This research aims to explore how Turkish business leaders tackle and navigate challenges in times of crisis. Recent Gezi Park protests in Istanbul, Turkey triggered a multilayered crisis. These protests lasted more than two months, having long-term effects on Turkey’s social, cultural and economic life. Therefore, this thesis considers these Gezi Park protests as a crisis for food sector business leaders in the neighbourhood. This research examines leaders’ processes of dealing with the protests, by drawing on interviews with 40 leaders in the food sector. First, it investigates how these leaders addressed the protests, as leaders’ responses affected their businesses. Secondly, it discusses challenges experience by leaders during the protests. Finally, it investigates leaders ‘coping mechanisms’ in the face of challenges. The thematic analysis of data suggests that those leaders who helped the protestors by opening their doors prioritised humanity before any ideology. These leaders put humane values first, such as acting with conscience, feeling empathy and feeling compassion despite having opposing political views. This behaviour is considered successful leadership behaviour. Conversely, those leaders who put their self-interests first by closing their doors to the protestors are considered unsuccessful leaders. It emerged that leaders faced emotional, physical, interpersonal and financial challenges during the protests. Leaders coped with challenges by remaining hopeful about the future, by being patient, by being supported by family and friends, by becoming accustomed to the challenges, and by adopting an exit strategy.

The dissertation documented the degree of Turkey’s involvement in the promotion of democracy in the Arab Middle East (ME). Initially, I investigated why and under what conditions Turkey promotes democracy in the ME, and then I explained strategies through which Turkey promotes democracy in the region. I applied the neo-classical realist theoretical framework and a mixed methodology in the research, and I provided evidence from two sources: face-to-face interviews with the Turkish and foreign officials and common citizens, and the statistical data from institutions, such as the OECD, Turkish Statistical Institute, and World Bank. My research indicates that Turkey promotes democracy through seven channels. These channels are official development assistance (ODA), mentoring, demonstrative effect, normative pressure, conditionality, military power, enlargement, and civil society organizations. Turkey promotes democracy in the ME for three substantial reasons: first, to advance its security and economic interests; second, to improve the political, social, and economic conditions of people living in the region; and third, to create long-term regional stability, crucial for cooperation in economic and security realms. I attempted to engage in debates with two distinct, but interrelated fields of comparative politics and international relations. My most important contribution to the field is that I documented Turkey’s case of democracy promotion regarding the degree of Turkey’s involvement in this endeavor, its strategies, specificities, and effectiveness in the region. I also contribute to the field as I explained the difference between democracy promotion policies of a regional power, such as Turkey, and global powers, such as the US. I further engaged in discussions that illuminate some aspects of the interplay between the identity and strategic interests in states’ foreign policy decisions.