Different paths to regional hegemony: national identity contestation and foreign economic strategy in Russia and Turkey

Abstract

IPE scholars have extensively studied regionalisms in various parts of the globe. However, little has been done to explore the role that countries with regional leadership aspirations have played in fostering regional integration. Why do regional powers pursue different forms of leadership to exert economic influence over their neighbors and achieve regional hegemony? Through a comparison of Russia and Turkey, I argue that elite national identity conceptions construct national economic interests and shape foreign economic policies of these regional powers. In both countries, ruling elites have embraced national identity conceptions that were in stark contrast to the national identity conceptions of their predecessors. Russia under Putin has pursued a coercive hegemonic form of leadership in Eurasia contrary to the Yeltsin era. Conversely, Turkey under Erdogan has pursued liberal regional economic leadership in the Middle East as opposed to the coercive and isolationist policies of Westernist elites. In both cases, the consolidation of political power and international developments have strengthened the prevalent national identity conceptions at home, and reinforced regional economic leadership strategies. As it highlights the domestic ideational sources of the pursuit of regional hegemony, this study has implications for the study of regional powers, regionalism and economic nationalism.

Contemporary Financial Nationalism in Theory and Practice

“…Economic nationalists seek to align the economic position of the nation and its insiders with what they perceive to be the nation's identity and rightful status. Economic nationalists might, for example, seek to reorient a country's international economic relationships more toward regions, countries, and groups that they believe share broader identities, values, histories, and/or cultural attributes with their nation and away from those that do not (Abdelal 2001;Köstem 2018a). Second, and related, economic nationalists believe in using economic institutions and policies to build national unity and to serve the nationalist cause (Nakano 2004).…”

Understanding National Identity Construction in China-ASEAN Business Discourse

“…In national identity politics, sovereign states are involved in recognition games in which some states attempt to become recognized by the international Others and claim their self-image (Nissen & Tsinovoi, 2018). Such an intersubjective conception of national identity driven by material incentives facilitate the design of foreign policies that foster cooperation and engender conflict with foreign countries in order to maintain national interests (Köstem, 2018).…”

Constructive Role Ambiguity and How Russia Couldn’t ‘Get Away’ with Its 2022 Ukrainian Invasion

“…It marks a change toward more direct confrontation with the United States, something noted by Köstem (Köstem 2018). This change in turn led to a more direct inter-state role conflict between US hegemonic role conceptions and Russian anti-hegemonic role conceptions (Maull 2011;Engström 2014).…”