy, have led to the readjustments in its foreign and security policy. This realignment has resulted in closer Sino-Turkish partnership and emergence of the strategic cooperation. In China, a growing realisation has emerged in favour of Turkey’s geo-strategic and geopolitical importance and its potential as a market for Chinese defence exports. Turkey as a client may impart much sought after international credibility to Chinese weapon manufacturers and a base in Turkey would enhance Chinese access to regional markets. Hence, China has increasingly courted Turkey and Chinese companies have increased their operations inside Turkey. In addition, there are significant convergences between both armed forces on issues of national security, separatism and terrorism. Consequently, strategic cooperation between China and Turkey has increased considerably in the last decade. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper is an attempt to provide a critical realist analysis of the concept of ‘strategic debth’ recently being used in analysing Turkish foreign policy. The article provides a criticism of the realist geopolitical thinking on which the concept of strategic debth is based using the insights of the critical realist philosophy of science. It takes the concept of ontological debth from critical realism and extends it to Gramsci’s analysis and develops the concept of hegemonic debth. Underlying the concept of hegemonic debth is the idea that geopolitical relations should be thought of in connection with the social structures that give rise to them. The article is intended as a contribution to a historical materialist analysis of Turkish foreign policy where a state-centric positivism dominates, as well as an attempt to develop a social theory of foreign policy based on critical realism. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Much praise and calumny has been heaped on the new Turkish Foreign Policy (TFP) for its peculiar record in the last decade. In particular, probing into whether Turkey drifts from the West have recently become something of a cottage industry. Systematic studies analyzing complexities and nuances of the new TFP are scarce. Instead, both the champions and critics of the new TFP often cloak normative and empirical debate in hastily designed conceptual edifice, which not only tend to simplify and misconstrue the whole debate on what is at stake in Turkey's changing identity and foreign policy, but also expose deep misperceptions and confusions rather than scholarly communication. This article seeks to offer an analysis of Turkey's new foreign policy orientations in relation to its identity-changes affect policies and positions of Turkey in world politics. It first provides a general overview of the approach developed by the founding figure of the new TFP, Ahmet Davutoğlu. Secondly, it identifies theoretical underpinnings of the new TFP with a view to evaluating the role of its religious and cultural identity. Then, a selection of discussions both from the advocates and critics with regard to empirical cases including the Iraq and Israeli conundrums are put under scrutiny. Thirdly, the much-hyped debate as to whether the new TFP drifts from the West and its ideals are put into context order to provide a more balanced view of what is at issue in Turkey's changing foreign policy orientations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]