The issues of water and terrorism are often linked to each other in negotiations between Turkey and Syria, the upstream and the midstream riparians in the Euphrates River basin, respectively. This issue linkage and a deep rooted territorial conflict mark these countries' bilateral relations. This article explains and predicts the riparians' propensity to end the issue linkage unilaterally. The results demonstrate a multiplicity of conditions for such behavior. The common view asserting that Turkey has a more powerful position follows a specific set of conditions. The conclusions do not preclude a Syrian superiority over Turkey, or an equality between the riparians in terms of resistance to the temptation to concede unilaterally.
Delimitation of the territorial waters and continental shelf in the Aegean Sea constitutes a constant source of conflict and produces recurrent crises between Greece and Turkey. This article explores directions that the Greek-Turkish dispute over the delimitation of territorial waters can take through an evolutionary game framework. Crises are found to follow routines and practices involving challenges to the status quo and reactions preceding mutual retreat. Hence, the status quo in the Aegean Sea can persist even in the form of aggressive behavior. It is also possible that the dispute will evolve into a stable state of conflict where no cooperative foreign policy can survive.
Delimitation of the territorial waters and continental shelf in the Aegean Sea constitutes a constant source of conflict and produces recurrent crises between Greece and Turkey. This article explores directions that the Greek-Turkish dispute over the delimitation of territorial waters can take through an evolutionary game framework. Crises are found to follow routines and practices involving challenges to the status quo and reactions preceding mutual retreat. Hence, the status quo in the Aegean Sea can persist even in the form of aggressive behavior. It is also possible that the dispute will evolve into a stable state of conflict where no cooperative foreign policy can survive.
Religious beliefs can affect preferences of decision makers who formulate and guide foreign policy. This article investigates the relationship between preferences affected by Islamic worldview of Turkey's new leadership and foreign policy the new elite conduct through two simple models. The models are games against nature; thus, Turkey is the only decision maker facing no strategic uncertainty. It is found that the subjective estimates of achieving gains under the new foreign policy (NWP) and the old foreign policy (SQP) are critical and distinct from gains and costs of both policies. The new Turkish foreign policy (NWP) is a reversible move, even though Turkish decision makers evaluate it as generating a higher gain and a lower cost compared with the preservation of the status quo (SQP). The implementation of the NWP does not only depend on its gain but also on how attractive is the SQP.Turkish foreign policy nowadays attracts analysts' attention worldwide. Deteriorated Israel-Turkey relations and especially the recent crisis of aid flotilla to Gaza prompt many scholars to question whether Turkey, a NATO member and an ally of Israel, now completed its re-alignment moves by spectacularly siding with Iran, Syria, and even Hamas.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.