The Trump Administration has been an extraordinary experience for the entire world as much as for the United States. However, regarding the Middle East, it has not caused a radical change in general, but accelerated already-existing trends

The recent change of leadership in Muscat is crucial for regional balance of power as much as for Oman’s domestic politics. Following Sultan Qaboos bin Said’s 50-year long reign, the country has had a new ruler, Sultan Haitham bin Tariq Al Said, since last January.

Many believe that Trump’s possible defeat in the November election would be a serious loss for Turkey. Yet, in contrary to the prevalent mood and expectations, Biden’s election may not be as bad as some fears for Turkey, if Erdogan acts cautiously. Given the relative stability in bilateral relations, Joe Biden’s initial preference might be maintaining this course of ties with the US' unwieldy NATO partner.

The military intervention of Turkey changed the balance of power significantly in favor of the GNA, thanks to its drone technology. Developed by Erdogan’s son-in-law, Turkish drones had also wreaked havoc on Syrian targets in Idlib, outsmarting the advanced Russian air defense systems. These achievements boosted morale in Ankara and demonstrated that it has the power to shape developments in the region.

Despite President Erdogan’s unprecedented power, the Turkish politics is still vivid and dynamic. The crumbling economy, combined with the pressure of the COVID-19, has deepened the rifts by encouraging actors to take bolder steps. The economic downturn of the country has been high on the agenda of the Turkish society in recent years.

Diplomasinin birçok açıdan önemli değişimler yaşadığı günümüzde, diplomatlar için en büyük sorunlardan birisi otoriter ve populist liderler. Dış politikayı iç politik hesaplarıyla, ideolojik görüşleriyle ve kişisel hırslarıyla yönetmek isteyen liderler diplomatlar için ciddi bir problem teşkil etmekte. Yılların emeği siyasi ilişkiler bir basın açıklamasıyla ya da mitingle buhar olurken, bu tarz liderlerin duygusal, kişisel ve heran değişebilen kararları ise diplomatların uluslararası muhatapları karşısında itibarlarını zedelemekte.

Ahmet Davutoğlu kuşkusuz Türk dış politikası tarihindeki en önemli isimlerden birisi. Gerek fikirleri gerekse uygulamadaki performansıyla Davutoğlu son yıllarda sıkça eleştirilen bir isim. Soğuk Savaş yıllarından kalma tarihi geçmiş jeopolitik kavramlara atfettiği önem ve neo-Osmanlıcı (bazılarına göre ise neo-İslamcı) ideolojik takıntısı Davutoğlu’nun fikirlerine dair önemli eleştirilerden.

COVID-19’un siyasi yansımaları krizin en fazla konuşulan ve üzerine öngörülerde bulunulan yönlerinden birisi. Genel beklenti bu krizin uluslararası ilişkilerde ve küresel ekonomide devrimsel sonuçlarının olacağı yönünde. Birçokları beklentiyi Türk iç siyasetine de uyarlamakta. Bu devrimsel sonuçları görmek için henüz erken. Ancak şu ana kadar gerek küresel dengelerde gerekse iç siyasette kriz temel dinamikleri değiştirmedi.

If Erdoğan is voted out of office, no one in Washington or Brussels should expect Turkey to suddenly turn into a docile and obedient ally. Structural changes in the international environment, broader bureaucratic and ideological trends in Turkey, and new facts on the ground that Erdoğan has created will all limit the potential for “normalization” in post-Erdoğan Turkey.

Turkey has maintained strong dialogue with NATO and EU countries despite increasing differences regarding foreign policy matters. Meanwhile, Turkey’s intensifying relations with authoritarian states is one of the striking trends between 2010 and 2020.

elations between Turkey and Qatar have flourished within the past decade, particularly after the 2017 Gulf boycott against the latter. Yet efforts by Ankara and Doha to normalize diplomatic relations with Gulf countries and Egypt raise doubts about the future of bilateral relations between Turkey and Qatar. For sure, neither Turkey nor Qatar have any interest in ending their mutually beneficial bilateral relations.

Geopolitical, ideological, and socio-economic quandaries will continue to haunt processes of normalization in the Middle East subsequent to the US’s gradual withdrawal from the region. Underlying issues remain unresolved despite diplomatic relaxation, and the power vacuum left behind by the US has the potential to rekindle regional rivalries and trigger proxy wars worse than those seen under the Obama and Trump administrations.

With its endless wars, crises, massacres, and turmoil, the Middle East is seen as hopeless geography today. It was much better than this throughout the 20th century, but it had never been so hopeless, exhausted, and desperate. There is no more new ideas, projects, or emotions that motivate and energize Arab street around itself.

As Russia has initiated its onslaught against Ukraine, the Turkish position has tilted towards the attitudes of other NATO countries, although it remains cautious in an attempt to not raise Moscow’s ire.

For U.S. policymakers, it will be necessary to determine how best to reconfigure American strategy in the Middle East in an age of new hegemonic struggles. From the U.S. perspective, withdrawal or retreat from the region does not necessarily reflect the true nature of the policy change. Regional actors, however, are likely to have the opposite perspective—that the United States is much less interested in Middle Eastern regional issues than it has been in the past.

Rusya’nın Ukrayna’yı işgali büyük güçler arasında son yıllarda artan rekabetin nerelere varabileceğini çok açık bir şekilde herkese göstermiş oldu. Y kuşağının tarih kitaplarından okuduğu felaket senaryolarının günümüzde de pekâlâ yaşanabileceğini görmüş olduk.