Arap Baharı sonrası dönemde Beş Deniz Havzası'nda Türkiye, Rusya ve İran'ın dış politikalarını anlamak

The Arab Spring after 2010 has led to significant changes in the regimes of the regional countries and the near environment of the Middle East. It is a longstanding phenomenon that has shaken global and regional balance. Apart from the great powers, naturally, the major regional actors, Türkiye, Russia and Iran, have been influenced from that phenomenon. Their foreign policies in the Five Seas Basin, defined as a junction point of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea, Persian Gulf, Caspian Sea and Red Sea, have also been affected by the opportunities and the threats created with the Arap Spring. The Basin covers a broad geopolitical area stretching from the Black Sea to the Red Sea, including energy corridors, ethnic-political conflict zones, and points of intersection between great power rivalries. Türkiye, Russia and Iran are the most significant actors in the Five Seas Basin. They all have historical and cultural ties with the different parts of the basin. For example, while Achaemenid Empire and Ottoman Empire dominated whole region, the Tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union controlled an important part of the basin. That's why examining the foreign policies of Türkiye, Russia and Iran in the basin is critical. At the same time, these three actors have clashing interests in the basin, but they started to cooperate in Syrian Civil War and to conduct a reconciliation process called Astana process in the region. At the same time, while Russia and Türkiye took initiative to resolve the almost thirty-year Nagorno Karabakh Conflict, Iran and Türkiye played mediator roles in Qatar Diplomatic Crisis between 2017 and 2021. It is noteworthy and worthy of consideration that these three states, with their different characteristics and conflicting interests, are able to avoid conflict and act together in times of crisis. Within this context, based on the literature and current issues, the research question of this study is as follows: What are the conditions and factors that influence and shape the relations between Türkiye, Russia, and Iran in the post-Arab Spring period and in the Five Seas Basin? How have these conditions and factors shaped the relations between the three actors? In that direction, the thesis argued that in the post-Arab Spring period, Türkiye, Russia, and Iran in the Five Seas Basin have avoided conflict with each other due to the influence of internal and external factors in all three countries. In other words, although they have cooperated from time to time, the concept that defines the relationship between the three countries is "avoidance of conflict." The methods used throughout the study are process tracing, content analysis, and comparative case study which have been separately used in foreign policy analysis literature in recent years. Firstly, process tracing is a research method used to establish cause-and-effect relationships and investigate the causes of cases. In this method, where multiple causes of a result are investigated, the process from cause to effect is analyzed. Both deductive and inductive reasoning can be used in this foreign policy analysis method. The inductive form is used to investigate cause-and-effect relationships that cannot be explained by a theory, while the deductive form reveals cause-and-effect relationships within the framework outlined by a theory. The process tracing method is used for three main purposes: testing a theory, producing a new theory, updating an existing theory, and explaining the results. In this study, the foreign policies of Türkiye, Russia, and Iran towards three different cases, Syrian Civil War, Nagorno Karabakh Conflict and Qatar Diplomatic Crisis were tracked in the aftermath of the phenomena and the impacts of these foreign policies on the relations of three states. Neoclassical Realism was used as the theoretical framework. The theory was tested through three cases related to the foreign policies of Türkiye, Russia, and Iran. Contributions were made to the theory in the context of analyzing the foreign policies of non-Western countries. At the same time, contributions were made to the theory regarding the embedded structure of leader level analysis and unit level analysis in states with power centralization tendencies. Secondly, qualitative content analysis was used in the study. It is important in cases where there is no theoretical framework, as it allows for the appropriate collection and categorization of data, thereby imparting a new and original conceptual dimension to the collected data. The basic aim of content analysis is to arrive at meaningful sections of the existing data without a given framework. Since the study has a comprehensive theoretical framework, the content analysis was used to assist detecting the intervening variables of Türkiye, Russia and Iran in a fundamental level. The content analysis method used in this study was applied to the official documents published after the Arap Spring period to draw a framework of foreign policy making of three states and also applied to the statements and explanations of the leaders of Türkiye, Russia, and Iran after the Arab Spring to detect the intervening variables. The reasons for examining the period after the Arab Spring include the regional and even global effects of the Arab Spring phenomenon and its impact on surrounding regions, the deterioration/straining of political relations between Türkiye, Russia, and Iran during the Arab Spring, and the Arab Spring phenomenon enabling Türkiye, Russia, and Iran to open up to other regions and interact with them. At the same time, comparative case study was used as a third method. In order to simplify and comprehend the relations of three actors in the Basin, three cases were selected. There are three selection criteria for these cases. Firstly, the cases had to be selected from within the Five Seas Basin during the period following the Arab Spring. Secondly, the cases had to be selected from cases in which none of the three actors were involved in the conflict. In other words, neither of the three states could be a direct party to any conflict. For example, the Russia-Ukraine War was not a suitable case for this study. Thirdly, in the selected case or cases, it was necessary to select phenomena in which the three actors had conducted bilateral or trilateral diplomatic relations and had assumed the role of mediator or big brother to solve the phenomena. The aim of this study is to examine the internal and external factors that influenced the foreign policies of Türkiye, Russia, and Iran in the Five Seas Basin during the period following the Arab Spring, and the impact of these factors on the relations between the three countries. It is to understand the dynamics of Türkiye, Russia, and Iran relations and their foreign policies towards three cases from the Basin. In this regard, the importance and originality of the study can be emphasized in five main points. First, the study's comprehensiveness is important in that it addresses the relations between three actors (Türkiye, Russia, and Iran) with regional hegemonic potential and ambitions in the Five Seas Basin from a broad perspective and theoretical perspective. Second, defining the Five Seas Basin phenomenon, increasing its use, and determining its boundaries contributes to its theoretical establishment in literature. Third, examining the foreign policies and the relations between Türkiye, Russia, and Iran through comparative case study helps to understand the reasons behind the foreign policy orientations of the relevant actors and reveal the dynamics of these orientations in the regional context. Fourth, using Neoclassical Realism at three levels of analysis (unit, system, individual) as a theoretical framework to explain the foreign policies of Türkiye, Russia, and Iran in the post-Arap Spring period contributed to the literature theoretically. Within the context of the phenomena and the foreign policies of Türkiye, Russia and Iran towards these phenomena, seven findings are crucial. First, in the foreign policies of Türkiye, Russia and Iran regarding the Five Seas Basin in the post-Arab Spring period, there are similar intervening variables or domestic motivations of the states like the leadership, the desire to increase and maintain their influence, the impact of identity, economic concerns, the impact of public opinion and media and the threat perception. On the other hand, there are different internal factors such as similar regime types, multipolar foreign policy vision, and authoritative allocation of capacity. Second, in authoritarian states or the states having power centralization tendencies, it is difficult to distinguish between individual-level analysis and unit-level analysis, as the phenomena of leaders and states are intertwined. Since the perception or ideological attitude of the leader is seen as the perception and ideological attitude of the state, treating the perception of the leader as a separate intermediate variable causes repetition in the analysis. Within the context of this study, it can be said that the number of leader level analyses of Türkiye, Russia and Iran towards Syrian Civil War, Nagorno Karabakh Conflict and Qatar Diplomatic Crisis is much lower than the number of unit level analyses. This fact also exemplifies the second finding. Thirdly, the systemic independent variable or constraint of the international system that brings Türkiye, Russia, and Iran closer together is the power vacuum created by the US withdrawal from the Five Seas Basin. This power vacuum is being filled by Türkiye, Russia, and Iran, which are eager to increase the influence of the Basin. Fourth, while Russia and Iran's policies have more long-term strategies, Türkiye is more tactical than Russia and Iran. Türkiye's tactical move is thought to stem from its traditional balancing policy between East and West since the Ottoman Empire. Through this balancing policy, and hence short-term tactical policy, Türkiye continues to harmonize with Russia and Iran in the Five Seas Basin and build relations by avoiding the conflict. Fifth, the crises as disturbances in the foreign policy analysis literature in the Five Seas Basin improve the diplomatic relations, defined as a practice of gathering in a platform, of Türkiye, Russia and Iran. They all take on the role of mediator and via playing mediator role, try to increase or maintain their influence in the Basin, while improving diplomatic relations. Sixth, while both in Syrian Civil War and in Nagorno Karabakh Conflict, minimum four intervening variables are detected for Türkiye, Russia and Iran, in Qatar Diplomatic Crisis, two intervening variables are detected for the three states. Seventh, it can be said that during the post-Arab Spring period, as long as the three states benefit from the crises economically in the Five Seas Basin, they maintain their relations by avoiding the conflict. They all have the desire to increase and maintain their influence in the Basin, but at the same time they prioritize their economic concerns. The reason for their desire is rooted in their imperial past and their historical, cultural and even economic ties with the countries in the Basin. Prioritizing their economic concerns keeps them away from conflict.