Turkey’s bold foreign policy moves in recent years reflect a determined effort to redefine its regional and global role. From its military interventions in Syria to its growing engagement with BRICS [the association of Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and four additional countries], Ankara’s actions reveal a broader strategy.
Turkey’s ambitions challenge the international order.
Its involvement in Syria underscores an increasingly interventionist approach to the Middle East. By actively supporting jihadist and terrorist groups, Ankara has positioned itself as a key player in the Sunni-Shiite power struggle. This strategy aligns with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s vision of a neo-Ottoman sphere of influence, where Turkey assumes a leadership role in the Sunni Muslim world. Unlike traditional statecraft, Turkey’s geopolitical imagination prioritizes intervention and influence. This is not solely about immediate security concerns; it is about shaping the regional order to reflect Turkey’s historical and ideological ambitions.
Turkey’s actions in Syria and Iraq also signal a deeper shift away from its Western alliances. Erdogan’s government has cultivated closer ties with Russia, challenging NATO’s cohesion and trans-Atlantic interests, exemplified by acquisition of Russia’s S-400 air defense system – a move that alienated NATO allies and raised security concerns about espionage risks to US bases in Turkey.
From its military interventions in Syria to its growing engagement with BRICS, Ankara’s actions reveal a broader strategy.
Even as Turkey provides light weapons to Ukraine, Erdogan’s efforts to circumvent Russian sanctions highlight Ankara’s nuanced balancing act. This historical strategy of playing the Russian card seeks to maintain economic ties with Moscow while carving out an independent role in the global order.
Turkey’s interest in joining BRICS reflects its broader aspirations to challenge Western dominance. Erdogan has framed this engagement as a commitment to “diversity of approaches, identities, and politics in the global economic system.” However, this rhetoric masks a more strategic aim: leveraging Turkey’s unique position between East and West to maximize its geopolitical clout.
The move also asserts a reversion to the natural region, which is indicative of an imperial Islamic order. Some BRICS members advocate for a “civilizational state” model that prioritizes sovereignty and cultural identity over liberal democratic norms. This vision resonates with Erdogan’s own neo-Ottoman worldview, which emphasizes Turkey’s colonial distinctiveness.
Turkey’s Geographical Advantages
Turkey has used its strategic location to its advantage in negotiations over Sweden and Finland’s NATO membership. By positioning himself as a gatekeeper, Erdogan has demonstrated his ability to extract concessions from Western and non-Western powers.
Turkey’s foreign policy ambitions are not limited to geopolitics; they extend into the ideological realm. Erdogan’s government has fostered close ties with political Islamist movements, including Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, which reflect Turkey’s long-term investment in shaping the future of political Islam across the Middle East and Europe. Hosting conferences featuring Hamas leaders, such as Khaled Mashaal, who recently called for suicide attacks against Israel, highlights Ankara’s ideological commitments.
Moreover, Turkey’s partnership with Qatar in financing Islamic movements reveals a coordinated strategy to dominant Sunni Muslim communities globally, especially after the weakening of Iran’s “axis of resistance.”
With a dual approach, Turkey has accused NATO of fueling the war in Ukraine while simultaneously leveraging its NATO membership to bolster its strategic position.
Turkey’s foreign policy exemplifies the complexities of a multipolar world order. With a dual approach, Turkey has accused NATO of fueling the war in Ukraine while simultaneously leveraging its NATO membership to bolster its strategic position.
Turkey’s ambitions present a complex challenge for US policymakers. On one hand, Turkey remains a critical NATO ally. On the other hand, its pivot toward Russia, BRICS, and political Islam undermines the values and principles that underpin the trans-Atlantic alliance.
Ankara is seeking to redefine its role as an independent power broker, unbound by traditional alliances or norms. This raises difficult questions about how to engage with an increasingly assertive and unpredictable Turkey. In the Middle East, its ambitions could exacerbate existing tensions. By positioning itself as a leader of Sunni Islam, Ankara risks deepening sectarian divides and destabilizing the region further.
Its ideological outreach could also fuel extremism and undermine efforts to promote stability and democratic governance. By combining interventionist strategies with ideological outreach, Ankara is reshaping the geopolitical landscape of the region and “beyond,” as Erdogan claims.
Turkey’s metamorphosis demands a measured response, and the international community must thoughtfully consider its implications. For the West and its allies, engaging with Turkey will require a nuanced approach that balances strategic cooperation with efforts to address the challenges posed by Ankara’s evolving foreign policy.
