Sinan Tavukçu
Türkiye, which has the world’s third-largest diplomatic network, is closely watched both at home and abroad for the active foreign policy it pursues and the positive relations it has established with nearly every country in a manner that differs markedly from that of other states. Observers are seeking to understand and make sense of this approach. In this article, we will examine the underlying codes that shape Turkish foreign policy, which is being closely followed by the international community.
Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has stated in numerous speeches that the current global system is in the midst of a profound crisis, describing this situation as “geopolitical turbulence.” Since 2013, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has likewise maintained that the current global system—built after the Second World War upon the hegemony of five states under the United Nations Security Council—has generated a global crisis, and that a solution is possible, as expressed through the slogans “The World Is Bigger Than Five” and “A More Just World Is Possible.”
Hakan Fidan identifies three fundamental causes of the system’s gridlock: institutional inadequacy stemming from the sluggishness of international institutions in producing solutions to the multidimensional crises they face; the emergence of new centers of power as the world evolves from a unipolar to a multipolar structure; and the digital transformation driven by emerging domains such as artificial intelligence and cyberspace, which is disrupting traditional security paradigms. Minister Fidan underscores the global system’s need for a paradigm shift, stating, “The world is trying to solve today’s crises with the tools of the past; this is not possible.”
At a time when global powers are retreating from their traditional security commitments, Ankara is building its new foreign policy vision to fill the vacuum in the international system upon the concepts of “taking an active role,” “responsible diplomacy,” and “regional responsibility.” Leveraging its geographical advantage, Türkiye assumes the role of a “balancing power” across a vast geography stretching from the Black Sea to the Middle East and from the Caucasus to Africa. Turkish foreign policy proposes a new system in which regional crises are resolved by the countries of the region themselves through mechanisms of regional cooperation, without the need for hegemons.
Foreign Policy Priorities
Before examining the codes that guide Türkiye’s foreign policy, it would be more illuminating to discuss its foreign policy priorities.
Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has outlined the areas of cooperation and the priorities of Turkish foreign policy in various interviews and speeches. The foremost priority of Turkish foreign policy is the de-escalation of conflicts, the cessation of wars, and the elimination of instability in our immediate region, including the Middle East, the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, and the Aegean. Beyond the immediate region, Africa as a whole, South America, the Asia-Pacific countries, and the ASEAN member states constitute other regions where Türkiye has developed significant partnerships in recent years.
Turkish foreign policy maintains that, at a time when the foreign policy orientation of the United States is changing, closer cooperation and greater coordination among middle powers such as Türkiye, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom will contribute to global stability.
Principles Guiding Turkish Foreign Policy
Both President Erdoğan and Foreign Minister Fidan state on every platform the necessity of establishing an inclusive, effective, fair, and secure international system based on solidarity rather than polarization for the resolution of regional and global problems.
Minister Fidan represents an approach that prefers to interpret international issues through concepts rooted in the historical and cultural depth of the Turkish nation and to develop original strategies, rather than interpreting them through the colonialist-orientalist perspective and concepts produced by the West. The fundamental objective of the strategy that President Erdoğan calls the “Century of Türkiye” is to transform Türkiye into a center of gravity and a global balancing actor in the new multipolar world order through a strategic understanding that establishes its own game, writes its own rules, and develops its own concepts. The foreign policy serving this objective embraces not a narrow approach that places national interests above all else, but a much more inclusive vision based on the principles of global justice, equal representation, and multilateralism.
Although some refer to Türkiye’s new foreign policy as the “Hakan Fidan Doctrine,” Fidan’s emphases in his speeches that decisions are made with “state wisdom” and within “institutional coordination” indicate that foreign policy is not conducted through individual preferences, but points to the continuity of state wisdom. His statement in his speeches that “Türkiye’s foreign policy is not shaped by daily developments” means that decisions regarding foreign policy are not reactive, but are made through a continuous state wisdom based on analysis and information. President Erdoğan has also emphasized in various speeches that they do not make decisions based on daily political calculations, but that decisions are made through the millennia-old deep-rooted accumulation, memory, and institutional experience of the ancient state. Indeed, in the January 6, 2007 Declaration on the 80th Anniversary of the National Intelligence Organization (MIT), which has the character of the Turkish State’s strategic concept document, it was accurately analyzed that the global order had to change, and Türkiye’s objectives for the new period and its institutional preparations were indicated.
Of course, Hakan Fidan’s management style, reflected in his intelligence-diplomacy background and personality and described as “quiet power”—far from populist rhetoric, not detached from geopolitical reality, technical, calm, measured, yet resolute—has a major share in the shaping of foreign policy and in its finding an effective response among its counterparts.
The fundamental concepts that define the parameters and objectives of Turkish foreign policy, which Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan frequently articulates in his interviews, various speeches, and articles, may be listed as follows:
Win-win: This is the principle of cooperation based on shared interests, under which both parties benefit, as opposed to the zero-sum game concept in international relations, whereby one party’s gain comes at the expense of the other. This principle prioritizes building relations between the parties in areas that generate shared prosperity, such as the economy, trade, energy, and logistics, rather than on conflict. This cooperation-based strategy, which envisions the parties meeting on common ground to enlarge the pie and share it together, finds its most tangible expression in Africa, which has been unilaterally exploited by Western countries. By emphasizing the Win-win principle in the mediation and facilitation roles it undertakes in crises across its immediate region, Türkiye fosters trust among the parties.
Regional Ownership: This is the principle that the region’s problems should be resolved through the cooperation of regional actors themselves, without the need for actors from outside the region (hegemons). To this end, every nation-state must assume responsibility for safeguarding the rights and legitimate interests of its neighboring states, guaranteeing their security, ensuring regional stability as an inseparable part of the region as a whole, and demonstrating solidarity in every field—in other words, acting with a sense of ownership toward one another. Israeli expansionism and sectarianism (the Sunni-Shia divide) are among the region’s greatest challenges. Before enhancing their military deterrence capabilities against any threat, the countries of the region must first establish fundamental and enduring mutual trust among themselves. Respect for the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the countries of the region, the pooling of the defense capabilities of regional actors not against one another but for one another’s security, and a joint struggle against terrorism that destabilizes the region are all essential. According to this principle, enduring trust will be established only when no state in the region dominates another, when states engage in constructive interaction, and when each commits itself to the security of the others. In line with this approach, Türkiye has established special mechanisms based on Regional Ownership with actors across its neighboring regions. The regional mechanisms established with the Middle East, the South Caucasus, and the Balkan countries are examples of this approach. Within these mechanisms, Türkiye positions itself not merely as a participant but as a rule-setting actor.
Regional Inclusivity: This refers to ensuring that no actor is excluded from the pursuit of regional stability and to institutionalizing relations with neighboring countries on the basis of shared interests. According to Minister Fidan, it is now imperative for the countries of the region to come together, solve their own problems collectively, have mutual confidence in one another, and establish their own regional order. To achieve this, the states of the region must abandon narratives of Turkish, Arab, and Persian domination and set aside imperial ambitions. In his interview with Nikkei Asia, Hakan Fidan’s remarks that a new cooperation platform could be established comprising Türkiye, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the Gulf states, and that Iran and Israel could also be included in the future should conditions become conducive, are significant in illustrating the framework of Türkiye’s vision of Regional Inclusivity.
Multi-Peripheral Partnerships: This is the approach of establishing simultaneous, multi-layered partnerships across different geographies and political spheres in Türkiye’s surrounding regions by leveraging its geopolitical position at the intersection of Asia, Europe, and Africa, together with its diplomatic capacity. According to this vision, Türkiye should not belong exclusively to a single axis (either the West or the East); rather, as a Central Actor, it should simultaneously assume both a founding and a rule-setting role across multiple regions. Within this framework, Türkiye is expanding its strategic room for maneuver among global centers of power rather than remaining confined to its traditional hinterland (the Middle East, the Balkans, and the Caucasus), while making institutional openings into new regions where global power balances are shifting. The Africa Initiative and Back to Asia strategies fall within this framework. Türkiye’s objective of transforming its geostrategic bridge position into a lasting source of strength through east-west and north-south trade routes, energy corridors, infrastructure, and digital networks constitutes one of the principal instruments of its strategy of establishing Multi-Peripheral Partnerships.
Compartmentalization: This principle, which may be described as the compartmentalization of relationships, is based on preventing a crisis arising in one area between countries from poisoning cooperation in other areas. This strategy seeks to prevent bilateral relations from breaking down entirely because of a single issue by separating different issues and managing them independently in separate compartments. Through this pragmatic principle, which Hakan Fidan introduced during his tenure as Head of the National Intelligence Organization (MIT), backchannel diplomacy (intelligence diplomacy) was kept open even when political relations between states had broken down. As a result, it played a significant role in preventing the rupture of Türkiye–Russia and Türkiye–United States relations despite ongoing crises, thereby expanding Türkiye’s room for maneuver.
Micro-Regionalism: This is the concept of establishing flexible and functional alliances tailored to specific problems and geographical areas in order to overcome institutional deadlock caused by the inability of international institutions to respond effectively to the crises they face. This speed- and results-oriented approach envisages resolving problems in troubled regions not through traditional, cumbersome, and slow-moving international organizations (such as the United Nations and the OSCE), but through small, flexible alliances composed of three or four directly relevant actors and organized around specific problems or objectives. The MCM Black Sea initiative, the 3+3 Format in the Caucasus, and the Astana Process are among the most concrete examples of this approach.
Connectivity: This concept seeks to transform Türkiye, situated at the intersection of Asia, Europe, and Africa, from merely a transit country through which goods and energy pass into a lasting power by leveraging its geostrategic bridge position through trade routes, energy corridors, infrastructure, and digital networks. Connectivity goes beyond linking continents through Türkiye and constructing and managing these routes; it also aims to transform Türkiye into a Central Actor (Hub) where prices are determined, energy is stored, and trade is managed. Within the framework of its Connectivity strategy, Türkiye is striving to become the backbone of global logistics through projects such as the Development Road, the Trans-Caspian East-West Middle Corridor, and the Saudi Arabia–Türkiye High-Speed Railway. At the same time, by connecting the rich oil and natural gas reserves of Asia and the Middle East to Europe, Türkiye is emerging as a critical hub for the Western world’s energy supply security.
Türkiye’s Structural Alignment with the New Foreign Policy
To achieve the strategic objectives embodied in the concepts guiding its foreign policy, Türkiye has undertaken a process of restructuring both its perspective and its relationships. This restructuring may be described through three concepts: Strategic Autonomy, Strategic Flexibility, and Smart Power.
Strategic Autonomy: This concept is based on Türkiye’s capacity to make independent decisions in areas such as foreign policy, defense, and critical technologies in line with its own national interests, without becoming dependent on global powers, and to implement those decisions in practice. The European Union’s continued opposition to Türkiye’s membership, the crises and embargoes it has experienced with its NATO allies that have threatened its security, and the emergence of efforts to establish a new multipolar world order have made it imperative for Türkiye to attain Strategic Autonomy without becoming dependent on any single axis. Guided by a strategy founded on Strategic Autonomy, Türkiye, despite being a NATO member, has sought to expand its sphere of influence in regions including Africa, Latin America, and Central Asia (through the Organization of Turkic States), particularly in relation to Russia and China, while deepening its relations with non-Western economic groupings such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and ASEAN. The development of Türkiye’s defense industry has provided Ankara with military deterrence and the capacity to act independently in foreign policy, thereby becoming a powerful diplomatic lever that has enabled Türkiye to establish new alliances and reshape geopolitical balances. An advanced indigenous and national defense industry has reinforced Türkiye’s central role within NATO and shifted the balance of its relations with Western countries in its favor. By providing military support to Azerbaijan during the Karabakh War and by establishing military bases and maintaining an operational presence in countries such as Qatar, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Somalia, Türkiye has acquired the capability to intervene directly in crises within its region. The most tangible outcome of Strategic Autonomy is that the establishment of an expandable regional military alliance comprising NATO member Türkiye, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Qatar has now become a subject of discussion.
Strategic Flexibility: This refers to the ability to establish simultaneous ties with different camps through multidimensional diplomacy. Strategic Flexibility enables foreign policy to adapt to changing circumstances, expand its range of options, avoid becoming constrained by global power balances, create alternative arenas for action, respond rapidly, and turn crises into opportunities. As Strategic Autonomy develops, Strategic Flexibility also increases.
Smart Power: This is the ability to combine military capabilities (hard power) with such instruments as diplomacy, culture, humanitarian assistance, development assistance, and the rights of ethnic kin (soft power) in a strategic and mutually reinforcing manner in order to achieve the state’s objectives. As one of the world’s leading providers of humanitarian assistance relative to its national income, Türkiye implements its Smart Power strategy by coordinating the state’s hard power institutions (the Turkish Armed Forces and the National Intelligence Organization) with its soft power institutions (TİKA, AFAD, the Yunus Emre Institute, the Presidency of Religious Affairs, and YTB) and directing them toward the same geographical regions. In the practical application of Smart Power, Türkiye is among the few countries that simultaneously employ military deterrence and diplomatic mediation.
Conclusion
In the theory of international relations, states are hierarchically classified as Global Powers, Middle Powers, and Rising Powers according to their economic size, military capabilities, population, geographical location, and diplomatic influence.
Within this classification, Türkiye is identified as a Middle Power and, because of its challenges to the existing global system, as a Rising Power. However, these hierarchical classifications are rapidly losing their validity. Just as relatively small actors (Ukraine, Iran, and even the Houthis), by combining cost-effective unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), missile technologies, and artificial intelligence, have rendered the cumbersome conventional forces of global powers (Russia and the United States) ineffective and transformed the criteria of military power, new forms of interaction in international relations may likewise render this traditional classification obsolete.
The vision and concepts developed by Turkish foreign policy for building a more just world advocate respect for the territorial integrity of all states, the resolution of crises among neighboring countries without recourse to hegemons, and the joint development of states through institutions founded upon Regional Ownership. In this respect, they seek to replace the obsolete global order—designed to preserve dependence on hegemons (the Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council) that derive strength from crises and conflicts—with a new model of global relations based on global pluralism.
In the period ahead, the current global system dominated by great powers relying on numerical superiority and domination is expected to give way to a new world order shaped by the cooperation of multiple states that form alliances among themselves, seek common solutions to global problems, and unite around the common good. The foreign policy propositions developed by Türkiye as a rule-setting actor may provide important points of reference for such a model.
Source: https://www.sde.org.tr/sinan-tavukcu/genel/turk-dis-politikasinin-kodlari-kose-yazisi-65710
