Debating Security in Turkey: Challenges and Changes in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Ebru Canan-Sokullu, gives a detailed account of the strategic security agenda facing Turkey in an era of uncertainty and swift transformation in global politics, and regional and local dynamics. The contributors to this volume describe the challenges and changes that Turkey encounters in the international, regional, and national environment at a time of extraordinary flux. This study provides a framework for Turkish security agenda locating it in theoretical discussions, and developing a conceptual framework of security challenges to Turkey, and to a broader region where the country and its interests are located. The book positions Turkey in the new global security order addressing a multidimensional political agenda, and points to the need not only to elaborate on the overall evaluation of Turkey's political affairs--domestic and foreign-- but also to trace a critical conjuncture of transatlantic relations, its recent role in the Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia, and bid for full membership in the EU within the security context. Finally, the contributors reflect upon where Turkey's security challenges and prospects stand from internal and external perspectives with an interactive foreign policy assessment. Debating Security in Turkey is an essential contribution to the literature of Turkish national security, and the effects of that security in the region.

Turkey, with a robust modern economy and growing energy needs, is pursuing a switch to nuclear power. But that shift is occurring in an environment fraught with security challenges: Turkey borders Iraq, Syria, and Iran—all states with nuclear or WMD ambitions or capabilities. As a NATO member, Turkey also hosts U.S. nuclear bombs on its territory, although some question the durability of this relationship. This dynamic has naturally led to speculation that Turkish leaders might someday consider moving beyond a civilian course to develop nuclear weapons. Yet there has been remarkably little informed analysis and debate on Turkey's nuclear future, either within the country or in broader international society. This volume explores the current status and trajectory of Turkey's nuclear program, adding historical perspective, analytical rigor, and strategic insight.

Offers an in-depth case study of the failure of popular constitution making in Turkey from 2011 to 2013.

The causes of the current Greek-Turkish rapprochement progress are explored in this book in relation both to the international environment, which is increasingly conducive to this progress, and significant domestic changes.

Seminar paper from the year 2009 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: European Union, grade: A-, University of Basel (Europainstitut), language: English, abstract: Authors have proved hypothesis: Turkey's military capabilities, experience in NATO and international peace keeping operations and missions could rather strengthen than weaken ESDP position. However, there are some weaknesses that Turkey faces (focus on 'hard' rather than 'soft' power, military is in the process of modernizing, underestimated role in peace keeping operations), Turkey's contribution to ESDP is too significant (strong involvement in the missions) and will give more benefits than costs. Furthermore, Turkish accession to the EU would transform strategic challenges of ESDP.51 Only five of twenty ESDP peace keeping operations have been of a military nature, which mostly has been held by NATO or UN. "When it comes to much bigger military issues, the EU avoids taking strategic responsibility and still depends on the NATO to do its 'dirty work'"52. Therefore military stronger EU would give NATO and UN credit that EU is also responsible in the field of crisis management. Such win-win situation would exempt US Secretary's of State Madeleine Albright's the "3 D's" 1) decoupling of ESDP from NATO, 2) duplication of capabilities, 3) discrimination of non-EU NATO members.53 Turkey would also play role of agent between EU and NATO and "parties involved will benefit from threelevel game"54 (EU-Turkey-NATO). Therefore it is advantageous and beneficial not only for Turkey, but also for the EU and the NATO as well.55 Finally, last week Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn once more showed that EU would not allow Turkey 'cruise control' on accession.56 Therefore Turkey-EU relations should balance the contributions and benefits of such partnership and show that both partners can be producers and consumers of security and experience of defence. Such dialogue will prove that EU can play an imp

Turkish foreign policy and its implications for Eurasian security.