Between praetorians and democracy the role of the military in Turkish foreign policy

Milletleraras ◽  
2003 ◽  
pp. 177-211
Author(s):  
İlhan UZGEL
2013 ◽  
Vol 05 (03) ◽  
pp. 5-16
Author(s):  
Lance L P GORE

The new foreign policy team is more professional and with an Asian focus than its older counterpart. Although still fragmented, it may have stronger leadership and better coordination. This is critically important because China is at a defining moment as to its international role. Xi Jinping's closer ties with the military and his hands-on style may encourage assertive nationalism and more active role of the military in foreign affairs.


2021 ◽  
pp. 118-134
Author(s):  
Ahmet Erdi Öztürk

This chapter aims to read the AKP period of Turkey in light of a combination of domestic and foreign policies, with religion at the forefront. In these two chapters, the concept of ‘state of exception’ is employed to understand the authoritarian ethno-nationalist Sunnification of Turkey under AKP rule. Indeed, throughout the chapters the new positions of state institutions such as Diyanet, the role of the Gülen Movement, the role of Ahmet Davutoğlu in the new Turkish foreign policy and the leadership of Erdoğan constitute the priorities, since these are the main determinants in an understanding of the relations between the Balkans and Turkey since the early 2000s.


Istoriya ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (7 (105)) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Alexey Komarov

The article examines the evolution of the Soviet leadership’s attitudes regarding Finland’s desire to position itself as a neutral country. Finland’s efforts to promote the idea of its neutrality became especially active after World War II. In this way the representatives of the Finnish political class tried to enhance their profile on the international arena and distance themselves from the military clauses of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual assistance signed by the USSR and Finland in 1948. Both in Moscow and Helsinki it was understood that neutrality can play the role of an important foreign policy instrument. The Finns tried to use this instrument to weaken Soviet influence on the country, to facilitate rapprochement with other Nordic countries and, ultimately, with the West as a whole. The Soviet leadership regarded these activities negatively. However, within the framework of general deconstruction of the foreign policy priorities’ system created by Mikhail S. Gorbachev’s predecessors, the Soviet side in 1989 finally and unconditionally recognized Finland’s neutrality. After the collapse of the USSR the Soviet-Finnish Treaty of 1948 was substituted by another document, namely the Treaty on the Foundations of Relations between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Finland signed on January 20, 1992. During the elaboration of the new agreement the Russian side would have had no objection against recognizing Finland as a neutral state, but Helsinki, considering the transition from the bipolar system of international relations to the unipolar one, showed no interest to this.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document