Hamas’ surprising attack on Israel on Oct. 7, followed by Israel’s ongoing and disproportionate military operation in Gaza, has the potential to become a pivotal moment in Middle Eastern history. Predicting the extent of Israel’s incursion into Gaza remains uncertain, and Hamas faces immense challenges in maintaining its resistance.

Türkiye carried out airstrikes in Syria and Iraq last week in response to a terrorist attack against the Interior Ministry in Ankara. During that period, one statement and one picture attracted plenty of attention.

Merely skimming over the world news, one quickly notices Türkiye’s growing geopolitical significance. Let me elaborate by highlighting four issues, excluding countless others – including migration, armed drones, the Altay tank and Türkiye’s rapprochement with Egypt. Türkiye will host the third international meeting toward the Ukraine peace summit. Ankara pledged to target all PKK terror groups and its Syrian presence YPG assets in Iraq and Syria. Azerbaijan refused to participate in EU-brokered talks with Armenia in Spain, citing Türkiye’s exclusion. Last but not least, the Abu Dhabi-based investment company ADQ is in talks with Türkiye regarding constructing a railroad over the Bosphorus as part of a trade corridor linking Europe with the Middle East and Asia. Obviously, Türkiye’s direct involvement in peace diplomacy, counterterrorism, the South Caucasus region’s stability and energy/logistics corridors does not just relate to its geographical location.

In light of the attempted terrorist attack on the General Directorate of Security in the Turkish capital of Ankara on Oct. 1 by the PKK terrorist organization, it is imperative to address the prevention of terrorist propaganda and strategic communication processes, in addition to security and intelligence matters. In the aftermath of a terrorist attack, not only do security institutions face a challenge, but society as a whole grapples with shock and uncertainty. While the standard operational procedures for security institutions and intelligence communities are quite clear, effectively deploying security and intelligence processes and implementing strategic communication to counteract immediate propaganda are intertwined. Responding swiftly to such incidents can impact not only immediate outcomes but also the long-term trajectory of national security and societal cohesion. Therefore, a crucial aspect that demands immediate attention after terrorist attacks is preventing terrorist propaganda. In this regard, the significance of strategic communication in preventing propaganda must be underscored.

On the centenary of the Turkish Republic, President Erdoğan, who has been ruling Türkiye for the last two decades, has announced a new perspective on foreign policy for Türkiye’s second century. He has named the long-term foreign policy vision as the ‘Century of Türkiye’ and declared his determination for building a ‘Türkiye Axis.’ After a fierce struggle against both domestic and international tutelage, President Erdoğan has succeeded to attain autonomy in Turkish foreign policy. Ankara has built a powerful economy and increased its military capacity at the national level. Also, it has improved its relations with both Turkic and Muslim countries and begun to take initiatives and to play a leadership role at the regional level. Furthermore, Türkiye has diversified its relations with other actor and elevated its status at the global level. Within this perspective, it has begun to contribute to resolving global challenges and to play an influential role in international organizations. This article will provide a comprehensive analysis of the evolving foreign policy of Türkiye in recent years. It will delve deep into the shifts and transformations that have taken place and explore the underlying principles and objectives that define Türkiye’s new foreign policy vision, the Century of Türkiye.

The dissolution of the Ottoman Empire set the stage for Türkiye’s evolving foreign policy in the Middle East, a region deeply intertwined with its historical legacy. From the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 to the rise of the AK Party in the early 2000s, Türkiye’s approach has been marked by pragmatism, adaptability, and a keen understanding of regional dynamics. The nation's foreign policy has oscillated between neutrality, revisionism, proactivity, reactivity, assertiveness, autonomy, and diplomacy, reflecting both its historical ties and strategic imperatives. As Türkiye continues to navigate the complexities of the Middle East, its foreign policy remains a testament to its enduring resilience and strategic acumen. By tracing its roots and evolution, the article sheds light on the myriad factors that have shaped its course, offering insights into the evolving nature of Türkiye’s multifaceted and adaptive foreign policy and role in the Middle East over the last 100 years (1923-2023).

This paper explores Türkiye’s relations with Africa, focusing on Somalia, Nigeria and Libya from both humanitarian and security perspectives. To do so, the study employs the concept of soft power in relation to the security and humanitarian policies that Türkiye has adopted on the African continent. Though Türkiye has no significant colonial history on the continent like other European countries, its relations with Africa in recent decades are no secret and continue to strengthen against all odds. From a relationship that stems from historical links with the Ottoman Empire to more promising and positive impacts on the continent in recent years, it is important to understand these ties amidst the increasing distaste expressed by some African nations towards the West. Using examples of Türkiye’s security and humanitarian deployment in Somalia, Nigeria and Libya, it is perhaps no surprise to perceive the relationship between Türkiye and African nations as a dichotomy between humanitarian and security.

This paper explores Italy-Türkiye relations and food diplomacy’s role in shaping international relations, drawing parallels between Harry S. Truman’s 1951 decision to provide emergency grain aid to India and current global diplomacy, especially amid the Ukraine crisis. Truman’s choice, driven by humanitarian concerns and India’s significance during the early Cold War, is examined. The article also explores how Türkiye employs food diplomacy, exemplified by the Black Sea Grain Initiative, to bolster its regional and global influence. It delves into complex Italian-Turkish relations amid the Ukraine conflict, emphasizing NATO membership and food diplomacy’s role in shaping their future ties.

Analyzing modern Türkiye’s foreign policy is the perfect case study of how, over time, a nation-state can completely restructure its approach to engaging with the outside world. Yet this analysis does not aim to propose an extended or complete listing of individual countries’ relations; on the contrary, it basically tries to suggest what was the catalyst when measurable change occurred for the first time. In brief, Türkiye progressed from promoting splendid isolation during the past millennium to becoming a fully integrated and often trend-setting international actor in just over two decades. Hence, determining the actual catalyst for change, which according to the author is not just an election victory but also a much more profound paradigm shift in elected officials’ attitudes towards the wider world, is this contribution’s major aim. After discussing the analytical differences between international relations on the one hand and foreign policies on the other and focusing on the electorate as a key contributor and beneficiary of and from proactive foreign policies, the piece proposes a number of key examples to come up with a tangible way to measure foreign policy success. At the same time, the question is put forward in which context there might be even more to expect from Ankara and its constant desire to further expand on an already impressively positive global image. Whether or not foreign policies are an integral part of Türkiye’s 100-year strategy and thus become a focus of Türkiye the Brand serves as the concluding reflection.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s address to Parliament’s opening session focused on his call for a new constitution. Stressing that Türkiye should draft a civilian constitution for the first time since the republic’s early years, the Turkish leader made the case that the 1982 Constitution, which was drafted by the junta that carried out the Sept. 12, 1980 coup, could not address the country’s needs. He thus urged everyone to answer his call for a new constitution “with a constructive approach.”

Azerbaijan has successfully launched a large-scale military operation against the so-called self-declared Armenian state in Karabakh between Sept. 19 and 20. Thus, it has completed the process of what it achieved after the Second Karabagh War in November 2020. After meeting with the representatives of the local Armenians, the Armenians declared the dissolution of their so-called state. Thus, Azerbaijan has resolved the Karabagh issue. From now on, the Karabagh issue is an internal problem of the Azerbaijani state. The two sides will meet on Oct. 5 in Spain to negotiate the new conditions and possibly to sign a peace agreement.

New geopolitical transformations are taking place in world politics as the inability of international organizations, starting with the United Nations, to promote peace and security encourages all countries to prepare for new solutions, cooperations and rivalries.

The latest issue of Insight Turkey seeks to offer a thorough examination of Türkiye’s historical journey and its evolving foreign policy, with a focus on the implications these changes hold for Türkiye’s future. This issue holds particular significance as Türkiye approaches its centennial anniversary as a republic, marking a significant milestone in its foreign policy trajectory. Within this context, President Erdoğan has launched the ‘Century of Türkiye’ vision, a strategic initiative aimed at enhancing Türkiye’s position on the global stage.

The political dynamics within the American Congress and the activities of lobbying groups have long been significant factors negatively impacting Turkish-American relations. Since the 1970s, Congress has constrained the broad authority of the White House in foreign policy, leading to decisions against Türkiye on issues such as Cyprus and Armenia. In recent years, Congress has extended its influence into areas like Syria and defense cooperation.

The 44-day war between Azerbaijan and Armenia in 2020, which concluded with Baku’s victory, triggered a significant shift in the post-Cold War geopolitical landscape of the Caucasus region. Azerbaijan’s successful effort to partially end the Armenian occupation of Karabakh had two major implications.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan spoke with reporters covering his day trip to Nakhchivan, Azerbaijan, where he attended the groundbreaking ceremony for the Iğdır-Nakhchivan Natural Gas Pipeline with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev. His main remarks included the following:

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan visited Nakhchivan, Azerbaijan, on Monday with an official delegation, which included me, to attend groundbreaking and opening ceremonies for a natural gas pipeline and a military complex. By the time of the delegation’s departure, the media reported that eight senior Armenian military officers had been arrested on the charge of plotting the assassination of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan.