Turkiye’s strategic approach to the Middle East

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has emphasized Turkiye’s strategic approach to navigating the transformative developments in the Middle East, and highlighted Turkiye’s reliance on “strategic wisdom” as its guide.

The importance of strategic wisdom in foreign policy cannot be overstated. It is crucial for an effective foreign policy to ride out the complex security environment in the region, where the dynamics of hard power and soft power are often fluid, and alliances or rivalries emerge based on shifting interests.

As the Middle East remains tense and volatile, Turkiye, a middle-ranking power, faces challenges that require strategic wisdom in an era when foreign policy decisions have not only regional but also global implications: it is about priorities and a fine balance between realism and idealism. Moreover, strategic wisdom must be based on pragmatism while maintaining the flexibility to respond to sudden changes. Turkiye’s strategic approach in the Middle East may not be welcomed by all the regional and global stakeholders or work in favor of their interests. However, a successful strategic approach is pragmatic, adjustable and implementable. Turkiye’s role in the Middle East, and specifically Syria, is a good example of how such strategies are adjusted and implemented in accordance with emerging realities.

In Syria, Turkiye took a multilayered strategic approach. While initially focusing on diplomatic and humanitarian efforts, it later recalibrated its policy to prioritize national security through military operations and the creation of safe zones. This policy shift aimed not only at eliminating security threats but also gaining leverage. In doing so, Ankara used a mix of military and diplomatic tools. Force or the threat of it is one element of a strategic approach. Turkiye’s military involvement in Syria has paved the way for a deepening of Ankara’s role there and strengthened its hand to counter Iranian and Russian influence.

As Joseph Nye has said, there is no difference between the aims of hard power and soft power, but the means are very different. Aware of this, Turkiye applied a combination of soft and hard power, and everything in between, to expand its role in Syria.

Through soft power, by creating strong connections and reliable government near its border, it attempted to widen its sphere of influence in the country. It drew its strength not only from its influence on the ground but also through its strategic approach coupled with its political, cultural and educational capabilities. The educational institutions that it built are a good example of Turkiye’s soft-power efforts that aim to inspire hope among Syrian youth. Additionally, throughout the crisis, it provided educational opportunities for Syrians in Turkiye, some of whom now hold important positions in the new administration in Damascus. Turkiye’s strategic approach to build connections with Syrians through soft power actually served its material goals, particularly evident in the post-Assad era.

Turkiye’s strategic approach includes providing support to war-torn states in the Middle East with humanitarian and economic tools and balancing between global and regional powers through diplomacy.

Sinem Cengiz

The Marshall Plan of 1948, through which the US provided economic aid to rebuild Europe after the Second World War, exemplifies strategic wisdom in foreign policy. The US approach to opening diplomatic relations with China in 1972 is another example. Turkiye’s strategic approach includes providing support to war-torn states in the Middle East with humanitarian and economic tools and balancing between global and regional powers through diplomacy.

The second tool of strategic wisdom is geopolitical adaptability. In Syria and elsewhere in the region, when necessary Turkiye realigned its policies in response to changing circumstances. Turkiye’s ability to adapt to the shifting conditions, whether through military action or diplomatic engagements, shows the importance of a flexible strategic approach. The Astana peace process that began in 2017 with Iran and Russia was an example of such a flexible strategic approach. In the same way, its normalization process with regional states was an example of a strategic approach, which required prioritizing realpolitik over idealpolitik.

The third crucial tool of strategic wisdom is mediation. Turkiye’s role in mediating disputes, especially between African nations, or efforts to mediate between Russia and Ukraine, should continue in order to maintain its relations with these actors.

However, despite such maneuvers, Turkiye’s strategic approach will certainly be tested. The region remains volatile, alliances change rapidly, and the policies of global powers often create complexities for regional states. Sitting between global and other regional powers, Turkiye seeks to expand its influence, but managing relations with other regional powers — avoiding zero-sum approaches — is essential.

However, strategic wisdom in foreign policy is not static: it is a dynamic process that requires constant adjustments. Turkiye needs to be clear about what the goal it seeks and how it gets from situation A to B in this volatile region. This means not only maintaining flexibility in its policies but also ensuring that its policies have clear long-term goals. Its ability to balance hard power with soft power, assert strategic autonomy, and adapt to a rapidly changing region will determine Turkiye’s role as an effective middle power in the region and beyond.

• Dr. Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes in Turkiye’s relations with the Middle East. X: @SinemCngz