The relations between Russia and Turkey paradoxically combine close cooperation with enmity as well as consistency with unpredictability. How can such ambiguous and controversial nature of Russo-Turkish relations be explained? The existing arguments predicated upon the material factors of security and economic benefits are not able to grasp the essence as to why the two countries forgo benefits for other considerations. Furthermore, these works do not allow for the socially constructed nature of "security". Putting the current state of relations between Moscow and Ankara in the long historical trends context fails to expose the mechanisms which make these trends function. The paper seeks to shed light on the dynamics of Russo-Turkish relations from the perspective of international status theory. We understand status as the set of collective beliefs about the place a given state possesses among the other states. We apply the status approach to analyze how Russia and Turkey dealt with the conflicts in Syria and in Nagorno-Karabakh. On the one hand, Moscow and Ankara give each other mutual status recognition. In fact they constitute for each other the reference group which satisfies their status aspirations. Therefore it is dramatically important for both states to sustain cooperation. Otherwise the confrontation breaks the mechanism of mutual status recognition. On the other hand there is status disparity between Russia and Turkey. Russia is a nuclear power and the permanent member of UN Security Council. Turkey is a middle range power, claiming great power status. The disparity leads to status competition between Moscow and Ankara and informs rivalry between them.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silaev et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: