Evolution of Türkiye’s Engagement in the Middle Eastern Regional Order: The Normalization Agenda and Beyond

 This article analyzes the transformation of Turkish foreign policy towards the Middle East during the turbulent years initiated with the Arab Spring. In due course, Turkish policy considerably shifted from proactive engagement with the region in the early 2000s to a bid to leading regional transformation, particularly in the initial years of the Arab Spring. However, the reversal of the Arab Spring increasingly presented a blowback for Türkiye’s regional engagements. The ensuing regional insecurity resulted in a realist turn in Turkish foreign policy, with frequent resort to military instruments and coercive diplomacy. Eventually, regional policies of Türkiye corresponded to the search for de-escalation and normalization within the emerging Middle Eastern order since 2020. The article argues that changing regional dynamics corresponding with domestic conditions influenced and shaped Türkiye’s policies towards the Middle East. Recently, under the impact of the regional-systemic pressures coupled with changing domestic conditions, recalibrating its regional engagement, Türkiye has prioritized the normalization agenda. It argues that while normalization agenda will remain an important objective for Türkiye’s regional policies, it will evolve in a partial manner, and case-by-case, conditional on the unfolding regional order and Ankara’s strategic priorities.


https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_98367_67b42d82c5c89837a1edef94ce040048.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bayram-Sinkaya

https://www.academia.edu/126224411/Evolution_of_T%C3%BCrkiyes_Engagement_in_the_Middle_Eastern_Regional_Order_the_Normalization_Agenda_and_Beyond


Azerbaijan-Iran Relations under the Shadow of "Pan-Turkist" Challenges

The independence of the Azerbaijan Republic in October 1991 and the ensuing Azerbaijan-Armenia dispute over Nagorno-­­Karabakh posed a new set of challenges for the Islamic Republic of Iran. One such challenge was that Iran now faced a military conflict between its two neighbours, creating instability adjacent to its borders that eventually turned into a protracted conflict. Although Tehran claimed neutrality, 

Azerbaijan blamed Iran for providing tacit support to the Armenians. Another challenge was the ascendance of Abulfaz Elchibey to power in Baku in June 1992, which sparked the so-called threat of pan-Turkism, arguably aimed at the territorial integrity of Iran. Elchibey was an ardent Turkish nationalist who forecasted the downfall of Iran and the “unification of two Azerbaijans” that alarmed Iranian officials about security risks arising from a powerful and independent Azerbaijan. Nonetheless, Baku and Tehran used to have pragmatic relations, particularly after the replacement of Elchibey with Heydar Aliyev as President of Azerbaijan in 1993. Despite occasional tensions between the two neighbours that revolved around the alleged Iranian promotion of political Islam and its intelligence activities inside Azerbaijan, Iranian support for Armenia with regard to the Karabakh dispute, and Baku’s alleged support for ethnonationalism among Iranian Azerbaijanis, the two countries have managed to preserve relatively stable and pragmatic relations.

However, immediately after the Second Karabakh War (27 September-9 November 2020), also dubbed as the 44-Day War by Azerbaijanis, which ended with Azerbaijan’s liberation of territories that were previously occupied by the Armenian forces, Baku-Tehran relations were strained significantly. Azerbaijan furiously reacted to Iranian deployment of additional troops close to the Azerbaijan-Iran border and frequent military drills. In return, Iran viewed the growing Azerbaijan-Israel relations as a “Zionist threat” encroaching close to its territories. Finally, in response to an attack on the Azerbaijani Embassy in Tehran in January 2023, Azerbaijan suspended the activities of the embassy and withdrew its diplomats from Tehran. Baku then blamed Tehran for cultivating militant cells in Azerbaijan and declared some Iranian diplomats as persona non grata. Iran reciprocated the measure, displaying the severity of tension between the two states.

This paper examines the evolution of Baku-Tehran relations after the Second Karabakh War. It argues that the recent tensions between Iran and Azerbaijan are a result of two related factors. The first is the shifting geopolitics of the South Caucasus against the interests of Iran. The war has broken Azerbaijan and Armenia’s previous stalemate, and made the former, along with Türkiye, the dominant powers in the region. The second reason is the revival of the spectre of pan-Turkism that has haunted Baku-Tehran relations for the past century. In addition, rising Azerbaijani and Turkish influence in the South Caucasus and the presence of approximately twenty-five million Turkic, Azeri/Azerbaijani speaking people in the northwest region of Iran, commonly called Iranian Azerbaijan, has proved to be a source of tension in Azerbaijan-Iran relations. Members of the Azerbaijani elite who have close ties with former President Elchibey have often talked about the partition of Iran and the unification of the two Azerbaijans (bütöv Azerbaijan). This has fuelled Tehran’s fears that Baku incites ethnonationalist movements among Iranian Azerbaijanis, and alleged pan-Turkist or pan-Azerbaijani policies pursued by Baku have led to the securitization of relations between the two countries.

For the full text: https://www.dohainstitute.org/en/Lists/ACRPS-PDFDocumentLibrary/azerbaijan-iran-relations-under-the-shadow-of-pan-turkist-challenges.pdf

Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies,

Turkey-Iran Relations after the JDP

 After the JDP came to power in Turkey in 2002, much has changed in Turkish foreign policy as well as profound changes in international, After the JDP came to power in Turkey in 2002, much has changed in Turkish foreign policy as well as profound changes in international, regional and domestic contexts surrounding it. Particularly fluctuations in Turkish-Iranian relations in the course of seventeen years have been very puzzling, and complicated, which made it worthy of study. Once, relations between the two states have so improved that some pundits regarded it as an evidence of shift of axis in Turkish foreign policy. Soon later, Ankara and Tehran embroiled in a regional competition that reminded the Ottoman-Safavid rivalry of the 16th century with its strategic and sectarian implications. Later on, they have developed amicable relations. Against this background one may question how could we understand that very dynamic nature of Turkish-Iranian relations? Considering this complicated and dynamic picture, we should analyse decisive factors in the relations between Ankara and Tehran. In other words, what has changed - and has been changing - in Turkish-Iranian relations after the JDP? In order to comprehend the complicated and dynamic interactions between Ankara and Tehran, this research goes beyond the JDP period in Turkey and put forwards a review of the history of Turkish-Iranian relations. And then, it focuses on the JDP period and analyse relations between Ankara and Tehran from diplomatic, economic and regional perspectives. Finally, it makes some speculations on the future of Turkish-Iranian relations. It argues that the complicated relationship between the two countries have been determined by a configuration of geopolitical context, structural factors, and the ruling elite. The JDP elite have employed rationalization, institutionalization and compartmentalization strategies to further Turkish-Iranian relations. However, they could not go beyond the diplomatic culture that set the longer history of interactions between the two countries on a fine course between bitter rivalry and friendly relations.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337090886_Turkey-Iran_Relations_after_the_JDP


The Role of Iran in the Syrian Conflict

 Soon after the Arab Spring shattered Arab politics in the early 2010s, Bashar al-Assad, who had replaced his father as the head of the Baath regime in Syria, has faced with a cohort of domestic, regional and international challenges that aimed to force him to leave the power. Iran has remained one of few international actors that have stood alongside the Assad administration. In this regard, Iran’s policies have varied from diplomatic support to the mobilization of militia forces and troop deployment in support of Assad. Since then Iran’s motivations for standing behind Assad have been questioned by many analysts. Arguments that were put forward to explain Iranian policy toward Syria during the crisis have been ranged from a hypothetical view of Iranian fear of encirclement by the hostile forces to a sectarian consolidation under the Shiite axis. This article asserts that Islamic Republican regime in Iran has a keen interest in maintaining a foothold in Syria, and circulated several complementary narratives to justify its involvement and role in the crisis. The article reviews those narratives in order to comprehend Tehran’s enduring support for the Assad administration, and examines the ways in which Iran supported Assad throughout the conflict.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354578987_The_Role_of_Iran_in_the_Syrian_Conflict

HOUTHI -IRAN RELATIONS: DISTANT RELATIVES TURNS BROTHERS IN ARMS

 Revolutionary process in Yemen that begun in February 2011 ended up with the Houthi movement’s (that is also called Ansarollah) takeover of Sanaa, the capital city, on September 21, 2014. The takeover has drawn attention to Houthis’ ties with Iran and unleashed a debate on whether the Houthi movement is a new proxy of Tehran. Likewise, subsequent military intervention of Saudi-led international coalition to reverse the Houthis march to power is also discussed within the framework of a proxy war between Riyad and Tehran. However, the frame of proxy relationship leads to the underestimation of multi-layered, intersected confrontations among a multitude of actors, and changing characteristics of the protracted conflict. Indeed, the conflict in Yemen has evolved from the Houthi uprising to a prolonged civil war that drew leading regional powers and had regional ramifications. The Houthis also turned from local insurgents to national actors, and to virtually regional players. Unfolding of the Yemeni conflict from a local insurgency to a protractive regional conflict has also transformed the Houthis’ relations with Tehran. This article aimed at elaborating the Houthis’ changing relations with Iran over the course of time. It is argued that initially there was a distant relationship between the Houthis and Iran, which evolved in two decades into a close relationship of “brothers in arms”. 

Keywords: Ansarollah, Iran, Revolutionary Guards, Yemen, Zaydi


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367150922_HOUTHI_-IRAN_RELATIONS_DISTANT_RELATIVES_TURNS_BROTHERS_IN_ARMS_BayramSinkaya

U.S. and Israeli Military Attacks Against Iran: Regional and Global Consequences

  1. Introduction On February 28, 2026, U.S. military elements and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) launched coordinated and joint missile an...