Since the Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) victory and government in 2002, Turkey entered a new phase in its history and witnessed major changes in all social, economic, and political aspects. Turkish foreign policy went through huge transformations and the new AKP government was able to revolutionise Turkey’s international position. In particular, relations with Middle Eastern countries have tremendously improved and Turkish interests and role have been growing ever since. This thesis investigates the sources of change in Turkish foreign policy since 2002 towards the Middle East, focusing on the role of the AKP (Justice and Development Party) as a ruling party in particular on the changes it went through in the first ten years from 2002 to early 2012. The significant changes in Turkish foreign policy appeared under the AKP government became one of the most debated issues in this field and created a puzzle that many scholars attempted to explain. Therefore, the thesis engages in recent debates between the different scholars and analysts in the literature and argues that there is a need for a more inclusive approach that can recognize the complex and multilateral nature of the Turkish case. The aim is to assess and evaluate the plausibility of the available competing explanations in the literature in explaining such foreign policy outcomes. Therefore, the thesis borrows and builds on the works of Alexander George & Andrew Bennet (2005), and Derek Beach & Rasmus Pedersen (2013) by adopting the Process Tracing Methodology, which helps to facilitate a better critical analysis and systematic evaluation of the selected explanations. The results of this thesis demonstrate that single factor based explanations actually drive researchers away from achieving a comprehensive explanation and only help provide a partial picture. Therefore, the best way to go forward is by adopting a much more inclusive and multiple factors based approach recognising the important opportunity that foreign policy theories offer in looking at the Turkish case from different perspectives. The results of this thesis suggest that the best way for understanding Turkish foreign policy change is by recognizing the multiple roles of domestic and international economic, political,and ideational sources, as well as the role of policy makers, particularly that of Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Ahmet Davutoglu. The contribution of this thesis lies within its analysis bringing the wide range of explanations in the literature together, exploring and summarizing the vast number of data in a more simplified manner, and examining the value and plausibility of the competing explanation to try and arrive at the most comprehensive explanation, all under one piece of work. Therefore, this thesis establishes a useful foundation for researchers to adopt and take forward in future studies.

Este estudo apresenta reflexões a respeito de Brasil e Argentina no período compreendido entre os anos de 1974 e 1991. Está dividido em três partes: o regime militar, a democratização e os governos neoliberais. Em cada um dos períodos, foram analisadas as condições internas de cada país, as relações bilaterais e as intenções e os projetos de cooperação e integração. As diferenças e semelhanças políticas e econômicas de cada país são consideradas como condicionantes da postura destes entre si e ante o cenário internacional. O trabalho tenta contribuir mostrando os avanços e os retrocessos nas relações bilaterais e a mudança de rumos que tais relações tiveram, centrando-se então no processo de aproximação, cooperação e integração para posteriormente a formação do Mercosul. / This study presents some reflexions about the relations between Brazil and Argentina during the period comprehended by the years 1974 to 1991. It’s divided in three parts: the military regimen, the democratization and the neoliberal governments. In each one of the periods, had been analyzed the internal conditions of the each country, the bilateral relations and the intention and the projects of the cooperation and integration. The differences and similarities politics and economics of the each country are considered how cause of the posture of these between itself and before the international scene. The work tries to contribute showing the advances and the retrocessions in the bilateral relations and the change of routes that such relations had had, centering then in the process of the approximation, cooperation and integration for later the formation of the Mercosul.

Este estudo apresenta reflexões a respeito de Brasil e Argentina no período compreendido entre os anos de 1974 e 1991. Está dividido em três partes: o regime militar, a democratização e os governos neoliberais. Em cada um dos períodos, foram analisadas as condições internas de cada país, as relações bilaterais e as intenções e os projetos de cooperação e integração. As diferenças e semelhanças políticas e econômicas de cada país são consideradas como condicionantes da postura destes entre si e ante o cenário internacional. O trabalho tenta contribuir mostrando os avanços e os retrocessos nas relações bilaterais e a mudança de rumos que tais relações tiveram, centrando-se então no processo de aproximação, cooperação e integração para posteriormente a formação do Mercosul. / This study presents some reflexions about the relations between Brazil and Argentina during the period comprehended by the years 1974 to 1991. It’s divided in three parts: the military regimen, the democratization and the neoliberal governments. In each one of the periods, had been analyzed the internal conditions of the each country, the bilateral relations and the intention and the projects of the cooperation and integration. The differences and similarities politics and economics of the each country are considered how cause of the posture of these between itself and before the international scene. The work tries to contribute showing the advances and the retrocessions in the bilateral relations and the change of routes that such relations had had, centering then in the process of the approximation, cooperation and integration for later the formation of the Mercosul.

This study offers a glimpse into how the transatlantic relationship between the European Union (the EU) and the United States of America (the U.S.) has developed during the last three presidential administrations, including the Trump administration. To do this, the study has developed a frame- work on transatlantic convergence, divergence, and drift, which it uses to analyses similarities and differences within the different parties’ discourses on the Iranian nuclear weapons program. The study concludes that while there has been some divergence with all three U.S administrations, how- ever there has been far more convergence with the Bush and Obama administration than with the Trump administration. Moreover, this study argues that Trump administration represents in some ways a ’transatlantic drift’, since the parties have opposing views on the Iran deal (JCPOA) and cherish widely different fundamental security values.

Este estudo apresenta reflexões a respeito de Brasil e Argentina no período compreendido entre os anos de 1974 e 1991. Está dividido em três partes: o regime militar, a democratização e os governos neoliberais. Em cada um dos períodos, foram analisadas as condições internas de cada país, as relações bilaterais e as intenções e os projetos de cooperação e integração. As diferenças e semelhanças políticas e econômicas de cada país são consideradas como condicionantes da postura destes entre si e ante o cenário internacional. O trabalho tenta contribuir mostrando os avanços e os retrocessos nas relações bilaterais e a mudança de rumos que tais relações tiveram, centrando-se então no processo de aproximação, cooperação e integração para posteriormente a formação do Mercosul. / This study presents some reflexions about the relations between Brazil and Argentina during the period comprehended by the years 1974 to 1991. It’s divided in three parts: the military regimen, the democratization and the neoliberal governments. In each one of the periods, had been analyzed the internal conditions of the each country, the bilateral relations and the intention and the projects of the cooperation and integration. The differences and similarities politics and economics of the each country are considered how cause of the posture of these between itself and before the international scene. The work tries to contribute showing the advances and the retrocessions in the bilateral relations and the change of routes that such relations had had, centering then in the process of the approximation, cooperation and integration for later the formation of the Mercosul.

The thesis is an explorative study of the notion of constraints to Russia’s foreign policy. The explorative attempt investigates Moscow’s external behaviour vis a vis the states of the Baltics and the South Caucasus from 2013 to 2020. The analysis argues that the notion of constraints, under the theoretical framework of neoclassical realism, can offer a certain degree of explanatory power in terms of foreign policy variance. The operationalization of the notion, based on Foreign Policy Analysis Theory, proposes specific factors for inspection. Initially, a thematic analysis of Russia’s Foreign Policy Documents of 2013 and 2016, illustrates that the notion of constraints and regionalism is lacking from the perception of the actor. The two documents understand the external world more in terms of threat/risk instead of constraints. Consequently, an examination of the constraints on the level of the international system, and the regional actors demonstrates that the notion holds analytical value under certain circumstances, however, it overlaps with existing frameworks such as that of Tsygankov’s constructivist version, and Structural Realism. The explorative research brings forward fields where the literature on Russia’s foreign policy can be enriched. One of the suggestions is associated with inspecting the notion of fear conditioning in the policy documents of the country.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.