Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Introduction. Modern Russia and Türkiye are dynamically developing geopolitical centers actively participating in the formation of a new model of international relations. The purpose of the research is to determine how historical models and patterns of interaction of the two states have influenced on current cooperation and their possible clash in the near future and compare their main resource opportunities for obtaining the status of a power in the new world order. Materials and Methods. The study is carried out within the framework of the paradigms of classical geopolitics using system, geopolitical, civilizational and historical approaches. The authors consider the historical experience of Russian-Turkish relations in the form of the interaction of imperial systems. Results. It’s seen that although Russia and Türkiye can be seen as historical antagonists, their imperial nature is based on Eurasian spatial projects that influence their contemporary foreign policy. Despite the12 Russian-Turkish wars, the powers have never posed an existential threat to each other and have had unprecedented periods of political rapprochement, while at the same time they have faced the existential challenges from the united West. Now, having a significant space for cooperation in the economic and geopolitical sphere, Russia and Türkiye clash in three key regions: the Eastern Mediterranean and North Africa, the Black Sea region, the South Caucasus and Central Asia. The central issue of interaction is the problem of the functioning of the Black Sea straits. The issue was updated after the start of the Special Military Operation of the Russian Federation in Ukraine, when Ankara, on the basis of the Montreux Convention, blocked the straits for all warships that benefits Russia. Discussion and Conclusion. The sovereign revival of Russia and Türkiye is a reason for an extremely unstable climate of bilateral relations, within which a positive agenda is currently being formed due to the personal factor of the two presidents: painful issues to be postponed for future. This state of affairs requires a qualitative scientific examination of the historical and political experience of the interaction of the two powers and modeling of future bilateral relations.
Irkhin et al. (Fri,) studied this question.