Türkiye

With the date of Turkish elections coming soon, Turkish president and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) are facing one of the most serious challenges since the year they came to power. Namely, inflation exceeded 80% in September 2022 and Turkish Lira plummeted in the face of American Dollar. These economic hardships are leading the prospects of a political change to peak. According to polls, Erdogan is in real trouble with the AKP receiving barely 29.5% of votes. Accordingly, Erdogan and his allies resorted to the Nationalist rhetoric knowing that it is an important card when it comes to attracting Turkish citizens’ votes. Turkish Nationalism is believed to be nurtured by Kurdish uprisings and the belief in the “revival” of the Ottoman empire. Next May, general elections are to be held in the middle of the aforementioned atmosphere which threatens Erdogan's legacy. Using the same nationalist tactic as he used in 2018, will the Turkish President succeed again or it is a burned card not useful anymore?

Securitizing an issue means simply, designating an issue as of an extreme danger to be dealt with urgently. The theory of securitization stipulates that national security policies are not given but are formulated by policy makers mainly through their uttered words. Accordingly, narratives given by policy makers frame issues as either a security threat, a mere challenge or even an opportunity. The same issue can be mentioned by the same political leader once as a security threat that the nation should mitigate at some point and an asset at another. Migration is one of those issues which governments either give a securitizing polish or none at all. In this analysis, the argument goes that “national interests” made-up from economic and political conditions are the main factors in deciding the given frame.

The earthquake which hit the southern Turkish territories in February 2023 proved that natural disasters taking place in the 21st century do not only result in piles of deaths and injuries but also political ramifications take place. When the earthquake hit Turkey, politicians understood that it is an opportunity to capitalize on for achieving delayed political aims. On the domestic level, opposition parties started to accuse the current president and his government with poor crisis management while trying to tilt the playing field in their favor before the general elections scheduled in May. On the international front, issues such as NATO enlargement, bilateral relations with Greece and the delayed F-16 deal have taken the larger space in the discussions which came after the earthquake. Accordingly, the natural disaster proved to be a political tool that should not be missed by contemporary politicians.

The bilateral relations between Türkiye and Iran have always been one of the most unique in the world of international relations. Although pigmented with a number of clashes over several issues, ad-hoc points of cooperation intervene to stand in the face of building an animosity between the two states. With geopolitical changes taking place recently, it deserves to study whether the “marriage of inconvenience” between the two states will continue or it will at some point be disrupted. In this analysis, both points of contention and cooperation will be discussed showing the shape the relations between the two states have been taking paving the way for understanding the persistence of the current pattern.