Turkey's Middle East policy of the 21st century in the axis of pozitivist and critical paradigms

Considering the desire of every small or large-scale state, community, group to dominate over geographical areas throughout history, it was inevitable for the Middle East to get its share from these struggles. Turkey, which approached these lands with prejudice from of old, has been closely interested in the Middle East with its desire to terminate the problems and conflicts that struck in the 21st century. Turkey's foreign policy stance, which dismissed its traditional foreign policy approach and adopted a new foreign policy rhetoric, was based on the solution of the problems in the Middle East region through economic, cultural and diplomatic mediums and the development of bilateral relations by periodically following different strategies and paths. In Turkey's foreign policy, which gained momentum especially with the change of government, the traditional Turkey-Middle East approach was moved to another dimension and extensive relations were aimed to be revealed. The foreign policy rhetoric organized by the Justice and Development Party governments, which came to power with the 2002 elections, has generated copious controversies. The attitude and approach that was shaped in the line of "Westernism" and "Status Quo" in the first place, was affected by the current crises and transformed into a security-oriented foreign policy understanding in the following periods, and serious changes were observed. Although the foreign policy approach it developed could not achieve the expected results in the long run, it did achieve some results in the short run. The perception of Turkey's role in the region has had many positivist and critical reflections. In particular, the handicaps of the policy that Ankara wants to pursue are quite numerous. Turkey's Middle East policy has confronted it with other states and Turkey has faced various sanctions. It has been exposed to various problems and criticisms at home as well as in foreign policy. When we interpret this situation with paradigms, it is possible to provide a scientific explanation for these experienced situations. The reflections of the results obtained from the experienced situations may be established in a causable law. Since both the positivist paradigm and the critical paradigm are the phenomena waiting to be discovered, the policies introduced by the decision makers of Ankara government have positive and negative effects on individuals. While the positivist paradigm supports that the impact of the traces of the policy carried out by Turkey to expand its sphere of dominance on individuals and states may have various consequences, the critical paradigm believes that the resulting causes and effects should be analyzed in depth. Starting from the way Turkey intervened in the events, the reasons why the targeted results could not be resolved require deep analysis.