There is perhaps nothing more important than being able to communicate in politics. In this regard, political communication is crucial, and it necessitates careful planning. A well-crafted message can influence public opinion. Effective politicians must have a compelling style, be able to connect with various constituencies and be engaging. By applying strategic messaging, a politician can effectively convince an audience. Using social media, in particular, can have a profound impact on political communication. Engagement in politics is now becoming easier than ever before. Over the past two decades, social media has taken a central role in politics and institutions around the globe. As the spread of social media has led to easier political involvement, it has also fueled the rise of authoritarian and illiberal regimes in many countries. Therefore, it is important to study political communication and apply it to different situations carefully. We contacted our contributing authors from around the world and asked for their input. As Janet Steele writes in her article, Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid shocked many when he declared that the Taliban would support free and independent media provided they followed Islamic law. She argues in her article that Western policymakers should take the Taliban's words seriously since they contain a set of powerful Islamic concepts likely to resonate with Muslim listeners around the world. Dan Slater and Jeremy Boo tell us that new information technologies impact authoritarian regimes and their social opponents in various ways. They combine recent academic literature in order to examine how social media and surveillance technology shape both opposition mobilization and authoritarian control in places like China, Iran, Russia, and Singapore. They identified four distinct dynamics of digitization: Liberation Technology, Digitized Transparency, Digitized Diversion, and Big Brother. As noted by Kutsal Yesilkagit, established liberal democracies around the globe face populism and the possibility of democratic backsliding. The rise of populist parties has forced civil servants to face a fundamental dilemma: Are they expected to serve their newly democratically elected officials, even when they disagree with their illiberal ideologies? Ben Voth considers ethics as a matter of political communication that has vexed human experimentation in politics since its inception. According to him, ethics in political communication is a necessity for ongoing consideration in all expert research on political communication to avoid important excesses of politics ranging from injustice to genocide. A critical component for achieving ethical rather than unethical conduct in political communication is a careful praxis of discursive complexity. Since the 21st century has intensified its attachment to vehicles of communication rooted in artificial intelligence, expert practitioners need to enhance their pedagogy and research towards encouraging human dissent. Peter Preston examines the idea of democracy in the European Union. In his view, the discussion of democracy in the European Union revolves around issues like parliaments, parties, party competition, and competitive elections. He also mentions the wider media environment. The model he cites is primarily liberal. There are criticisms, however: the central Brussels machinery lacks democratic legitimacy; some recent member states from the former Soviet sphere are authoritarian; and some established member states have prominent nationalist/populist parties. We invite you to learn more about what is shaping our world. There is a number of other articles in this issue that determine the focus of the TPQ Journal. I would like to thank many people for creating this issue for TPQ Journal and making it possible. The list includes all contributing authors as well as many others who devoted a great deal of time and effort. TPQ's team has worked hard to bring you this edition. Many of the features in it are the results of the excellent work they have done.

Following up on the Winter 2020/21 edition, TPQ’s Spring 2021 issue continues with the series of debates that we hope to ignite on “systems in decay,” and the shifting world order at large. On that note, this edition inquires, “Where Do We Go from Here?”—exploring the deteriorating state of human rights across the globe, from social injustices in the US, to Turkey’s withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention, and to the Chinese government’s growing repression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Our authors also discuss how the US's foreign policy is evolving, along with its societal values and political principles, amid ongoing tensions within both its borders and outside of them. In this special issue, Delise O'Meally, CEO of the Institute for Sport and Social Justice, explains how sports can serve as a social institution, one especially suited to spur systemic change in society. O'Meally analyzes the role sports has played in the fight against racial injustice, starting in 1968 when John Carlos and Tommie Smith raised their fists at the Olympics, to 2020, when US sports leagues showed solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement. While underlining the universality of sports, O'Meally illustrates how sports, with its shared values of teamwork, unity, mutual aspirations, and respect, can advance positive social change. As part of a multi-part contribution, TPQ Publisher, Kemal Köprülü delves further into the systemic problems, including corruption, biased media, and the lack of accountability, that plague American politics. While reflecting on US policies and their domestic and international ramifications in modern history, Köprülü asserts that America is far from being “back”—and, in fact, is at its weakest. As the specter of a rising China and its connections to Democratic politicians and donors becomes increasingly apparent, Köprülü argues containing China during Biden's presidency will be impossible. Despite their efforts to divert attention away from China and toward Russia, Democrats’ corrupt acts will come back to haunt them, Köprülü writes—especially ahead of the 2022 and 2024 elections. Noting that the Chinese government’s oppression of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim peoples has reached unprecedented levels since late 2016, Maya Wang, senior researcher on China at Human Rights Watch, highlights that the Chinese government has committed, and continues to commit, crimes against humanity in Xinjiang. Wang points to how the response—or lack, thereof—of Muslim-majority countries has been particularly disappointing, including Turkey, whom many had hoped would take a clearer stance against these human rights abuses. However, Wang notes, it is not too late. The Turkish government still has the chance to adopt concrete policies both domestically and internationally, including through individual sanctions, trade restrictions, and measures, to protect the Uyghur and Turkic diaspora in Turkey.

NATO is once again in the spotlight. A NATO summit concluded on Monday 14 June 2021 in Brussels, ending with important decisions charting the Alliance’s path over the next decade and beyond. NATO has served as a pillar of stability and security for more than seven decades, while the world has become more complex, with a host of new players, threats, and challenges. Allied leaders endorsed an ambitious NATO 2030 agenda to ensure that NATO can meet the challenges of today and tomorrow. While the Alliance concluded to improve NATO’s political consultations, collective defense, and resilience, leaders agreed upon providing better training and capacity building to its partners in order to stand up for the rules-based international order. In light of these commitments, TPQ’s Summer 2021 issue serves as a starting point for a well-informed debate by synthesizing and comparing expert discourses from a wide range of NATO member and non-member states on key issues concerning NATO's future. As we address the issues at stake, we also seek a better mutual appreciation of divergent geographical, historical, and political perspectives. This special and timely issue has been published in collaboration with NATO, our longstanding partner. Mircea Geoana, NATO Deputy Secretary General, expresses that the security environment has never been more uncertain and contested than it is now, due to the emergence of global competition and a wide variety of complex threats. He underlines the importance of NATO summit in Brussels last June, at which the Alliance's leaders made bold decisions to adapt to a more unpredictable world and to ensure that its one billion people will be safe for the next decade and beyond. In his view, the Transatlantic Alliance will remain capable of coping with today's challenges and future-proof against ones yet to come through an ambitious and forward-looking agenda. When President Biden visited Brussels in June, he declared, "America is back." According to Jamie Shea, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Emerging Security Challenges at NATO, this also means that NATO is back, as Biden reaffirmed the U.S.' solemn commitment to the defense of its European allies and Washington's willingness to once again lead a transatlantic alliance that was heavily criticized during the Trump years. He writes that at first sight, this is all good news for NATO; but could it turn out to be a mixed blessing for the Europeans in the longer run? He analyzes whether the NATO 2030 initiative is up to the task and if it provides the right answers. Due to NATO's reliance on space assets for operational effectiveness and the increased vulnerabilities of those assets, the militarization of outer space presents a range of policy and legal challenges. Having to rely on space-based assets and services to conduct military operations has proven to be NATO's Achilles heel as rivals work on counter-space techniques. Aurel Sari, Associate Professor of International Law at University of Exeter and Hitoshi Nasu, Professor of International Law at University of Exeter ask given the vulnerability of space-based assets and services to hostile interference, under what circumstances the collective defense commitment as set out in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty (NAT), arises in space.

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.

Climate change has become one of the primary drivers of human migration, with many observers predicting that its impact will outweigh all other man-made factors in the near future. While some natural disasters, such as earthquakes and floods, result in immediate and direct human displacements, climate change-related emergencies, such as drought and erosion, result in slow but steady migrations. As climate change increases the likelihood of natural disasters, the consequences will have far-reaching implications for local and cross-border displacements, as well as international policymaking. The edited volume combines two broad objectives. First, it intends to present an alarming and innovative perspective on climate change through case studies from around the world. Second, it will provide a new perspective on migration from the perspective of global and regional dynamics that force people to migrate. With a special emphasis on Türkiye’s climate change policy and its organizational capacity to meet new challenges that have emerged, especially after its successful response to the massive influx of Syrian refugees, the edited volume overall aims to inspire international organizations and governments to find long-term solutions to this dynamic process.

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.

Israel, formally known as "The State of Israel," was established on 14 May 1948, and has since played a pivotal role in international affairs, particularly in the politics of the Middle East and North Africa. Israel's relations with its Arab neighbors have been tense for decades, and a lasting peace has never appeared more likely. Yet, we already live in a time of perpetual change, and naturally, the politics of Israel and the surrounding region of the Middle East and North Africa are not immune to this pattern. Realizing this, TPQ decided to focus on the Changing Dynamics of Israel's Foreign Policy in its upcoming Fall 2022 issue. Many new headings, with a specific reference to Israeli politics, have started to appear in Middle East and North African context. Israel and its Arab neighbors, often considered as "the enemies at gates," are experiencing an intriguing phase of normalization of relations. The Abraham Accords, a historic agreement resulting from this process, were ratified on 15 September 2020. Since then, positive reports about the improvement of ties among Israel, the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco have been steadily increasing. We at TPQ are firm believers in the significance of the Abraham Accords and plan to keep covering the topic as one of our primary areas of focus. The Abraham Accords will be the main topic of our upcoming roundtable organization, going to take place in Istanbul on November 30. This comes after a lengthy hiatus caused by the pandemic. One of the main goals of this issue is to delve deeper into the possibilities the Abraham Accords present by analyzing the factors of improving ties between Israel and its neighbors. In this spirit, we have encouraged our contributors to highlight this in their work. Additionally, we discuss the changing dynamics of Israeli-Palestinian relations as well as Israel's ties with other major regional actors such as Türkiye in this issue. The fourteen papers featured in this special issue of TPQ were written by a diverse group of internationally known scholars and public intellectuals who welcome your feedback and constructive criticism. Eyal Zisser sees the signing of the Abraham Accords in September 2022 as a turning point in Israel's place in the Middle East. He thinks the accords improved the atmosphere for cooperation in the areas of security and the economy by laying the groundwork for it. However, he claims that this change doesn't do anything to fix Israel's fundamental issues. His article is a brilliant work that aims to further evaluate these essential issues. Gerald M. Feierstein says that Israelis and Gulf Arabs drew closer due to similar worries of an aggressive and potent regime in Tehran, which bragged of its sway over four Arab capitals (Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sanaa). His excellent work focuses on regional issues that contributed to making of Abraham Accords. He likewise explores the Abraham Accords and discusses the geographical dynamics that contributed to its ratification. Efraim Karsh argues that in the 85 years since the two-state solution was proposed (a Jewish state and a Palestinian Arab state living side by side in peace and security), no Palestinian Arab leader has shown true support for it. Therefore, he concludes that if Palestinian society does not experience a thorough revolution that sweeps the corrupt and repressive PLO and Hamas governments from power, it will remain a pipe dream. He considers a two-state solution as a delusion. Maia Carter Hallward and Taib Biygautane believe that in 2020, numerous Arab governments announced U.S.-brokered full normalization accords with Israel, without any specific sacrifices on Israel's part vis-à-vis the Palestinians. According to them, these agreements, the Abraham Accords, signified a dramatic change in Arab-Israeli relations. Their great article looks at how the Abraham Accords were portrayed in the Israeli press. We encourage you to learn more about the aspects of Changing Dynamics of Israel's Foreign Policy.