Religion, religious groups and teo-politics are always most vital topics of the Western politics. The relationship between politics and religion is reciprocal. While both domestic and international political actors try to exploit religion and religious sensitivity for their political interests and gains, religion and belief systems want to use significant power over main political and cultural actors and perceptions. With the emergence of the violent non-state actors such as Taliban, al-Qaeda and DAISH, which were all surfaced in the Middle East but have become transnational actors deeply affecting European politics, and the recent popularity of far-right Islam-phobic movements such as PEGIDA in Europe have once again forced us to look closely at the relationship between religion and politics in Western politics specifically in Europe. Even though it is generally perceived that the religion has lost its war against politics in Europe as European countries have established secular democracies based on the promotion of individual freedoms and pluralism, it is an undisputable fact that the general framework in European states is largely affected by the Christian values and often its imprints are seen in politics. The developments around the recent large scale immigration toward Europe from Middle East and Africa are the reasons which force us to make this bold statement. How Europe deals with mostly Muslim immigrants who come from very different ethnic and cultural backgrounds from European values is very alarming. After unsuccessful assimilation and/or integration efforts for these non-European and non-Christian immigrants, state and societal actors have instigated to take restrictive measures against further immigration and migrants. Furthermore we have started to witness strong wave of xenophobia and Islamophobia in these democratic European societies. Islamophobia, relations with European Muslims and implications of political developments in the Muslim World will significantly influence the future religion-state relations in European countries. However, for the last few months we have been spectators of the tragic death of thousands desperate immigrants at the Mediterranean Sea who were trying to reach Europe. Unfortunately the European countries have done nothing to prevent their death.. MUHİTTİN ATAMAN
Energy security, at the heart of energy policy, has become central to the dynamics of international relations. Political turmoil has overwhelmed many oil and gas producing countries, forcing them to adapt their national energy policies according to this continuous change. Specifically, because of the wars and instability in the Middle East and the Ukrainian crisis, global energy security is no longer guaranteed. One of the foremost experts on the energy industry, Daniel Yergin, identifies energy security as “the availability of sufficient supplies at affordable prices.” He also comments that every country interprets the definition of energy security with its own dynamics. In practice, the definition of energy security is polysemic and the topic of energy security is being explored daily, under the lens of numerous new studies, by scholars, energy experts, government officials, activists, and journalists.
Last year was the year of elections in Turkey with two parliamentary elections and months-long electoral campaigns that dominated the political agenda of the country. The parliamentary elections of June 7, 2015 brought an end to the AK Party’s 12-year long era of parliamentary majority and single-party government in Turkey. Nevertheless, the endeavors to form a coalition government could not be concluded successfully and another election appeared on the horizon. The country was ruled by an AK Party-led interim government and the elections were repeated five months later on November 1, 2015. While close in time, the two elections were quite distant with regard to the political contexts in which they were carried out, and in their respective results. The November elections witnessed a comeback for the AK Party, which increased its votes by over 9 points with the addition of five million new votes in the ballot box.
In a radio broadcast in 1939 Winston Churchill defined Russia in a famous quip as ‘a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.’ The chain of metaphors in Churchill’s famous maxim was to point the difficulty of making sense of the great political transformation Russia had gone through. Though perplexed, Churchill had a key to solve the Russian riddle: the national interest or more precisely ‘historic-life interests.’ The ‘new Middle East’ is also a riddle inside an enigma rolled up in a puzzle mat. The former is difficult to grasp even with metaphors. The national interest is not a ‘key’ either, for it appears more of a political ploy than an analytical edifice that can hardly be applicable to the haplessly artificial regional states. The enigma of the ‘Arab Spring,’ the mystery of the ISIL, the riddle of Russian intervention in Syria and the puzzle of Turkish national interests in the Middle East are few items in the long list of explanandum.
After being the focal point of the regional and global power competition for centuries, the Eastern Mediterranean region has recently re-emerged as a point of convergence in international politics. Over the last two decades, especially, many regional and global powers have begun to develop strategies toward the Eastern Mediterranean leading to a fierce rivalry amongst them. There are several reasons for the increase in the political, strategic, and economic importance of the region. However, four are especially noteworthy, and while two are long-standing factors, there are two significant novel developments that have contributed to the re-emergence of the strategic importance of the region. First, the main deep-seated reason stems from its geostrategic and geopolitical importance. The Eastern Mediterranean hosts some of the most strategic seaways in the world, such as the Suez Canal and the Turkish Straits. While the Suez Canal has served as the main sea passage bridging the East to the West since its opening in 1869, the Turkish Straits (the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles) has for centuries connected the Black Sea with the Mediterranean Sea and so the Atlantic Ocean. Second, due to its strategic importance the Eastern Mediterranean region has always been one of the most penetrated regions in the world. Many global and regional powers such as the U.S., Russia, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Turkey, Israel, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt and Saudi Arabia continue to intervene into regional affairs resulting in power struggles. While the U.S. is trying to maintain its superiority in the region following the Cold War period, Russia aims to reach the warm seas, its long-time strategic objective. On the other hand, the UK, France, and Turkey are working to protect their historical and imperial links with the region. Starting with President Obama, the U.S. has followed a retrenchment policy which has resulted in power vacuums in different regions including the Eastern Mediterranean. Under these circumstances the Western-dominated regional system and political stability has changed dramatically, and the power vacuum created after the U.S. downsized its regional role is filled by many other challenger states. One of these states is Russia which seems to have settled itself into the region permanently. From now on, it will be quite difficult to extricate Russia from the region and without doubt it will continue to pose a threat from the south to European countries. China is another actor that has gained a foothold in the region lately by improving its relations with some regional countries and by investing in the control of significant seaports. Furthermore, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE have also started trying to influence the regional balance of power. Consequently, all the cards are reshuffled in the Eastern Mediterranean and a new great game is underway in the region. Third, as the most significant novel development, the exploration of natural gas in the region has contributed to its geostrategic importance. Considered as one of the richest deposits with approximately 4.5 percent of the total natural gas reserves in the world, the Eastern Mediterranean has become of great interest to the energy market. The drilling activities performed to date show that essential portions of the reserves range from the Tamar and Leviathan gas fields, where the coasts of Cyprus, Egypt, and Israel meet, to the West Nile Delta field along the Egyptian coast. Within this framework, the regional and global powers have turned their attention to the region once again as the newly discovered rich energy resources have entered into the equation as a new parameter. Israel is the first state that discovered natural gas in Tamar (318 billion cubic meter) and Leviathan (605 billion cubic meter) fields and began to use and export it to other countries. Egypt and the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus (GASC) also discovered natural gas in the Zohr (850 billion cubic meter) field and Aphrodite (129 billion cubic meter) field, respectively. Furthermore, lately, a considerable amount of gas reserves was discovered in the Calypso and Glaucus fields located in the South of Cyprus. As new discoveries continue, other countries such as Turkey have been conducting offshore drilling activities to explore natural gas. All these activities have defrosted the longtime frozen problems of the region. The region is not rich only in terms of offshore natural gas reserves. It is known that some areas within the boundaries of Egypt and Libya are also rich in natural gas. Having the Wafa and Bouri gas fields, Libya is ranked 22nd in the world with around 1.5 trillion cubic meters of natural gas reserves. Egypt ranks as 16th in the world, with the Zohr, West Nile Delta, and Atoll fields yielding a total of around 2.2 trillion cubic meters of natural gas. It must be said that the reason many global and regional players have become involved in the Libyan civil war is closely related to its abundant energy resources. Furthermore, it is important to state that the Eastern Mediterranean is quite rich in terms of crude oil as well. Considering onshore and offshore reserves together, the region possesses nearly 3.7 percent of the world’s total oil reserves with around 64 billion barrels discovered to date. Libya alone has nearly 3.2 percent of the world’s oil reserves, with roughly 48.4 billion barrels, and Egypt has around 3.3 billion barrels of known oil reserves. Fourth, besides the three protracted crises, namely the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the political crisis in Lebanon, and the Cyprus question, two more recent regional political issues, the Syrian and Libyan crises, have been attracting the attention of many regional and global powers. The external involvement of some new actors in these crises has led to a new power struggle. Turkey and Russia are the two main states that have increased their presence in the region lately by becoming the two main powers involved in the Syrian and Libyan crises. Needless to state, their military intervention in these crises has undermined the status of the traditional Western colonial powers, such as France. As a country that has the longest shores in the Eastern Mediterranean and as one of the main players in regional geopolitics, Turkey has begun to increase its military presence in the region in order to deter anti-Turkish developments. The geography has begun to occupy a critical role in Turkey’s political, security, and economic policies, and eventually has become one of the most featured parameters in Turkish foreign policy. Turkey’s regional policy is shaped by a number of factors. First of all, the Eastern Mediterranean has long-standing importance for Turkey, which has historical ties with almost all regional states. For centuries the region was ruled by Turkey’s predecessor, the Ottoman Empire. Therefore, Turkey’s involvement in regional crises such as Libya, Syria, and Palestine can be partially explained by the historical ties between Turkey and these states. Second, the Eastern Mediterranean plays a crucial role in Turkey’s security and as a result Turkey’s foreign policy towards the region is highly shaped by its security concerns. Therefore, the policies of global powers such as the U.S., the European Union, and Russia towards the region are intrinsically linked to Turkey’s security. As all these actors pursue their own national interests, it has resulted in the U.S., EU, and Russia conflicting with Turkey’s policies and expectations in the region. This has become clear on issues such as the Cyprus problem and the attempts of the Greek side to sign international agreements regarding the maritime jurisdiction zones. Both of these developments aim at eliminating Turkey’s influence over the island and the region altogether. However, Turkey has made it clear that this is not something that it will accept, and has responded by signing agreements with the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) and Libya, in 2011 and 2019 respectively. Third, the Eastern Mediterranean is critical both for its abundant energy resources and for the bilateral economic relations between Turkey and the countries of the region; therefore, the economy is another factor determining Turkish policy towards the region. Turkey, an energy-dependent country that expects to discover new resources in its continental shelf, considers the rich hydrocarbon potential of the region as an alternative source of meeting its energy demands. Turkey seeks to both decrease its foreign dependence on energy and to increase its trade, first with neighboring countries and then with the world. In this regard, when forming its Eastern Mediterranean policy, Turkey is, on the one hand, intensely searching for natural gas and oil on its continental shelf and following policies towards transferring the resources found in other countries’ maritime zones to the Western markets through Turkey, and, on the other hand, trying to improve its relations with the countries in the region. The developments that threaten Turkey’s economic and security interests have urged Ankara to a closer involvement with the region. Tensions have risen with Greece’s eagerness to give its islands maritime jurisdiction zones beyond their territorial waters, which will cut into Turkey’s continental shelf and the GASC’s licensing of maritime blocks to international companies for energy research activities. Violating the TRNC and Turkey’s rights, and, with the aim of making their illegal actions permanent, their signing of agreements in close cooperation with Israel, Egypt, and the U.S., as well as conducting joint military operations will not contribute to the resolution of the problems. Within this framework, this issue of Insight Turkey highlights different affairs regarding the Eastern Mediterranean region. A number of leading and well-known intellectuals and academicians have contributed to this issue focusing on political, legal, and energy dimensions of maritime tensions and the rise of a new geopolitics in the region. This issue includes pieces that look at the Eastern Mediterranean tensions through the lens of international law. Ayfer Erdoğan’s research article examines the legal and political dimensions of the disputes by analyzing the standpoints of the main actor’s in the region. Meanwhile, the commentary written by Sertaç Hami Başeren reviews their justifications with reference to international law, with particular reference to Turkey’s actions. Furthermore, based on the principle that maritime delimitation should be carried out to reach an equitable solution by taking all the relevant circumstances into account, Yücel Acer argues that Turkey has developed a comprehensive legal approach as to the maritime delimitation in the Eastern Mediterranean and even submitted a map to the UN to demonstrate Turkey’s claimed continental shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) areas. While keeping up with the recent developments in the United States, Nurşin Ateşoğlu Güney and Vişne Korkmaz’s research article examines how and why Washington has come to embrace the logic of ‘Alliance Axis’ to shape the Eastern Mediterranean and explores the projected impact of the U.S.-initiated Abraham Accords on regional geopolitics. Meanwhile, Muhammad Soliman Alzawawy’s commentary aims to forecast the route and different scenarios that the new American President Joe Biden will take in his foreign policy towards the Eastern Mediterranean region through investigating the content of his speeches and rhetoric before and shortly after taking office. Galip Emre Yıldırım highlights the stance of another actor in the region by arguing that France’s identification of Turkey as an ‘external enemy’ reflects the former’s political and economic concerns with regard to the Mediterranean gas reserves. Sohbet Karbuz gives an overview of the key commercial, technical, legal, and political challenges the East Mediterranean gas faces, with a critical eye and proposes possible ways to overcome them. Karbuz discusses the challenges facing the monetization of the discoveries by looking at both the commercial challenges hampering the exploration and field development activities and the technical challenges for exporting gas to the immediate and distant markets. In addition to these eight pieces focusing on the Eastern Mediterranean, there are some insightful manuscripts on a range of topics regarding the recent developments in the international political arena. With regard to the recent changes at the level of the white house, Inderjeet Parmar analyses President Donald Trump’s attempted coup. Parmar also questions the political will of the new President to extirpate Trumpism and white supremacy from the U.S. body politic. After three-and-a-half-years into the crisis that struck the heart of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Marwan Kabalan sheds light on how the 41st Gulf Summit in the Saudi city of al-Ula, brought the blockade of Qatar to an end. From our off-topic research articles, Nikolay Kozhanov tries to prove the importance of the economic factors for the current development of Russia’s relations with the Gulf States. He also assesses the prospects for continued economic cooperation between the GCC states and Moscow. Ramazan Erdağ’s article concludes this issue with a discussion on why Russia replaced the South Stream project with the TurkStream by changing its route and name, and why Turkey is involved in a project on the North-South line although it plays a vital role in the Trans-Anatolia Natural Gas Pipeline Project in the southern gas corridor. While the importance of the region certainly is going to increase in the following years as more regional and global actors will be included in the power struggle, it is necessary to analyze and understand the issue from geopolitical, economic and legal standpoints. With that said, we are confident that this issue of Insight Turkey entitled “New Geopolitics in the Eastern Mediterranean” will provide timely studies regarding the Turkish perspective on a complex and increasingly important issue in the global power struggle.
On May 14, 2023, Türkiye will hold both the presidential and the parliamentarian elections, in which the Turkish people will choose the president and all 600 members of the Turkish Parliament. This will be the second elections since the transition to the presidential system in 2017. After the first elections, held in June 2018, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was elected as the first president of the new governmental system, and AK Party received more than 42 percent of the total votes, winning almost half of the seats in parliament. As in the first elections, two major political blocs will compete, namely, the People’s Alliance (Cumhur İttifakı) and the Nation Alliance (Millet İttifakı). The People’s Alliance bloc consists of the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AK Party) led by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Nationalist Movement Party (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi, MHP) led by Devlet Bahçeli, the Great Unity Party (Büyük Birlik Partisi, BBP) led by Mustafa Destici, the New Welfare Party (Yeniden Refah Partisi, YRP) led by Fatih Erbakan and the Free Cause Party (Hür Dava Partisi, HÜDA-PAR) led by Zekeriya Yapıcıoğlu. The second political bloc, the Nation Alliance also known as the Table of Six (Altılı Masa), is made up of six-plus-one political parties. The alliance, which was initially formed in May 2018 by four political parties, now consists of six parties, while one party supports the bloc from outside. The Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, CHP) led by Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu and the Good Party (İyi Parti, İP) led by Meral Akşener are the two main allies. They were/are officially supported by four smaller political parties. The Democrat Party (Demokrat Parti, DP) led by Gültekin Uysal represents the center right, while the Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi, SP) led by Temel Karamollaoğlu is the continuation of Necmettin Erbakan’s Islamic political tradition. The two additional political parties, the Future Party (Gelecek Partisi, GP) led by Ahmet Davutoğlu and the Democracy and Progress Party (Demokrasi ve Atılım Partisi, DEVA Party) led by Ali Babacan are breakaway groups from the ruling AK Party. They have recently joined the Nation Alliance in an attempt to overthrow the ruling party, which has been in power for the last two decades. In addition to these six political parties, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (Halkların Demokratik Partisi, HDP) led by Pervin Buldan and Mithat Sancar, also supports the Nation Alliance. However, it did not become an official partner of the Nation Alliance, since some partners of the alliance, most notably the İP, generally representing the secular Turkish nationalists, oppose the alliance with HDP due to its close connections with PKK. Therefore, although HDP has declared its support for the candidacy of Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, it has not joined the alliance. It has become obvious that two political alliances will dominate the election process, therefore there are effectively only two main presidential candidates. While the People’s Alliance has nominated Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Nation Alliance has nominated Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu for the presidential post. Concurrently, there are two additional candidates, Muharrem İnce and Sinan Oğan, supported by other small political parties that will no doubt influence the election results, however they are not expected to get more than a small percentage of the vote. The two opposing and conflicting political blocs represent an almost absolute mutual exclusive perspective about the future of Türkiye and the politics of the country, reflecting the increasing polarization of Turkish politics. These two alliances have two opposite and conflictual perspectives of Türkiye. The People’s Alliance emerged as a consequence of a domestic stance against the attacks Türkiye faced after the bloody coup attempt by FETÖ on July 15, 2016, which led to many major changes in the country. The alliance aims to maintain the current government, to consolidate the current presidential system, to continue the country’s transformation program, to protect the country against both internal and external threats, to increase its deterrent military power, to strengthen its economic development, and to globalize its diplomatic power. The Nation Alliance, on the other hand, was formed as a reaction to the People’s Alliance, since no one political party was/is able to challenge the power of AK Party and its leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The alliance is determined to reverse the course of politics in the country and to reverse many of the changes made by the AK Party governments. It claims that if it wins the elections, it will initiate a process of restoration, revive the old political system, change the regime, revive the old, and turn to the status quo ante. However, the Nation Alliance is quite a vulnerable and fractured opposition bloc. It seems that while the Nation Alliance agrees on what it does not want, specifically the rule of the AK Party, the bloc does not know what it wants instead. There is no real consensus among the fragmented opposition parties about the future of the country. Not only do different political parties expect different developments, even different wings within certain political parties make different suggestions. For example, some officials of the biggest partner of the Nation Alliance, the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), has declared that they will apologize (helalleşmek) to certain mistreated groups such as the women who were excluded from education and work because they chose to wear Islamic clothing. On the other hand, some other representatives and supporters emphasize that they will take revenge (hesaplaşmak) against other groups close to AK Party. Another important event that reflects the division within and the brittleness of the Nation Alliance is related to the announcement of their presidential candidate. Not only did it take more than ten meetings and several months for them to decide, but at the end of the process, the leader of İP, Akşener, left the block as she (and her party) did not approve the candidacy of Kılıçdaroğlu. Nevertheless, she came back to the table just one day later accepting Kılıçdaroğlu’s candidacy but adding two new names, Ekrem İmamoğlu and Mansur Yavaş, CHP mayors of İstanbul and Ankara respectively, to the existing five vice-presidents. Indeed, for a long time, Akşener had been campaigning that one of these two men be selected for the presidential candidacy. The upcoming elections, which are held on the centennial anniversary of the Turkish Republic, put Türkiye at an important crossroads. It seems that two conflictual perspectives, the bloc that supports the consolidation of the presidential system and the bloc that supports a regime change, will collide. While the People’s Alliance emphasize autonomy in foreign policy and seeks to achieve regional leadership, the Nation Alliance promote an inward-looking political system and withdrawal from regional issues. Whatever the position of the bloc, one thing is for sure: The Turkish people want a strong leadership in foreign policy during this crucial global transition period. The turnout in Turkish elections is relatively high, generally over 80 percent, which is one of the highest in the world. Considering the politicization in the people’s daily lives, political polarization and the harsh political dialogue, it seems that the turnout in the upcoming elections will be even higher. Furthermore, the earthquake disaster of February 6 has further exacerbated and aroused the political fault lines. However, at the end of this high level of democratic competition and turnout in elections, Turkish democracy will be the winner, and it will be consolidated. Taking into consideration these developments and the importance of the elections -not only for Türkiye but for the regional and global affairs as well- this issue of Insight Turkey tackles some of the most important and determinative topics influencing the results. Disinformation has been one of the most noticeable ramifications we are experiencing of the digital revolution. At the same time, Türkiye, situated in a geopolitical hotspot, is one of the countries that is both a target and a hub of disinformation campaigns in the region. Within this context, Fahrettin Altun, the Presidency Communications Director has penned a commentary addressing misinformation and disinformation with a special focus on Türkiye and the initiatives undertaken by Communication Directorate. Within the same line of thought, Yenal Göksun provides an overview of Türkiye’s strategic communication policy and evolution of the Turkish communication model and the current strategic communication initiatives undertaken by the Directorate of Communications. According to Göksun, Türkiye’s evolving development and foreign policy agenda, which has developed rapidly in the last 20 years, has pushed it to undertake more ambitious efforts in the field of communication and public diplomacy, and as a result, innovations have been made in strategic communication policies. Turning to one of the most discussed issues in recent years in Türkiye’s politics, Cem Duran Uzun focuses on the country’s presidential system and the different government systems proposed by various parties before the 2023 elections. He specifically focuses on the differences between the U.S. presidential system and Türkiye’s administrative system, which overhauled its political system in 2017 and replaced the parliamentary system with a Turkish-style presidential system. Following up, Hamit Emrah Beriş evaluates the key issues in Turkish politics before the 2023 elections. Beriş argues that the 2023 elections are one of the most important in Türkiye’s history and four main topics determined the fate of the elections: refugees, the economy, rising nationalism, and the Kurdish question. The author focuses on serious differences of opinion between the ruling and opposition blocs on the solution to these problems. According to Beriş, the 2023 elections will show whether the approaches of the ruling or opposition wing are in line with the expectations of Turkish society. In our next research article, Ravza Altuntaş Çakır aims to investigate the relationship between ethnic Muslim minority identity and transnational Muslim solidarity, with emphasis on HÜDA-PAR, the most organized political Islamic organization and the second largest political party in Southeast Türkiye. In her paper, Çakır examines how the concept of ummah motivates the party’s domestic/ideological, national and transnational political discourses and initiatives, and also deals with the uncertainties that a mostly abstract and idealist ummahist approach to modern politics brings in the face of Kurdish nationalism, regional realpolitik, and democratic pluralism. As mentioned previously, refugees are another important issue for the forthcoming elections. In that respect, the article by Hatice Karahan and Öznur Gülen Ertosun examines the various dynamics that Syrian women under temporary protection face in the labor market in Türkiye. Technology has become a driving force in the global affairs and Türkiye has been taking all the necessary steps to take advantage of new developments. Within this line of thought, Serdal Temel in his commentary argues that Türkiye, an emerging economy, has been attempting to improve its socioeconomic strength through the promotion of research and development (R&D), innovation, and technological development activities. The author underlines that since the 2000s, the government has implemented support programs focused on developing the innovation capacity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and universities, and emphasizes that these programs are diversified as support for ecosystem improvements as well as support for patenting, commercialization and entrepreneurship. In another article, Nurettin Akçay and Guo Changgang, discuss China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Türkiye’s Middle Corridor (MC) projects, which have a common goal of connecting Europe and Asia, as well as facilitating commercial, economic, political and socio-cultural interactions between the two continents. In this commentary, which aims to examine the history, objectives and stages of Türkiye’s MC, Akçay and Changgang harmonizes the BRI with the MC and examines the inherent risks and challenges of integration as well as opportunities for the region. Our final commentary by Şafak Oğuz, analyzes the possible consequences of the F-35 fighter crisis between the U.S. and Türkiye, particularly in terms of its effect on the tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) deployed in Türkiye as part of NATO’s nuclear sharing program. Three off-topic research articles enrich the scope of our special issue. Eldar Hasanoğlu and Oğuzhan Çağlıyan investigate, with the onset of the COVID-19 crisis, how the Israeli diplomacy initiative took on greater importance in maintaining its presence and reputation internationally. In their article, the authors analyze Israel’s approach to COVID-19 diplomacy, which involved providing medical teams, PPE, and surplus vaccines to approximately 20 countries, and examine the political and strategic calculations behind Israel’s decision to extend assistance to specific countries. Focusing on the religious conflicts in Kashmir, Resul Yalçın and Umair Gul seek to try to contextualize the search for the “secular” while examining the construction of Muslim identity, the institution of martyrdom, and its social basis in Kashmir. They define Kashmir as a festering political problem receiving little global attention. Lastly, Bashkim Rrahmani and Majlinda Belegu focus on the Serbia-Kosovo dialogue. They discuss the important issues linked with the dialogue that is being facilitated and negotiated by the EU, including essential activities, challenges, obstacles, antagonisms, the approach the EU facilitators/mediators undertake, as well as the reaction and the expected results that the parties involved in the process have regarding reaching a final solution to the dispute. As Türkiye is on the eve on one of the most important elections in its history, this issue of Insight Turkey addresses some of the issues that have been dominating the political agenda lately. Through this issue, we hope to provide our readers with a thorough analysis and the necessary foundations for a better understanding of some of the main issues that will influence the outcome of the May 14 elections.
Germany, who challenged the British and its allies twice in the first half of the 20th century, began to reemerge as a global political power and to play the “big game” in the wake of the Cold War. As the strongest economy and the most crowded country in the European Union (EU), Germany has decided to lead the EU institutions and the old continent in global platforms. Especially after the reunification of the country, Germany started to dominate European politics. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Cold War politics, Germany prompted the European countries to pursue a more independent foreign policy. Getting rid of the Soviet threat, Germany no longer needs NATO and the U.S. protection. As a result we see a Germany which has initiated a multidimensional and multilateral foreign policy orientation in order to improve its worldwide national interests.
The Israeli-Palestinian question has been at the heart of Middle Eastern politics for the last 80 years. Although the Palestinian’s land has been one of the main subjects of international politics since the beginning of the 20th century, it was the unusual creation of the Israeli state in 1948 that led to many regional crises. Since then the Israeli state has been the instigator of many regional wars, continuous expansionism, discrimination, and violation of international law and basic human rights. Millions of Palestinians were forced to leave their country and those who preferred to stay were deprived of their rights. A special type of apartheid has been implemented by the Israeli state. All regional states and most global powers have been involved with this problem, which is not only between the aggressive Israeli nationalism and the defensive Palestinian nationalism, but also a conflict between the Israeli state and the Arab countries, a civilizational dispute between a pro-Israeli coalition and Muslim countries and a war that symbolizes the struggle between the oppressor and the oppressed. A number of international organizations have passed different resolutions offering solutions to the problem. Among them is the Islamic Cooperation Organization which was established following the many attacks against sacred places, notably the city of al-Quds and al-Aqsa Mosque, in Palestine. The international community represented by the United Nations (UN) has been calling on the Israeli state for decades to withdraw from the occupied Palestinian territories and to abide by the international rules and principles. As the UN resolutions, international law, and international public opinion expect, and Palestinians also aspire for, Israel must withdraw from the occupied territories, namely East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip and recognize an independent Palestinian state as part of a two-state solution. However, global powers, especially the United States, have not allowed the UN to force the Israeli state to move out from the occupied territories and to restore peace in the region. In other words, the Palestinian people and Muslim nations have long witnessed the continuous Israeli fait accompli, the never-ending Palestinian suffering, the weakness of the Muslim Middle Eastern countries, and the indifference of the global powers. Israel continues to violate not only the rights of self-determination but also basic human rights for Palestinians. As one of the indications of this inhumane policy, the Gaza Strip has been under continuous Israeli blockade and attacks since 2006. Israel has been attacking the Gaza Strip and the West Bank intermittently, to expand its territories in order to establish new illegal Jewish settlements and squash any hope for Palestinian statehood. Israel’s large-scale attacks against the Gaza Strip in 2008, 2012, 2014, 2018, and 2019 have made conditions in Palestine unlivable. The latest attack in 2019 stopped with yet another cease-fire, however the fate of the most recent cease-fire is not different from the previous ones. Israel has never fulfilled its promises and cynically considers the cease-fire as a temporary process, allowing time to prepare for a new wave of violence. At a time when there is no will or strength in the Arab world to resist against any anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab development, the current Israeli and U.S. government is trying to legalize the years of Israeli atrocities, crimes against humanity, and violations of human rights. Most steps taken by these two governments contradict with and violate international norms and rules. First, the Israeli parliament adopted a law that is known as the “basic law” or “the nation-state act” in 2018. According to this law, the right to exercise national self-determination in the state of Israel is unique to the Jewish people and thereby it denies Palestinian people any national rights or existence. Second, U.S. President Donald Trump’s unilateral recognition of the “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel and the transfer of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is a pivotal point in the history of the Middle East, for both regional and global actors. This decision, with significant implications for the Middle Eastern politics, is not only about the transfer of the Israeli capital from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, but also about the halt of the Middle Eastern peace process. Furthermore, it implicitly means that the U.S. supports the expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland and the prevention of the establishment of a Palestinian state. In other words, the U.S. has contradicted its traditional policy and has abandoned the long-time advocated two-state solution. Third, contrary to basic rules of international law and a number of UN resolutions, the U.S. government announced that they do not consider the illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories as inconsistent with international law. The U.S. also stopped funding the United Nations Palestinian Refugee Agency (UNRWA) and closed down the Washington D.C office of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), a body internationally recognized as the representative of the Palestinian people. With all these steps, the U.S. government demonstrated that it fully and unconditionally supports the Israeli state. Fourth, Trump has declared a so-called Middle East peace plan in January 28, 2020 after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and opposition leader Benny Gantz in Washington D.C. The U.S. government has ignored and violated all decisions made and resolutions passed by the UN regarding the issue, according to which the Israeli state is an occupier of the Palestinian land and violator of international rules and norms. Bearing in mind all these illegal steps, it can be said that the U.S. shares the responsibility with Israel for the violation of Palestinian rights. Achieving peace between the Israeli state and the Palestinian people appears to be unachievable, because the Israeli side does not take any Palestinian demands into consideration. All steps taken so far have been unilateral and against the interests of the Palestinians. The Deal of the Century is no exception; it is also a unilateral intervention to the question. Effectively, it is a dictation to the Palestinian-Israeli problem which ignores the realities on the ground. The timing of the Deal of the Century has to do with the current situation in the Arab world. As a matter of fact, today there is no political Arab world, since almost all heavyweight nationalist Arab states are in chaos, politically unstable or vulnerable. The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia who claim the leadership of the Arab world are closely associated with the Trump Administration and the Israeli state. These two Arab states and the current Egyptian government support Israel rather than the Palestinians and blame Palestinian political groups instead of the Israeli state for the ongoing situation. These states condemn the retaliatory actions conducted by the Palestinians and remain silent about the inhumane treatment they suffer at the hands of the Israeli war machine. Consequently, there is no strong Arab state to defend the rights of Palestinians. For decades, Arab regimes have exploited the issue for domestic political legitimacy. Arab regimes who were afraid of their peoples tried to satisfy their demands by exaggerating the Israeli threat. Nowadays it appears that their fear of external powers is greater, which is why they capitulate to the demands of countries such as Israel and the U.S. and accordingly use the Palestinian issue in negotiations to their own benefit. However, Trump’s proclamation of the Deal of the Century caused fierce reaction from public opinion worldwide, especially from the Arab streets and Muslim communities. The Trump Administration miscalculated the civilian reaction. This time, it will be difficult to convince the Arab public, since it is much more aware than before about their regimes’ foreign policy behavior. Trump’s declaration, which contributed to the reunification of the Arab and Muslim peoples, satisfies only radical Christians and Zionist Jews. As long as the blockade on the Palestinian lands continues, the region will be subject to new waves of violence. Considering the unstable international system, ultra-nationalist, and xenophobic Western politics, chaotic regional atmosphere and Israeli domestic politics, it is not expected that the Israeli government will ease the blockade and give some rights to the Palestinians. Global powers such as the U.S. and the European Union not only close their eyes to the Israeli atrocities but also support its unequal and limitless violence. Even the UN has begun to warn “the two sides” about the escalation of violence, thus undervaluing the Israeli brutality by equating it with the small retaliatory actions of the Palestinains. Therefore, it can be said that there is currently no deterrent power in the world that is preventing Israeli aggression. Only a significant change in the regional and global balance of power will bring considerable changes in Israeli policies towards the region. This new issue of Insight Turkey highlights different subjects regarding the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Some of the leading and well-known intellectuals and academicians from Palestine, Israel, Turkey, Europe, and the United States contributed to this issue focusing of different dimensions of the problem. From a religious perspective, more particularly in Islam, the status and significance of Bayt al-Maqdis, the city of al-Quds, which is one of the main themes of the problem, must be acknowledged. Ikrime Sa’eed Sabri’s commentary explains the significance of Bayt al-Maqdis by addressing the close bonds, namely the bonds of creed, worship, civilization and culture, and history which are firm ties that link Muslims to Bayt al-Maqdis and the land of Palestine. The resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has faced many different obstacles since the United Nations resolved to partition Palestine into two separate states, Jewish and Arab. Galia Golan addresses these obstacles between Israel and Palestine as well as possibilities for peace, primarily the pragmatic 1988 PLO decision to create a new state, next to the state of Israel, in the West Bank and Gaza, with a capital in East Jerusalem. She discusses the possibilities of achieving a political peaceful co-existence in Palestine and finds it quite challenging. The commentary written by Victor Kattan examines the legality of the Israeli settlements and occupations in the West Bank, based on the perspective of international law and U.S. foreign policy. He analyzes the motives of the International Criminal Court (ICC) decision to initiate an investigation into the alleged war crimes committed in Palestine by the Israeli state, which include Israel’s settlement activities in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. “Is the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict achievable?” is the question that Ian Lustic seeks to answer. In his opinion, this solution is a pretty picture of the future that only good people can imagine. Meanwhile, it remains just that, a picture, because there is a lack of effort to conduct negotiations between the Israeli state and the Palestinian people. This lack of effort is mainly related to the nature of negotiations which have become highly provocative in recent years. The influx of immigrant Jewish communities from different countries to Israel has disenfranchised the Palestinians from their land. Although, Israel claims that it offers democratic rights for all its citizens, in reality Palestinians have nothing. Ran Greenstein conceptualizes this situation by comparing the Israeli policies with the practice of apartheid in South Africa. He identifies the policies practiced by Israel as “apartheid of a special type” and a crime against humanity. To reveal how the status of the original Palestinian population has been ignored, Elia Zureik highlights the Israeli practices of governance in Palestine and how the Zionist movement and later the Israeli state have worked to kill the dream of the Palestinian people for their own state. This has been achieved through passing racially biased laws that discriminate against the native population, and using violence when enforcing those laws, especially after the Israeli state codified its new citizenship law that defines Israel as the state of the Jewish people. Ayfer Erdoğan and Lourdes Habash question the continuity of the U.S. policy making towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, especially under the Trump Administration. The results show that there hasn’t been a radical change throughout the administrations; however, the U.S. position in the conflict has become more transparent with a sharper pro-Israel tilt during the Trump Administration. Hamas has a dual role in the political and military struggle against the Israeli state on one hand and Fatah in Palestinian politics on the other. Although Hamas has had many achievements, since its establishment in the late 1980s, it has also failed in many aspects. To understand why, Nasuh Uslu and İbrahim Karataş evaluate this dualist struggle of Hamas in Palestine. The authors conclude that since Hamas has been otherized by many international actors, the Palestinian Authority (PA) and some international actors contributed more to this struggle. However, Hamas is still expected to fulfill the needs of Palestinians. In addition to these eight articles, focusing on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, there are some insightful pieces on a range of topics regarding Turkey and international politics. The transformation of international education with a Turkey-centric perspective strengthens Turkey’s cultural diplomacy and soft power. This transformation is led by different sub-governmental and non-governmental organizations. One of the leading actors is the Turkish Maarif Foundation. In their commentary, Birol Akgün and Mehmet Özkan contextualize the foundation’s foreign and domestic policy and outline a vision through evaluating activities over the past three years. The principle of “the more corrupt the country, the less democratic it is likely to be” can be measured in the Balkan countries. Sabrina P. Ramet in her article addresses problems that the Balkan countries are facing, such as corruption, unemployment, and poverty. With regard to the events of the Gulf Crisis, Farhan Mujahid Chak deconstructs the reasons and motives behind the quartet’s blockade on Qatar. To do so, he employs post-colonialism variables, assuming that the preponderance of the U.S. military power in the Gulf Cooperation Council produces competing ‘projects’ in the Middle East. He underlines three conflicting ideal types: subservient, resisting/increasing, and pivoting from engagement to resisting the American hegemony. The article written by Nur Köprülü takes us back to the events of when the public protests engulfed most Arab regimes in 2011. However, she focuses on how the democratization processes in the MENA region led to the empowerment of the Islamist actors after decades of political exclusion. Hence, within a domestic and regional context shaping the politics of Islamist parties, Köprülü explores different trajectories of two countries in the region, the inclusion of Islamists in the case of Tunisia and their exclusion in the case of Jordan. In the last piece of this issue, Krizza Janica Mahinay analyzes the shift of the Moro National Liberation Movement (MNLF) in the discourse on Malaysia and the ramifications of this new discourse within the Philippine state. She elaborates this shift through the lens of power relations and foreign policy, taking into account the struggle for legitimacy within the Philippines. Through a wide range of commentaries and articles, this issue of Insight Turkey aims to bring to its readers a comprehensive framework on the current situation of the Israeli-Palestinian question. Whether there will be a deal to this problem remains a difficult question to be answered. Currently one thing is clear, that the plan declared by the Trump Administration, which was welcomed by Israel and some of its Arab allies, such as the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, assures the Palestinian people the continuation of their century long ordeal.
Today, the world system is in a transition and experiencing a deep international crisis. The U.S. has begun to oppose the basic international institutions such as the United Nations and its subsidiary organs and specialized agencies, even though most of these were established with American motivation. The hegemon state, the U.S., has been alienating most of its partners and even allies. The U.S. governments have begun to focus on the national setting and to underestimate the international one; to favor unilateral policies over multilateral ones. The presidency of Donald Trump has expedited this process. American rejection of providing global public goods such as international security and free trade has led to a systemic crisis. The relative decline of American power coincides with the persistent rise of China. Those who claim that the days of Pax-Americana are numbered assert that the rise of China will determine the future of the world system. China has begun to expand its influence worldwide. For this purpose it has established alternative political and economic international institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). Furthermore, China leads the establishment of some other international organizations as well. BRICS is only one of these formations challenging the political hegemony of the West, led by the U.S. One of the most promising Chinese projects is the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) Project, aspiring to connect the East (China) to the West (the world markets). It is expected that, on its completion, the OBOR Project will take China to the center of the world economy and politics. China has been the fastest growing economy in the world for the last thirty years. Its share of the world trade has increased dramatically, recording the highest share in world exports for several years. China has been enjoying economic transactions with all major international actors with more than 200 partners in exports and imports. However, in terms of per capita income China still lags behind the advanced Western countries. Furthermore, according to the calculations made by the World Bank and IMF, Chinese per capita income is still lower than the world average. China recently began to invest in the political and military sphere in the non-Western world. It has military bases in its near abroad and in the African continent. That is, Chinese economic influence and technological leadership is supported by its political and military power. In spite of the increase in Chinese military and political might, it is careful not to challenge the U.S. and the West. There are several reasons for this policy. First of all, China is aware of its vulnerabilities. It suffers some economic and political inconsistencies and weaknesses. For instance, it has to fortify its regional dominance first in the South China Sea and achieve its longtime one-China policy as a precondition for a possible global hegemony. Second, China wants to win the global rivalry without resorting to war with the current hegemon. Therefore, Chinese leaders refrain from opposing the American hegemony politically. Even though it has introduced some international institutions, the Chinese leadership does not propose a political and diplomatic alternative to the West. It will take time for China to offer a full-scale global leadership alternative to the world, since the global hegemony requires not only economic and military power but also values and norms for cultural hegemony. Lastly, China is not ready to take the global responsibility, since it brings high costs. As long as the current American hegemony works in favor of China, there is no need for China to change the course of its development. In the light of these developments, this issue of Insight Turkey focuses on some of the most important topics related to China’s persistent rise in the international system. More specifically, this issue postulates on how to read and understand China’s policies towards global powers, i.e. the U.S. and Russia, and regional powers, i.e. India and Turkey. Africa has once again returned to the attention of the global powers after being left for many years in the shadow of western politics. In recent years, Africa has become the center of China’s public, economic and military diplomacy. As it may be expected, China’s investments in Africa are not totally ‘welcomed’ by the U.S. Earl Conteh-Morgan in his commentary focuses on the strategic rivalry between China and the U.S. in Africa. Conteh-Morgan argues that their rivalry has progressed from mild to intense, with both powers increasing their activities on the continent and decreasing Africa’s erstwhile marginalization. Another rivalry that shapes China’s foreign policies in the region is that with India. Especially, since the Doklam Plateau incident in mid-2017, the expectation of a possible tension between the two regional powers is ever present. Taking this into consideration Bruno Maçães, in his commentary, ponders the economic and strategic rivalry between China and India along with a number of dimensions: infrastructure, border disputes, sea power, and trade.
Since the early 2000s, almost every great, middle and even small power has developed a tendency to deepen their relations in the Asia-Pacific region. This tendency is also valid regarding international and regional organizations. In addition to state actors, non-state and even sub-state actors have assigned a certain value to this region in their strategic calculations. With such a tilt, Asia-Pacific actors have become a focal point of global politics. The increasing significance of the region has been boosted by the rising Asian powers, such as China, India, Japan, Australia, South Korea, and Indonesia. With all this dynamism, extra-regional actors have increased their economic, political, strategic, and cultural investments in Asia-Pacific. This rise in the region’s multileveled value has led regionalism-oriented IR researchers to develop the concept of the Asian Century. Türkiye has a peculiar position and significance in this regard combining the West and the non-West in many respects. Unlike the Cold War and early-post Cold War times, the world, especially the Asia-Pacific “world” is not composed of only two vectors, the West and the non-West, but several spanning into a variety of directions. This multi-vectorial reality of inter-non/-state affairs fits into Türkiye’s ambitions in its foreign policy. The Cold War label of Türkiye, i.e., the staunch ally of the West, is no longer completely valid. Türkiye of today is much more than that. The Western alliance is only an aspect of Türkiye whose substance has been amalgamated by Ankara’s developing relations with other regions and sub-regions of the globe including Asia-Pacific. Türkiye’s search for political-strategic clout in other regions has led Ankara to conceptualize and announce the most comprehensive and official foreign policy approach towards the Asia-Pacific region yet, known as the Asia Anew Initiative. This shows that Türkiye is not an exception to the above-stated powers that gave this region a central place in their strategic calculations. The initiative is predominantly multifaceted at its core, which aims to eliminate the asymmetries between Türkiye and Asian actors in both strategic and commercial terms. By increasing the engagement and cooperation with these actors, Türkiye aims to utilize its advantage in the sectors that it has considerable advantages in, such as tourism, conventional defense technology, and construction together with the ones in which it has emerging improvement, such as high-tech, finance, infrastructure, and energy transport. Türkiye’s additional connotation regarding Asia-Pacific is in geocultural terms. Due to its historical and religious background, Türkiye has many ties with Pakistan, Bangladesh, South Korea, Muslim communities of India, and to an extent Afghanistan. This has been an important channel that Turkish state and non-state actors have experienced in deepening their relations in the region. Türkiye’s soft power and diplomacy have also utilized such cultural affinity. Links tracing back to the 15th century of the Ottoman era has aided Türkiye’s influence in South and Southeast Asia. A clear empirical indication of such influence is the popularity of Turkish culture/history-oriented television serials within these communities. Thus, geocultural impact not only boosts Türkiye’s visibility and weight in the region but also helps it to be relevant in the non-Western and multiple directional vectors of the Asia-Pacific politico-economic fabric. An additional element of Türkiye’s engagement in the region is that it tries to utilize almost any type of “-lateralism.” i.e., multilateralism, minilateralism, and bilateralism. Ankara is trying to be a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and has put forward its intention to join the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. It has also created MIKTA, a transregional partnership grouping, with its like-minded partners from the region. More importantly, it has been developing a whole range of bilateralisms with Asia-Pacific countries regardless of their power statuses. Another very significant element of Türkiye’s engagement with the region is its focus on Asia-Pacific communities. Various Turkish state institutions, the Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TİKA), the Presidency of Religious Affairs (Diyanet), and the Türkiye scholarships program of the Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities (YTB) have been developing Türkiye’s people-to-people links through strategic and sustainable communication and promoting the country’s national brand. Although there is an obvious increase in Türkiye’s engagement with Asia-Pacific it is still early to assert its prominence in the region. However, this is not only a result of Türkiye’s current capabilities but the parameters of competition that must be navigated, with the global powers competing and cooperating in the region. Türkiye in this sense would require more cooperative patterns with like-minded powers, to increase its influence and boost its partners’ strength. Asia-Pacific is not a hassle-free region and currently Türkiye has a limited impact in this challenging ecosystem. On the other hand, developing multifaceted relations, especially with culturally and historically proximate sub-regions, will increase Türkiye’s visibility and impact. With the above-stated awareness and engagements, Türkiye’s visibility and economic significance in the Asia-Pacific will significantly increase over time. One very formidable catalyst for this would be its cultural and historical ties with Central Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia, which have already been transforming into commercial and political-strategic outcomes. The current edition of Insight Turkey is dedicated to the exploration of bilateral relations between Türkiye and Far Eastern countries, within the context of the Asia Anew Initiative. The winter issue features a commentary and six research articles on this subject, providing a comprehensive analysis of the topic. Moreover, the issue includes four off-topic comments and two research articles that lie outside the main theme. Among these, two articles shed light on the current Gaza genocide, ongoing since October 7. The commentary section opens with a perceptive analysis by Nuh Yılmaz on Türkiye’s foreign policy toward Asia. In his commentary, Yılmaz examines Türkiye’s general perspective on the Asian continent and discusses the basic dynamics of the initiative. According to his analysis, there has been a significant shift in the global balance of power, with Atlantic Asia emerging as a rising force in, politics, military, culture, and especially in economy. This transformation of the Asian continent prompted Türkiye to launch the Asia Anew Initiative in 2019, which presents a comprehensive and systematic vision for Asia. Yılmaz delves into Türkiye’s general perspective on the Asian continent and the key dynamics of this initiative. Furthermore, the initial research article, authored by Gürol Baba as the guest editor, centers on Türkiye’s strategies and its Asia Anew Initiative. Through his work, Baba endeavors to illustrate that within the Asian framework, Türkiye has the capability to not only be pragmatic but also achieve efficiency by implementing a diverse foreign policy approach. He argues that Türkiye’s application of multi-vectorism to its foreign policy in Asia is more successful than multilateralism or minilateralism policies. This is because there is much more than the two traditional vectors (West and non-West) due to the current intra-regional fragmentations and deviations in Asia. Baba embodied the success of bilateral relations in Asia by giving examples from some countries. Following Baba’s outline of Türkiye’s approach to its Asian policy, the second research article, penned by Mujib Alam, delves into the complex nature of Türkiye-India relations between 2000 and 2023. Alam’s analysis spans diplomatic, economic, scientific, and cultural exchanges, offering a comprehensive view of their bilateral engagements. Despite different stances on issues such as Kashmir and Cyprus, Alam points out a trend towards improvement in relations, especially economic relations and cultural exchanges, driven by the foreign policy trends of the ruling parties of the two countries. The third research article by Kohei Imai examines the bilateral relations between Türkiye and Japan, which will soon celebrate their 100th anniversary in 2024. Imai delves into the historical relationship between the two nations, which while positive, lacked a tangible cooperative partnership. He carefully considers the diplomatic challenges and public perspectives that Japan encounters, and identifies opportunities for both countries to pursue more practical collaborations moving forward. In the next research article, Alaeddin Tekin and Arshad Islam focus on Malaysia, shedding light on Türkiye’s relationship with another Southeast Asian country. In research articles based on primary sources, including Ottoman and Turkish archives as well as Bahasa Melayu and English materials, Tekin and Islam aim to investigate historical and current relations between Turks and Malays. Another research article on the subject, written by Yunhee Kim, tries to examine veteran diplomacy through the example of Türkiye and draws from the different historical examples of the Korean War. Claiming that veteran diplomacy can be used as an opportunity to expand South Korea’s soft power in the new public diplomacy era of the 21st century, Kim also argues that this diplomacy paves the way for security cooperation in the context of Türkiye-South Korea relations. Ali Akkemik, who deals with Türkiye’s relations with East Asia from the economic dimension, in the next research article, states that their economic relations have undergone a significant structural change in the last twenty years. According to Akkemik, while Japan previously dominated Türkiye’s trade with East Asia and the flow of direct foreign investment from East Asia to Türkiye, recently, both South Korea and China have surpassed Japan as Türkiye’s main trading partners in East Asia and have caught up with Japan in terms of foreign investments in Türkiye. Moreover, in this issue, we address the grave humanitarian crisis stemming from the conflict in Gaza. Specifically, two commentaries focus on the tragic events unfolding since October 7. Nkosi Zwelivelile Mandelsizwe Dalibhunga Mandela offers an analysis of South Africa’s response to Israel’s actions against the Palestinian people, focusing on their legal recourse at the International Court of Justice. He draws comparisons between Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and South Africa’s apartheid era, underscoring the deep ties of solidarity between these communities and the essential role of global unity, accountability, and concerted efforts in promoting justice and equality. Additionally, Norma Hashim provides a unique perspective by focusing on the plight of prisoners and hostages in Gaza, arguing that Palestinian prisoners are central to the narrative of the genocide initiated on October 7. She delves into their importance within the Palestinian national movement and shares the personal stories of some of these prisoners, highlighting their significance in the context of the ongoing crisis in Gaza. In other off-topic commentary, Sönmez Ateşoğlu has written a commentary as a continuation of the research article, “Economic Power and International Security,” he previously published in Insight Turkey. While Nancy Snow has provided a commentary in which she discusses the national brand of Japan, where she lived for many years. In his previously published research article, Ateşoğlu explains in detail the impact of economic power on international security and the connection between economic and military power, but claims that the security dimension is not sufficiently addressed. Therefore, in this commentary, the author aims to explain the impact of military power on international security, especially in the context of Türkiye, and how a state can achieve its security goals by using military force. On the other hand, Nancy Snow explores the evolution of Japan’s national brand, analyzing the transition from historical isolation to its current global recognition, especially under the influence of Shinzo Abe’s policies. The winter issue broadens its scope with two research articles that venture beyond the main theme. Blerim Sallahu’s contribution opens this segment with an in-depth exploration of the modalities for acquiring citizenship in Kosovo. Following this, Kemal İnat and Burhanettin Duran assess the Ukrainian war’s profound repercussions on the global order, scrutinizing the intricate position and consequential influence of Türkiye –situated uniquely as both a neighbor to Russia and an ally of the U.S.– within this complex geopolitical landscape. This latest special edition of Insight Turkey meticulously explores the evolving dynamics of Türkiye’s engagement with East Asia under the ambit of the Asia Anew Initiative. This edition is distinguished by a series of foundational articles that provide a thorough overview of the initiative, alongside in-depth analyses of Türkiye’s bilateral relationships with key Asian nations. We trust that the comprehensive discussions and diverse perspectives presented in this issue will offer our readers valuable insights and deepen their understanding of the intricate geopolitical landscape.
