The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Turf Wars in Foreign Policy Bureaucracy: Rivalry between the Government and the Bureaucracy in Turkish Foreign Policy
Abstract
This paper, using examples from Turkish foreign policy between 2002 and 2014, argues that the fragmentation in foreign policymaking due to adopting different foreign policy ideas, that is, ideas of the elected leadership and the bureaucracy, is likely to generate competition between the state agencies that constitute the foreign policy bureaucracy. If there is backlash in the bureaucracy to realize the government's revisionist foreign policy goals, then the government aims to transform the bureaucracy by empowering certain small bureaucratic units, that is, missionary agencies. Once the degree of conflict between the government and the bureaucracy becomes severe, then the elected officials opt to work with the established bureaucratic agencies to speed up the decision-making processes. The analysis based on a series of interviews conducted with sixty-one Turkish foreign policymakers shows that the turf war in the foreign policy bureaucracy is a conceptual framework for comprehending how elected officials use bureaucratic tactics to undermine the involvement of bureaucrats in decision-making processes. Finally, the study contributes to current debates on populism and the presidentialization of foreign policy by showing that the foreign policy bureaucracy is not immune from the anti-elite, anti-establishment rhetoric of governments.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Gülen identifies how the elected AKP government has fought 'turf wars in the foreign policy bureaucracy…to undermine the involvement of bureaucrats in decision-making processes.'”
From The Deinstitutionalization of U.S. and Turkish Foreign Policy: Why Societal Ties Are an Anchor in Bilateral Relations (2025) · cites this paper as Gülen, 2022
Citations
Cites
Collier, D. (2011) · PS: Political Science & Politics · doi:10.1017/s1049096511001429 · Cited by 2,238
Cantir, C., & Kaarbo, J. (2012) · Foreign Policy Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1743-8594.2011.00156.x · Cited by 236
Present at the Destruction: The Trump Administration and the Foreign Policy Bureaucracy
Drezner, D. W. (2019) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/702230 · Cited by 82
Research works printed but not linked: 69
- Akıllı, 2019, TIKA's Soft Power: Nation Branding in Turkish Foreign Policy, 10.25253/99.2018EV.05 · DOI
- Akkoyunlu, 2021, The Five Phases of Turkey's Foreign Policy under the AKP, Social Research: An International Quarterly, 88, 243, 10.1353/sor.2021.0014 · DOI
- Allison, 1971, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis
- Allison, 1972, Bureaucratic Politics: A Paradigm and Some Policy Implications, World Politics, 24, 40, 10.2307/2010559 · DOI
- Alpan, 2016, From AKP's ‘Conservative Democracy’ to ‘Advanced Democracy’: Shifts and Challenges in the Debate on ‘Europe’, South European Society and Politics, 21, 15, 10.1080/13608746.2016.1155283 · DOI
- Aras, 2014, Davutoğlu Era in Turkish Foreign Policy Revisited, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 16, 404, 10.1080/19448953.2014.938451 · DOI
- Aras, 2015, Reform and Capacity Building in the Turkish Foreign Ministry: Bridging the Gap between Ideas and Institutions, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 17, 269, 10.1080/19448953.2015.1063271 · DOI
- Aslan, 2021, Public Tears: Populism and the Politics of Emotion in AKP's Turkey, International Journal of Middle East Studies, 53, 1, 10.1017/S0020743820000859 · DOI
- Aydinli, 2021, Elite Change and the Inception, Duration, and Demise of the Turkish–Israeli Alliance, Foreign Policy Analysis, 17, 1, 10.1093/fpa/oraa021 · DOI
- Aydın-Düzgit, 2016, Encounters with Europe in an Era of Domestic and International Turmoil: Is Turkey a De-Europeanising Candidate Country?, South European Society and Politics, 21, 1, 10.1080/13608746.2016.1155282 · DOI
- Başer, 2015, Shift-of-Axis in Turkish Foreign Policy: Turkish National Role Conceptions before and during AKP Rule, Turkish Studies, 16, 291, 10.1080/14683849.2015.1050958 · DOI · Paper page
- Bauer, 2020, Democratic Backsliding, Populism, and Public Administration, Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 3, 19, 10.1093/ppmgov/gvz026 · DOI · Paper page
- Bennett, 2015, Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. Strategies for Social Inquiry
- Brummer, 2013, The Reluctant Peacekeeper: Governmental Politics and Germany's Participation in EUFOR RD Congo: The Reluctant Peacekeeper, Foreign Policy Analysis, 9, 1, 10.1111/j.1743-8594.2011.00174.x · DOI
- Cason, 2009, Presidentialization, Pluralization, and the Rollback of Itamaraty: Explaining Change in Brazilian Foreign Policy Making in the Cardoso–Lula Era, International Political Science Review, 30, 117, 10.1177/0192512109102432 · DOI
- Cohen, 2016, Ahmet Davutoğlu's Academic and Professional Articles: Understanding the World View of Turkey's Former Prime Minister, Turkish Studies, 17, 527, 10.1080/14683849.2016.1220838 · DOI
- Çuhadar, 2020, Turkish Leaders and Their Foreign Policy Decision-Making Style: A Comparative and Multi-Method Perspective, Turkish Studies, 22, 1, 10.1080/14683849.2020.1724511 · DOI
- Çuhadar, 2017, Personality or Role? Comparisons of Turkish Leaders across Different Institutional Positions, Political Psychology, 38, 39, 10.1111/pops.12333 · DOI
- De Faria, 2013, Itamaraty on the Move: Institutional and Political Change in Brazilian Foreign Service under Lula Da Silva's Presidency (2003–2010): Itamaraty on the Move, 468
- Demir, 2020, From Military Tutelage to Civilian Control: An Analysis of the Evolution of Turkish Civil–Military Relations, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 47, 172, 10.1080/13530194.2018.1491291 · DOI
- Desrosiers, 2009, Canada and the Bureaucratic Politics of State Fragility, Diplomacy & Statecraft, 20, 659, 10.1080/09592290903455774 · DOI
- Drezner, 2000, Ideas, Bureaucratic Politics, and the Crafting of Foreign Policy, American Journal of Political Science, 44, 733, 10.2307/2669278 · DOI
- Drezner, 2009, Avoiding Trivia: The Role of Strategic Planning in American Foreign Policy
- Esen, 2016, Rising Competitive Authoritarianism in Turkey, Third World Quarterly, 37, 1581, 10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732 · DOI · Paper page
- Esen, 2019, Killing Competitive Authoritarianism Softly: The 2019 Local Elections in Turkey, South European Society and Politics, 24, 317, 10.1080/13608746.2019.1691318 · DOI
- Fidan, 2013, A Work in Progress: The New Turkish Foreign Policy, Middle East Policy, 20, 91, 10.1111/mepo.12006 · DOI
- Fidan, 2008, Turkey's Role in the Global Development Assistance Community: The Case of TIKA (Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency), Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, 10, 93, 10.1080/14613190801895888 · DOI
- Goldstein, 1993, Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change, 10.7591/9781501724992 · DOI
- Gulmez, 2013, Rising Euroscepticism in Turkish Politics: The Cases of the AKP and the CHP, Acta Politica, 48, 326, 10.1057/ap.2013.2 · DOI
- Ilgit, 2014, Turkey at the United Nations Security Council: ‘Rhythmic Diplomacy’ and a Quest for Global Influence, Mediterranean Politics, 19, 183, 10.1080/13629395.2013.829329 · DOI
- Ipek, 2015, Ideas and Change in Foreign Policy Instruments: Soft Power and the Case of the Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency, Foreign Policy Analysis, 11, 173, 10.1111/fpa.12031 · DOI
- Jenne, 2021, Populism, Nationalism and Revisionist Foreign Policy, International Affairs, 97, 323, 10.1093/ia/iiaa230 · DOI
- Jones, 2010, Bureaucratic Politics and Organizational Process Models, 10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.2 · DOI
- Jones, 2011, Bureaucratic Politics
- Kaarbo, 1998, Power Politics in Foreign Policy: The Influence of Bureaucratic Minorities, European Journal of International Relations, 4, 67, 10.1177/1354066198004001003 · DOI
- Kaarbo, 1998, The Social Psychology of Inter- and Intragroup Conflict in Governmental Politics, Mershon International Studies Review, 42, 226, 10.2307/254414 · DOI
- Kardaş, 2012, Charting the New Turkish Foreign Policy, International Journal: Canada's Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 67, 1
- Kavakli, 2018, Domestic Politics and the Motives of Emerging Donors: Evidence from Turkish Foreign Aid, Political Research Quarterly, 71, 614, 10.1177/1065912917750783 · DOI
- Kesgin, 2013, Leadership Traits of Turkey's Islamist and Secular Prime Ministers, Turkish Studies, 14, 136, 10.1080/14683849.2013.766988 · DOI
- Kesgin, 2019, Turkey's Erdoğan: Leadership Style and Foreign Policy Audiences, Turkish Studies, 21, 56, 10.1080/14683849.2019.1575735 · DOI
- Kirdiş, 2015, The Role of Foreign Policy in Constructing the Party Identity of the Turkish Justice and Development Party (AKP), Turkish Studies, 16, 178, 10.1080/14683849.2015.1044444 · DOI
- Kutlay, 2021, Turkish Foreign Policy in a Post-Western Order: Strategic Autonomy or New Forms of Dependence?, International Affairs, 97, 1085, 10.1093/ia/iiab094 · DOI
- Kutlay, 2021, Understanding Oscillations in Turkish Foreign Policy: Pathways to Unusual Middle Power Activism, Third World Quarterly, 42, 3051, 10.1080/01436597.2021.1985449 · DOI
- Kuus, 2013, Foreign Policy and Ethnography: A Sceptical Intervention, Geopolitics, 18, 115, 10.1080/14650045.2012.706759 · DOI
- Lequesne, 2019, Why Studying State Foreign Services Remains a Research Priority, Diplomacy & Statecraft, 30, 780, 10.1080/09592296.2019.1673553 · DOI
- Marsh, 2014, Obama's Surge: A Bureaucratic Politics Analysis of the Decision to Order a Troop Surge in the Afghanistan War, Foreign Policy Analysis, 10, 265, 10.1111/fpa.12000 · DOI
- McCormick, 2018, The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence
- Müftüler-Baç, 2016, Turkey's Ambivalent Relationship with the European Union: To Accede or Not to Accede, UluslararasІ Ilişkiler Dergisi, 13, 89, 10.33458/uidergisi.463085 · DOI
- Neumann, 2012, At Home with the Diplomats: Inside a European Foreign Ministry, 10.7591/cornell/9780801449932.001.0001 · DOI
- Öniş, 2012, Turkey and the Arab Spring: Between Ethics and Self-Interest, 10.2139/ssrn.2017639 · DOI
- Öniş, 2014, Turkey and the Arab Revolutions: Boundaries of Regional Power Influence in a Turbulent Middle East, Mediterranean Politics, 19, 203, 10.1080/13629395.2013.868392 · DOI
- Öniş, 2017, The Dynamics of Emerging Middle-Power Influence in Regional and Global Governance: The Paradoxical Case of Turkey, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 71, 164, 10.1080/10357718.2016.1183586 · DOI
- Özcan, 2011, Understanding the ‘New’ Turkish Foreign Policy: Changes within Continuity, Is Turkey Departing from the West?, USAK Yearbook, 4, 159
- Özcoşkun, 2018, Cumhurıyet'in Kuruluşundan Bugüne Dışişleri Bakanlığı Teşkilat Yapısı (1923–2018) [From the Republican Era to Today: Organizational Structure of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1923–2018)]
- Özkan, 2015, Information and Communication Technologies and Organizational Culture in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, 20, 37
- Ozkececi-Taner, 2005, The Impact of Institutionalized Ideas in Coalition Foreign Policy Making: Turkey as an Example, 1991–2002, Foreign Policy Analysis, 1, 249, 10.1111/j.1743-8594.2005.00012.x · DOI
- Plagemann, 2019, Populism and Foreign Policy: The Case of India, Foreign Policy Analysis, 15, 283, 10.1093/fpa/ory010 · DOI
- Rathbun, 2009, Interviewing and Qualitative Field Methods: Pragmatism and Practicalities, 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286546.003.0029 · DOI
- Sarigil, 2011, Civil–Military Relations Beyond Dichotomy: With Special Reference to Turkey, Turkish Studies, 12, 265, 10.1080/14683849.2011.572633 · DOI
- Selcen, 2019, Gözden Irakta: Hariciyeci Gözüyle [Far Away from Eyes: Through the Eyes of a Diplomat]
- Selçuk, 2016, Strong Presidents and Weak Institutions: Populism in Turkey, Venezuela and Ecuador, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16, 571, 10.1080/14683857.2016.1242893 · DOI
- Sever, 2015, Abdullah Gül İle 12 Yıl: Yaşadım, Gördüm, Yazdım [12 Years with Abdullah Gül: Lived, Saw, Wrote]
- Sevin, 2017, Public Diplomacy and the Implementation of Foreign Policy in the US, Sweden and Turkey, 10.1007/978-3-319-49334-3 · DOI
- Snyder, 1954, Decision-Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics
- Süleymanoğlu-Kürüm, 2021, The Sociology of Diplomats and Foreign Policy Sector: The Role of Cliques on the Policy-Making Process, Political Studies Review, 19, 558, 10.1177/1478929920901954 · DOI
- Tansel, 2018, Authoritarian Neoliberalism and Democratic Backsliding in Turkey: Beyond the Narratives of Progress, South European Society and Politics, 23, 197, 10.1080/13608746.2018.1479945 · DOI
- Tayfur, 2002, Decision Making in Turkish Foreign Policy: The Caspian Oil Pipeline Issue, Middle Eastern Studies, 38, 101, 10.1080/714004456 · DOI
- Tekin, 2015, The Europeanization of Turkey: Polity and Politics, 10.4324/9781315733128 · DOI
- Yilmaz, 2016, From Europeanization to De-Europeanization: The Europeanization Process of Turkey in 1999–2014, Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 24, 86, 10.1080/14782804.2015.1038226 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
O’donohue, A. (2025) · All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace · doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1621528 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Gülen, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gülen, Berkay
- ORCID
- Gülen, Berkay
- Venue
- Foreign Policy Analysis
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2022-10
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 1743-8586 (ISSN-L)
- 1743-8594
- OpenAlex
- W4303646914
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5
- FWCI
- 8.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Foreign Policy Analysis (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Turkey's Politics and Society
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Historical Turkish Studies
- Keywords
- foreign policy bureaucracy, turf wars, Turkish foreign policy, bureaucratic fragmentation, decision-making, populism, anti-establishment rhetoric
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review