President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan addressed Parliament on the occasion of the beginning of the new legislative year. He provided a summary of Turkey's international standing and foreign policy, and offered both criticism and fresh proposals to improve world politics and the situation in conflict zones.

With the U.S. elections five weeks away, the fight over the presidency keeps getting nastier. This is not your average disagreement between Republicans and Democrats. Even labels like globalist and patriot have long been overused. Nowadays, President Donald Trump’s critics claim that he will destroy American democracy if he gets four more years. If Joe Biden wins, others say, China will own the United States.

Turkey’s most recent steps in Libya and the Eastern Mediterranean raised questions in foreign capitals about that country’s international standing. As Americans grappled with President Donald Trump’s call to delay the 2020 elections, the European media went berzerk over the Hagia Sophia’s reclassification as a mosque. On the one hand, they called on European leaders to respond to “Sultan” Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, whom they charged with neo-Ottomanist expansionism. At the same time, European reporters appreciate that Erdoğan has been filling the power vacuum that the United States left behind, empowering his country in the process. They also understand that the Turkish president, as an experienced leader, does what his European counterparts fail to do and takes his country to a new level of agency.

The Hagia Sophia Grand Mosque's reopening, an embodiment of Turkey’s free will, could not have been possible without Erdoğan’s leadership and the Turkish people’s confidence in him. Hagia Sophia’s "resurrection" has become a symbol of Turkey’s efforts to become a prominent player in the international arena. A missing piece of our national identity has thus been put back in place. No politician would ever dare to reverse this decision as long as Turkey remains a democracy.

Following back-to-back successes by Government of National Accord, all sides seem to reorder positions

The 2016 presidential election in the U.S. is being remembered not only as an election that many pollsters and political analysts failed to predict, but also for the debates about Russian meddling in the elections. Even before the inauguration of President Donald Trump, the tensions between the U.S. and Russia had begun to rise in regard to the activities of Russian operatives in the U.S.

After a long COVID-19 interval, the two U.S. presidential candidates launched their campaigns and started to meet voters. Trump campaign prefers to organize large rallies in the battleground states, despite a rise in the number of COVID-19 infections there. Joe Biden's campaign, on the other hand, chose to organize small gatherings as per social distancing rules and broadcast the former vice president's remarks online.

As Libya’s Government of National Accord (GNA) attempts to liberate Sirte and Jufra, diplomatic talks are regaining momentum. The latest move came from Egypt, where President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi met putschist Gen. Khalifa Haftar and Libyan politician Aguila Saleh before unveiling the Cairo Declaration. That document relates to a cease-fire, a road map for political reconciliation, the establishment of the Presidential Council and elections within 18 months. Although Russia and the U.S. endorsed the call for a cease-fire, the Cairo Declaration, which exclusively deals with eastern Libya and intends to keep Haftar in business, does not create common ground or reconcile other stakeholders, including Turkey. Hence Ankara’s description of the declaration as "stillborn."

The coronavirus pandemic hasn't just made people obsessed with hand hygiene and social distancing. In fact, we are equally eager to predict how the world will change post-pandemic – hence the wrangling among political leaders regarding the economic crisis that this public health emergency will ensure.

This analysis addresses the potential changes in the constitution of the Russian Federation and the reasons behind the acting government’s resignation brought upon by President Putin on January 15, 2020. The work aims to underline the causes behind the proposed constitutional amendments and the government dissolution as well as its consequences on the future governance of Russia.

The March 5 agreement between Turkey and Russia put an end to the military confrontation in Idlib, Syria. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, shook hands on that deal to de-escalate what had become serious bilateral tensions. The 2018 Sochi agreement has thus been updated.

After a six-hour meeting between leaders and technical committees, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Russian counterpart announced a cease-fire for Syria's Idlib. During the meeting at the Kremlin, the presidents gave short speeches. The whole world followed the process as the decisions could trigger an escalation in violence while intensifying the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Syria. Turkey and Russia both wanted to end the civil war but were unwilling to concede their positions. For both Turkey and Russia, bilateral relations were at stake as well.

Last week’s agreement between Turkey and Russia established a new deconfliction plan and demonstrated that the two countries were united in their commitment to the Astana and Sochi processes. Even more important was their ability to stop the clashes in Idlib and preserve the framework of their bilateral relations.

The deal signed between Turkey and Russia eased the tension in Idlib by declaring a cease-fire once again. Yet, despite the positive intentions of both parties, the unreliable nature of the Syrian regime raises cautiousness while increasing the responsibility on the shoulders of the Turkish and Russian sides as guarantor states

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan visited Moscow this week to hold talks on the Idlib crisis. The world closely followed his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. All experts were sure that this would be the tensest meeting between the two leaders since the 2015 jet incident.

For days, both Syrian public opinion and the world have been discussing the question of “What is Turkey doing in Idlib, Syria?” If you are really curious about this question, you must have been born after 2015. Turkey has intervened in northern Syria for both humanitarian and security reasons due to a number of problems, such as nearly 4 million refugees coming to the country during the nine-year war, instability spreading from Syria and dozens of people killed in missile strikes on Turkish soil, which were launched from across the Syrian border.

The Idlib crisis reached another turning point after the signing of the Turkish-Russian agreement last week during President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s visit to Moscow. Reports indicated that the challenging process of negotiations carried on for more than six hours. The end result of the negotiations generated a lot of debates regarding its provisions and the potential roadblocks in its implementation.