SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Politics and Security / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

Türkiye’s Pursuit of Strategic Autonomy in the Black Sea During the Russia-Ukraine War

Zhiqiang Zou(Fudan University)
Ahmet Faruk Işık(Torino World Affairs Institute)0000-0003-0832-0466
Pages
388–404
Publication Date
2026-10-29
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The case highlights the distinction between maintaining diplomatic access and securing durable influence over conflict outcomes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Amid the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape of the Black Sea—shaped primarily by the Russia–Ukraine war and intensifying Russia–West rivalry—Türkiye has pursued a policy aimed at preserving regional stability while maintaining a delicate balance of power.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This article examines how Türkiye has pursued strategic autonomy in the Black Sea while maintaining its NATO membership, supporting Ukraine, and preserving relations with Russia.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The case highlights the distinction between maintaining diplomatic access and securing durable influence over conflict outcomes.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Türkiye · Rusya-Ukrayna Savaşı · Karadeniz

Abstract

Amid the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape of the Black Sea—shaped primarily by the Russia–Ukraine war and intensifying Russia–West rivalry—Türkiye has pursued a policy aimed at preserving regional stability while maintaining a delicate balance of power. This article examines how Türkiye has pursued strategic autonomy in the Black Sea while maintaining its NATO membership, supporting Ukraine, and preserving relations with Russia. Rather than relying predominantly on hard power, Türkiye leverages a combination of diplomatic engagement, mediation initiatives, and pragmatic economic relations to position itself as a pivotal regional actor. Within the constraints of its NATO membership and relations with Russia, Ankara seeks to preserve room for independent decision-making on specific security, economic, and diplomatic issues.Using a qualitative case study based on official statements, institutional documents, and secondary scholarship, the article examines Türkiye’s implementation of the Montreux Convention, support for Ukraine, economic engagement with Russia, and diplomatic initiatives. It argues that these policies reflect an effort to preserve strategic autonomy under competing security and economic pressures, rather than neutrality or a departure from NATO. The case highlights the distinction between maintaining diplomatic access and securing durable influence over conflict outcomes.

Özet

Amid the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape of the Black Sea—shaped primarily by the Russia–Ukraine war and intensifying Russia–West rivalry—Türkiye has pursued a policy aimed at preserving regional stability while maintaining a delicate balance of power. This article examines how Türkiye has pursued strategic autonomy in the Black Sea while maintaining its NATO membership, supporting Ukraine, and preserving relations with Russia. Rather than relying predominantly on hard power, Türkiye leverages a combination of diplomatic engagement, mediation initiatives, and pragmatic economic relations to position itself as a pivotal regional actor. Within the constraints of its NATO membership and relations with Russia, Ankara seeks to preserve room for independent decision-making on specific security, economic, and diplomatic issues.Using a qualitative case study based on official statements, institutional documents, and secondary scholarship, the article examines Türkiye’s implementation of the Montreux Convention, support for Ukraine, economic engagement with Russia, and diplomatic initiatives. It argues that these policies reflect an effort to preserve strategic autonomy under competing security and economic pressures, rather than neutrality or a departure from NATO. The case highlights the distinction between maintaining diplomatic access and securing durable influence over conflict outcomes.

🔖

Cite This Article

Zou, Z., Işık, A. F. (2026). Türkiye’s Pursuit of Strategic Autonomy in the Black Sea During the Russia-Ukraine War. International Journal of Politics and Security, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 388–404. https://doi.org/10.53451/ijps.1955643

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (57)

  1. Alim, E. (2022). Strategic Hedging in the Black Sea: The Case of Türkiye Versus Russia. Comparative Strategy, 41(5): 459-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2022.2111908
  2. Akhmedova, E. (2019). The Importance of the Black Sea Seurity Cooperation between the Republic of Türkiye and Ukraine and the EU Black Sea Synergy Security System. Актуальні проблеми політики, (64), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.32837/app.v0i64.195
  3. Ash, T. (2025, December 25). 2025, the year Türkiye’s long game paid off. TRT Africa. https://www.trtafrika.com/article/ee6baf382d56
  4. Avdaliani, E. (2022). New World Order and Small Regions: The Case of South Caucasus. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.
  5. Aydın, M. (2009). Geographical Blessing Versus Geopolitical Curse: Great Power Security Agendas for the Black Sea Region and a Turkish Alternative. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 9(3): 271-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683850902934283
  6. Aydın, M. (2014). Turkish Policy towards the Wider Black Sea and the EU Connection. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 16(3): 383–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2014.928541
  7. Atmaca, A. Ö., & Torun, Z. (2021). Geopolitical Visions in Turkish Foreign Policy, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 24(1): 114-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2021.1992189
  8. Balta, E. (2019). From Geopolitical Competition to Strategic Partnership: Türkiye and Russia after The Cold War. Uluslararasi İliskiler, 16(63): 69-86. https://dx.doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.621309
  9. Balta, E., & Bal, H. B. (2026). How do middle powers act? Türkiye’s foreign policy and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. International Politics, 63, 161–183. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-025-00679-9
  10. Bechev, D. (2023). Worst of Friends, Best of Rivals: Agency vs Structure in Türkiye -Russia Relations. Uluslararasi Iliskiler, 20(79): 5-31. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1357630
  11. Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, New York: Basic Books.
  12. Cenusa, D. (2025, June 12). The Black Sea region and the impact of the war: Geopolitics, geoeconomics and security “transversal costs” and “unintended benefits.” Geopolitics and Security Studies Center. https://www.gssc.lt/en/publication/the-black-sea-region-and-the-impact-of-the-war-geopolitics-geoeconomics-and-security-transversal-costs-and-unintended-benefits
  13. Corbeau, A., and Mitrova, T. (2024, February 21). Russia’s Gas Export Strategy: Adapting to the New Reality. Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia. https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/publications/russias-gas-export-strategy-adapting-to-the-new-reality/.
  14. Dal, E. P. (Ed.). (2018). Middle Powers in Global Governance: The Rise of Türkiye, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
  15. Dipama, S., & Dal, E. P. (2024). Assessing the Impact of Türkiye’s Quest for Status Since the 2000s on Foreign Policy Change: Transformational or Transactional? Uluslararasi İliskiler, 21(81): 77-93. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1406813
  16. Dubovyk, V. (2026, January 8). The European Union’s Black Sea strategy. New Eastern Europe. https://neweasterneurope.eu/2026/01/08/the-european-unions-black-sea-strategy/
  17. Dursun-Özkanca, O. (2022). An Examination of the Underlying Dynamics of Türkiye -European Union Relations through the Lenses of International Relations Theory. Turkish Studies, 23(5): 743-764. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2022.2060083
  18. Gafarlı, O., and Roknifard, J. (2023). Relations with Russia in the Context of Türkiye’s Policy in Constructing its ‘Strategic Autonomy’. Uluslararasi Iliskiler, 20(79): 33-49. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1358280
  19. Gümüş, A. (2022). Increasing Realism in Turkish Foreign Policy during post-Davutoğlu Era. Insight Türkiye, 24(4): 167–86. DOI:10.25253/99.2022244.10
  20. Gürer, C., and Freriks, J. (2022, April 28). Deep dive in the Black Sea: Türkiye’s role and potential in the region. George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies. https://www.marshallcenter.org/en/publications/clock-tower-security-series/deep-dive-black-sea-turkeys-role-and-potential-region/deep-dive-black-sea-turkeys-role-and-potential-region.
  21. Gürzel, A. (2014). Türkiye’s Role as a Regional and Global Player and its Power Capacity: Türkiye’s Engagement with other Emerging States, Revista de Sociologia e Politica, 22(50): 95-105. DOI: 10.1590/1678-987314225007.
  22. Güvenç, S. (2021). Montrö. [Montreux] April 12. https://www.gazetepencere.com/montro/.
  23. Hale, W. (2023). The Türkiye -Russia Relationship in Historical Perspective. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 20(78): 43-58. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1284191
  24. Hamilton, R. E., & Mikulska, A. (2021, April 8). Cooperation, Competition, and Compartmentalization: Russian-Turkish Relations and their Implications for the West, Foreign Policy Research Institute. https://www.fpri.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/russian-turkish-relations-bssp.pdf
  25. Hu, X. (2019). Strategic Game in the Black Sea Region. World Affairs, 75(21): 74.
  26. Isachenko, D. (2023). Türkiye in the Black Sea region. German Institute for International and Security Affairs. Center for Applied Türkiye Studies. https://www.swp-berlin.org/publications/products/research_papers/2023RP12_Türkiye_BlackSeaRegion.pdf
  27. Jiao, Y. and Zhu, Y. (2023). Ukraine Crisis and Strategic Confrontation between Russia and NATO in the Black Sea. Russian, East European & Central Asian Studies, 43(6): 115-136.
  28. Köstem, S. (2022). Managed Regional Rivalry Between Russia and Türkiye After the Annexation of Crimea. Europe-Asia Studies, 74(9), 1657-1675. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2022.2134308
  29. Kubicek, P. (2021). Strictly Pragmatism?: Prospects for a Russian-Turkish Partnership. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 23(2), 233-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2020.1867810
  30. Kubicek, P. (2022). Contrasting Theoretical Approaches to Turkish Foreign Policy. Turkish Studies, 23(5), 645-658. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2022.2107340
  31. Kutlay, M., and Öniş, Z. (2021). Turkish Foreign Policy in a Post-Western Order: Strategic Autonomy or New Forms of Dependence? International Affairs, 97(4), 1085-1104. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab094.
  32. Liu, D., (2017). Significance of the Black Sea for Russia. Academic Journal of Russian Studies, 7(6), 72-77.
  33. Liu, Z., & Zeng, Z. (2023). Identity Politics Dilemma in Türkiye’s Political Development and Foreign Strategy. Foreign Affairs Review, 40(1), 109-133.
  34. Malik, M. (2024). Russian-Western Competition and Türkiye’s Balancing Approach in the Black Sea Region. Pakistan Horizon, 77(2-3). https://www.pakistan-horizon.piia.org.pk/index.php/pakistan-horizon/article/view/381
  35. Morgado, N., & Varga, E. (2025). Geopolitical continuity? An analysis of the Turkish Straits and Russian ambitions. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2025.2515731
  36. Neset, S, Aydin, M., Balta, E., Ataç, K. K., Bilgin, H. D., & Strand, A. (2021). Türkiye as a Regional Security Actor in the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, and the Levant Region (CMI Report R 2021:2). Chr. Michelsen Institute. https://www.cmi.no/publications/7820-turkey-as-a-regional-security-actor-in-the-black-sea-the-mediterranean-and-the-levant-region.
  37. Öniş, Z., & Yılmaz, Ş. (2015). Türkiye and Russia in a Shifting Global Order: Cooperation, Conflict and Asymmetric Interdependence in a Turbulent Region. Third World Quarterly, 37(1), 71-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1086638
  38. Öniş, Z., & Kutlay, M. (2017). The Dynamics of Emerging Middle-power Influence in Regional and Global Governance: the Paradoxical Case of Türkiye, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 71(2),164-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2016.1183586
  39. Pang, D. (2017). The Wider Black Sea: the Balkan of Eurasia. World Affairs, 73(11), 50-51.
  40. Pang, D. (2022). The Structural Dilemma in the Relationship between Russia and the West under the Ukrainian Crisis. Contemporary World, 29(2), 72-73.
  41. Papatulica, M. (2015). Black Sea Area at the Crossroad of the Biggest Global Energy Players’ Interests. The Impact on Romania. Procedia Economics and Finance, 22, 470-478. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00240-3
  42. Pedrozo, R. (2022). The Russia-Ukraine Conflict: Blocking Access to the Black Sea. Naval War College Review, 75(4), 37-51. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review/vol75/iss4/5
  43. Park, B. (2014). Türkiye’s ‘New’ Foreign Policy: Newly Influential or Just Over-active? Mediterranean Politics, 19(2), 161-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2014.915915
  44. Ripsman, N. M., Taliaferro, J. W., & Lobell, S. E. (2016). Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
  45. Şahin, D., and Sözen, A. (2023). Russia and Türkiye: A Roller Coaster Relationship between Securitization and Cooperation. Uluslararasi Iliskiler, 20(79), 87-104. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1319286
  46. Sharpe, K. B. (2022, March 18). Türkiye’s Ukraine policy: Playing all sides. Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa. https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/en/cp_article/turkeys-ukraine-policy-playing-all-sides/
  47. Suleymanov, R. (2025, November 26). Russia-Türkiye Ties Falter Amid Stresses of Ukraine War. Carnegie Politika. https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2025/11/rossiya-turciya-otdalyayutsya
  48. Tang, Z. (2017). The Internal Logic and Trends of Russia- Türkiye Relations. West Asia and Africa, 38(2), 3-24.
  49. Tocci, N. (2012). Türkiye’s Neighbourhood Policy and EU Membership: Squaring the Circle of Turkish Foreign Policy. International Journal, 67(1), 65-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/002070201206700106
  50. Tungul, L. (Ed.). (2025). Europeanisation and Eurasianism in Türkiye and Ukraine: Balancing between integration and autonomy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003387466
  51. Türkdoğan, S. S. (2023). Walking a Tightrope: Türkiye between the EU and Russia in the Crimea Crisis. Uluslararasi Iliskiler, 20(79), 67-85. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1325770
  52. Wang, J. (2003). Türkiye: The Bridge Connecting the Eurasian Continent, Beijing: World Affairs Press.
  53. Winrow, G. M. (2007). Türkiye and the Greater Black Sea Region. In N. Atesoglu Guney, (Ed.), Contentious Issues of Security and the Future of Türkiye, London: Routledge.
  54. Xu, W. (2024). Russia’s International Grain Trade Game on Black Sea Grain Initiative. Journal of Northeast Asia Studies, 13(6), 106-121.
  55. Yalvac, F. (2012). Strategic depth or hegemonic depth? A critical realist analysis of Türkiye’s position in the world system. International Relations, 26(2), 168.
  56. Yang, C. (2022). Türkiye’s Balanced Diplomacy in Russia-Ukraine Conflict: Responses, Motivations and Implications. Arab World Studies, 43(5), 77-94.
  57. Zou, Z. (2022). Türkiye’s Policy in Eastern Mediterranean in the Perspective of the Bule Homeland Strategy. Social Sciences in Xinjiang, 42(2), 96-106.