As part of a new series of debates we hope to ignite on the evolving world order, TPQ’s Winter 2020/21 edition explores the question of how the US’s changing role amid ongoing tensions with global powers will shape the upcoming decade. Topics such as the Trump administration’s domestic and foreign policy decisions and its reflections on the global stage, as well as where post-9/11 American cultural values and principles stand today are discussed. This unique edition marks the first of discussions that we look forward to stimulating across our platform on where the US—and the liberal international order—is headed. Headlining this special issue, James Franklin Jeffrey, Chair of the Middle East program at Wilson Center, writes on the US’s foreign policy in the Middle East, in particular the Trump administration’s unique approach to the region. As a result of the success of the Trump administration’s strategies which focused on near peer competition and reliance on partners and allies, Ambassador Jeffrey argues that, with the exception of the Iranian nuclear file, the Middle East looks more secure now than it did at the end of the Obama administration. The question now is whether the Biden administration can expand on this success or return to the Obama administration’s now obsolete policies, he concludes. We extend our deepest thanks to our Advisory Board member Ambassador Jeffrey, as we are particularly honored to have had the opportunity to feature his views in this issue. In the first part of a special two-part contribution, TPQ’s Publisher, Kemal Köprülü, provides an intricate analysis of the US’s inner decay from a personal as well as professional standpoint. While reflecting on the US presidential election season, the demise of objective American media, and the year 2020 as a whole, Köprülü dives deep into systemic issues such as a lack of accountability that continue to plague the American political system. Noting that the US is in deep trouble, Köprülü asserts that the US needs to restructure its system with first and foremost transparency, accountability, political ethics, and the rule of law. Despite American fatigue with involvement in overseas wars, Assal Rad, Senior Research Fellow at the National Iranian American Council, writes that American leaders have continued to intervene abroad. It is within this context, Rad argues, the Obama administration’s efforts to broker a deal with Iran must be analyzed. After four years of attempts by President Trump to undermine these efforts, Rad concludes that the US is at a crossroads: the Biden administration can now either use its power to spearhead a renewed sense of global diplomacy by reviving the JCPOA, or use its power to trigger further conflict.

How much time is twenty years? Long enough to inspire, or short enough to be unnoticeable? Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ) was published for the first time in February 2002. We are celebrating its 20th anniversary with this issue. While much has changed since then, we believe the values that guide TPQ are as relevant and important as ever. There was then and there is now a chance for us all to contribute to a better world. TPQ has always adhered to and will continue to adhere to this ideal. In return, its global audiences have relied on TPQ since the very first day to provide them with credible, balanced, inter-disciplinary, and independent coverage. TPQ's evolution has been complex, involving constant efforts to understand new technologies and redefine fundamental concepts within the realm of policy. Over the last two decades, TPQ faced numerous challenges as the world experienced devastating depressions, wars, and economic and cultural changes as it became widely regarded as an influential journal. This really had nothing to do with luck. TPQ team and our great contributing writers have always been accountable for making TPQ's stories come alive. Yet, the question remains as to how long, or short, twenty years actually is. It wasn't difficult to choose the focus of TPQ’s 80th issue. Artificial intelligence has fast become part of everyday life, and we wanted to understand how it fits into democratic values. It was important for us to ask how we can ensure that AI and digital policies will promote broad social inclusion, which relies on fundamental rights, democratic institutions, and the rule of law. There seems to be no shortage of principles and concepts that support the fair and responsible use of AI systems, yet it's difficult to determine how to efficiently manage or deploy those systems today. Merve Hickok and Marc Rotenberg, two TPQ Advisory Board members, wrote the lead article for this issue. In a world where data means power, vast amounts of data are collected every day by both private companies and government agencies, which then use this data to fuel complex systems for automated decision-making now broadly described as “Artificial Intelligence.” Activities managed with these AI systems range from policing to military, to access to public services and resources such as benefits, education, and employment. The expected benefits from having national talent, capacity, and capabilities to develop and deploy these systems also drive a lot of national governments to prioritize AI and digital policies. A crucial question for policymakers is how to reap the benefits while reducing the negative impacts of these sociotechnical systems on society. Gabriela Ramos, Assistant Director-General for Social and Human Sciences of UNESCO, has written an article entitled "Ethics of AI and Democracy: UNESCO's Recommendation's Insights". In her article, she discusses how artificial intelligence (AI) can affect democracy. The article discusses the ways in which Artificial Intelligence is affecting democratic processes, democratic values, and the political and social behavior of citizens. The article notes that the use of artificial intelligence, and its potential abuse by some government entities, as well as by big private corporations, poses a serious threat to rights-based democratic institutions, processes, and norms. UNESCO announced a remarkable consensus agreement among 193 member states creating the first-ever global standard on the ethics of AI that could serve as a blueprint for national AI legislation and a global AI ethics benchmark. Paul Nemitz, Principal Adviser on Justice Policy at the EU Commission, addresses the question of what drives democracy. In his view, technology has undoubtedly shaped democracy. However, technology as well as legal rules regarding technology have shaped and have been shaped by democracy. This is why he says it is essential to develop and use technology according to democratic principles. He writes that there are libertarians today who purposefully design technological systems in such a way that challenges democratic control. It is, however, clear that there is enough counterpower and engagement, at least in Europe, to keep democracy functioning, as long as we work together to create rules that are sensible for democracy's future and confirm democracy's supremacy over technology and business interests. Research associate at the University of Oxford and Professor at European University Cyprus, Paul Timmers, writes about how AI challenges sovereignty and democracy. AI is wonderful. AI is scary. AI is the path to paradise. AI is the path to hell. What do we make of these contradictory images when, in a world of AI, we seek to both protect sovereignty and respect democratic values? Neither a techno-utopian nor a dystopian view of AI is helpful. The direction of travel must be global guidance and national or regional AI law that stresses end-to-end accountability and AI transparency, while recognizing practical and fundamental limits. Tania Sourdin, Dean of Newcastle Law School, Australia, asks: what if judges were replaced by AI? She believes that although AI will increasingly be used to support judges when making decisions in most jurisdictions, there will also be attempts over the next decade to totally replace judges with AI. Increasingly, we are seeing a shift towards Judge AI, and to a certain extent we are seeing shifts towards supporting Judge AI, which raises concerns related to democratic values, structures, and what judicial independence means. The reason for this may be partly due to the systems used being set up to support a legal interpretation that fails to allow for a nuanced and contextual view of the law. Pam Dixon, Executive Director of the World Privacy Forum, writes about biometric technologies. She says that biometric technologies encompass many types, or modalities, of biometrics today, such as face recognition, iris recognition, fingerprint recognition, and DNA recognition, both separately and in combination. A growing body of law and regulations seeks to mitigate the risks associated with biometric technologies as they are increasingly understood as a technology of concern based on scientific data. We invite you to learn more about how our world is changing. As a way to honor this milestone, we have assembled a list of articles from around the world from some of the best experts in their field. This issue would not be possible without the assistance of many people. In addition to the contributing authors, there were many other individuals who contributed greatly. TPQ's team is proud to present you with this edition.

Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, or the BRICS nations, are living proof of how power and influence are constantly changing in the world's politics and economy. Redefining their positions within the global system and laying the groundwork for a multilateral world order that aims to challenge the traditional dominance of Western economies and institutions, the BRICS countries have been active since the acronym was coined in the early 21st century and expanded to include South Africa in 2010. Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Argentina, Bolivia, Indonesia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Cuba, Gabon, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Comoros, and Kazakhstan are among the more than 40 nations that have shown interest in becoming BRICS members. Now, after a huge expansion, the BRICS has grown into a more formidable club of nations with the recent addition of Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the UAE. Also, Saudi Arabia is still working on becoming a full member, even though Javier Milei, Argentina's newly elected president, turned down the invitation. Given that BRICS now includes over 40 percent of the world's population and 25 percent of the world's economy, it's easy to see why the organization is so essential to be better understood. Given this, the purpose of this TPQ special issue is to delve into the background, reality, and future prospects of the BRICS as well as the various reasons and motivations behind the accession of its member states.

Since the early 2000s, almost every great, middle and even small power has developed a tendency to deepen their relations in the Asia-Pacific region. This tendency is also valid regarding international and regional organizations. In addition to state actors, non-state and even sub-state actors have assigned a certain value to this region in their strategic calculations. With such a tilt, Asia-Pacific actors have become a focal point of global politics. The increasing significance of the region has been boosted by the rising Asian powers, such as China, India, Japan, Australia, South Korea, and Indonesia. With all this dynamism, extra-regional actors have increased their economic, political, strategic, and cultural investments in Asia-Pacific. This rise in the region’s multileveled value has led regionalism-oriented IR researchers to develop the concept of the Asian Century. Türkiye has a peculiar position and significance in this regard combining the West and the non-West in many respects. Unlike the Cold War and early-post Cold War times, the world, especially the Asia-Pacific “world” is not composed of only two vectors, the West and the non-West, but several spanning into a variety of directions. This multi-vectorial reality of inter-non/-state affairs fits into Türkiye’s ambitions in its foreign policy. The Cold War label of Türkiye, i.e., the staunch ally of the West, is no longer completely valid. Türkiye of today is much more than that. The Western alliance is only an aspect of Türkiye whose substance has been amalgamated by Ankara’s developing relations with other regions and sub-regions of the globe including Asia-Pacific. Türkiye’s search for political-strategic clout in other regions has led Ankara to conceptualize and announce the most comprehensive and official foreign policy approach towards the Asia-Pacific region yet, known as the Asia Anew Initiative. This shows that Türkiye is not an exception to the above-stated powers that gave this region a central place in their strategic calculations. The initiative is predominantly multifaceted at its core, which aims to eliminate the asymmetries between Türkiye and Asian actors in both strategic and commercial terms. By increasing the engagement and cooperation with these actors, Türkiye aims to utilize its advantage in the sectors that it has considerable advantages in, such as tourism, conventional defense technology, and construction together with the ones in which it has emerging improvement, such as high-tech, finance, infrastructure, and energy transport. Türkiye’s additional connotation regarding Asia-Pacific is in geocultural terms. Due to its historical and religious background, Türkiye has many ties with Pakistan, Bangladesh, South Korea, Muslim communities of India, and to an extent Afghanistan. This has been an important channel that Turkish state and non-state actors have experienced in deepening their relations in the region. Türkiye’s soft power and diplomacy have also utilized such cultural affinity. Links tracing back to the 15th century of the Ottoman era has aided Türkiye’s influence in South and Southeast Asia. A clear empirical indication of such influence is the popularity of Turkish culture/history-oriented television serials within these communities. Thus, geocultural impact not only boosts Türkiye’s visibility and weight in the region but also helps it to be relevant in the non-Western and multiple directional vectors of the Asia-Pacific politico-economic fabric. An additional element of Türkiye’s engagement in the region is that it tries to utilize almost any type of “-lateralism.” i.e., multilateralism, minilateralism, and bilateralism. Ankara is trying to be a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and has put forward its intention to join the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. It has also created MIKTA, a transregional partnership grouping, with its like-minded partners from the region. More importantly, it has been developing a whole range of bilateralisms with Asia-Pacific countries regardless of their power statuses. Another very significant element of Türkiye’s engagement with the region is its focus on Asia-Pacific communities. Various Turkish state institutions, the Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TİKA), the Presidency of Religious Affairs (Diyanet), and the Türkiye scholarships program of the Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities (YTB) have been developing Türkiye’s people-to-people links through strategic and sustainable communication and promoting the country’s national brand. Although there is an obvious increase in Türkiye’s engagement with Asia-Pacific it is still early to assert its prominence in the region. However, this is not only a result of Türkiye’s current capabilities but the parameters of competition that must be navigated, with the global powers competing and cooperating in the region. Türkiye in this sense would require more cooperative patterns with like-minded powers, to increase its influence and boost its partners’ strength. Asia-Pacific is not a hassle-free region and currently Türkiye has a limited impact in this challenging ecosystem. On the other hand, developing multifaceted relations, especially with culturally and historically proximate sub-regions, will increase Türkiye’s visibility and impact. With the above-stated awareness and engagements, Türkiye’s visibility and economic significance in the Asia-Pacific will significantly increase over time. One very formidable catalyst for this would be its cultural and historical ties with Central Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia, which have already been transforming into commercial and political-strategic outcomes. The current edition of Insight Turkey is dedicated to the exploration of bilateral relations between Türkiye and Far Eastern countries, within the context of the Asia Anew Initiative. The winter issue features a commentary and six research articles on this subject, providing a comprehensive analysis of the topic. Moreover, the issue includes four off-topic comments and two research articles that lie outside the main theme. Among these, two articles shed light on the current Gaza genocide, ongoing since October 7. The commentary section opens with a perceptive analysis by Nuh Yılmaz on Türkiye’s foreign policy toward Asia. In his commentary, Yılmaz examines Türkiye’s general perspective on the Asian continent and discusses the basic dynamics of the initiative. According to his analysis, there has been a significant shift in the global balance of power, with Atlantic Asia emerging as a rising force in, politics, military, culture, and especially in economy. This transformation of the Asian continent prompted Türkiye to launch the Asia Anew Initiative in 2019, which presents a comprehensive and systematic vision for Asia. Yılmaz delves into Türkiye’s general perspective on the Asian continent and the key dynamics of this initiative. Furthermore, the initial research article, authored by Gürol Baba as the guest editor, centers on Türkiye’s strategies and its Asia Anew Initiative. Through his work, Baba endeavors to illustrate that within the Asian framework, Türkiye has the capability to not only be pragmatic but also achieve efficiency by implementing a diverse foreign policy approach. He argues that Türkiye’s application of multi-vectorism to its foreign policy in Asia is more successful than multilateralism or minilateralism policies. This is because there is much more than the two traditional vectors (West and non-West) due to the current intra-regional fragmentations and deviations in Asia. Baba embodied the success of bilateral relations in Asia by giving examples from some countries. Following Baba’s outline of Türkiye’s approach to its Asian policy, the second research article, penned by Mujib Alam, delves into the complex nature of Türkiye-India relations between 2000 and 2023. Alam’s analysis spans diplomatic, economic, scientific, and cultural exchanges, offering a comprehensive view of their bilateral engagements. Despite different stances on issues such as Kashmir and Cyprus, Alam points out a trend towards improvement in relations, especially economic relations and cultural exchanges, driven by the foreign policy trends of the ruling parties of the two countries. The third research article by Kohei Imai examines the bilateral relations between Türkiye and Japan, which will soon celebrate their 100th anniversary in 2024. Imai delves into the historical relationship between the two nations, which while positive, lacked a tangible cooperative partnership. He carefully considers the diplomatic challenges and public perspectives that Japan encounters, and identifies opportunities for both countries to pursue more practical collaborations moving forward. In the next research article, Alaeddin Tekin and Arshad Islam focus on Malaysia, shedding light on Türkiye’s relationship with another Southeast Asian country. In research articles based on primary sources, including Ottoman and Turkish archives as well as Bahasa Melayu and English materials, Tekin and Islam aim to investigate historical and current relations between Turks and Malays. Another research article on the subject, written by Yunhee Kim, tries to examine veteran diplomacy through the example of Türkiye and draws from the different historical examples of the Korean War. Claiming that veteran diplomacy can be used as an opportunity to expand South Korea’s soft power in the new public diplomacy era of the 21st century, Kim also argues that this diplomacy paves the way for security cooperation in the context of Türkiye-South Korea relations. Ali Akkemik, who deals with Türkiye’s relations with East Asia from the economic dimension, in the next research article, states that their economic relations have undergone a significant structural change in the last twenty years. According to Akkemik, while Japan previously dominated Türkiye’s trade with East Asia and the flow of direct foreign investment from East Asia to Türkiye, recently, both South Korea and China have surpassed Japan as Türkiye’s main trading partners in East Asia and have caught up with Japan in terms of foreign investments in Türkiye. Moreover, in this issue, we address the grave humanitarian crisis stemming from the conflict in Gaza. Specifically, two commentaries focus on the tragic events unfolding since October 7. Nkosi Zwelivelile Mandelsizwe Dalibhunga Mandela offers an analysis of South Africa’s response to Israel’s actions against the Palestinian people, focusing on their legal recourse at the International Court of Justice. He draws comparisons between Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and South Africa’s apartheid era, underscoring the deep ties of solidarity between these communities and the essential role of global unity, accountability, and concerted efforts in promoting justice and equality. Additionally, Norma Hashim provides a unique perspective by focusing on the plight of prisoners and hostages in Gaza, arguing that Palestinian prisoners are central to the narrative of the genocide initiated on October 7. She delves into their importance within the Palestinian national movement and shares the personal stories of some of these prisoners, highlighting their significance in the context of the ongoing crisis in Gaza. In other off-topic commentary, Sönmez Ateşoğlu has written a commentary as a continuation of the research article, “Economic Power and International Security,” he previously published in Insight Turkey. While Nancy Snow has provided a commentary in which she discusses the national brand of Japan, where she lived for many years. In his previously published research article, Ateşoğlu explains in detail the impact of economic power on international security and the connection between economic and military power, but claims that the security dimension is not sufficiently addressed. Therefore, in this commentary, the author aims to explain the impact of military power on international security, especially in the context of Türkiye, and how a state can achieve its security goals by using military force. On the other hand, Nancy Snow explores the evolution of Japan’s national brand, analyzing the transition from historical isolation to its current global recognition, especially under the influence of Shinzo Abe’s policies. The winter issue broadens its scope with two research articles that venture beyond the main theme. Blerim Sallahu’s contribution opens this segment with an in-depth exploration of the modalities for acquiring citizenship in Kosovo. Following this, Kemal İnat and Burhanettin Duran assess the Ukrainian war’s profound repercussions on the global order, scrutinizing the intricate position and consequential influence of Türkiye –situated uniquely as both a neighbor to Russia and an ally of the U.S.– within this complex geopolitical landscape. This latest special edition of Insight Turkey meticulously explores the evolving dynamics of Türkiye’s engagement with East Asia under the ambit of the Asia Anew Initiative. This edition is distinguished by a series of foundational articles that provide a thorough overview of the initiative, alongside in-depth analyses of Türkiye’s bilateral relationships with key Asian nations. We trust that the comprehensive discussions and diverse perspectives presented in this issue will offer our readers valuable insights and deepen their understanding of the intricate geopolitical landscape.

The editors of this collection of sixteen articles argue the relationship between the United States and Mexico is at its most tenuous in recent memory. Each article explores the future of US-Mexico relations, focusing on relevant topics such as trade, water, drugs, health, immigration, environmental issues and security. Employing a strategic foresight methodology, the authors use past trends and identify pivotal drivers to predict, based on indicators, at least three possible outcomes for the next few decades: a baseline or continuity scenario, an optimistic version and a pessimistic one. They also articulate the implications each forecast has for both nations. Most chapters are co-written by a scholar from the United States and another from Mexico. While acknowledging it is impossible to predict the future, they nonetheless describe what could occur. Ultimately, the authors of the articles in this fascinating volume make recommendations to achieve a peaceful, integrated and prosperous North America that will drive the world economy. The book is required reading for anyone interested in the binational relationship and the well-being of citizens in both countries.

Greek-Turkish conflict-ridden relations have long occupied a problematic position in the Western alliance, first in NATO then, more dramatically, within the context of the newly developing European Union and its defence initiatives. Following three major earthquakes on both sides of the Aegean, the two countries have now experienced, firstly, a public empathy towards each other, and secondly, a significant diplomatic rapprochement. This rapprochement though has failed to resolve the Cyprus conflict, and is now at risk of reverting back to a series of conflicts. This book addresses the crucial issues between Greece and Turkey, from a critical perspective, and provides an up-to-date assessment of the current state of the Greek-Turkish rapprochement and its future development. This book was previously published as a special issue of the journal Turkish Studies.

Survival, the IISS’s bimonthly journal, challenges conventional wisdom and brings fresh, often controversial, perspectives on strategic issues of the moment. In this issue: Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry argue that liberal internationalism is more appropriate to contemporary global realities than the Quincy-coalition restraint James Crabtree explains why the West’s Build Back Better World partnership will be hard-pressed to compete with China’s Belt and Road Initiative Joelien Pretorius and Tom Sauer contend that if states are serious about nuclear disarmament, they should ditch the NPT and join the Ban Treaty instead Sameer Lalwani and Tyler Sagerstrom analyse what the India–Russia defence partnership means for US policy And eight more thought-provoking pieces, as well as our regular Book Reviews and Noteworthy column. Editor: Dr Dana Allin Managing Editor: Jonathan Stevenson Associate Editor: Carolyn West Assistant Editor: Jessica Watson