The global geopolitical balance of power is rapidly transforming in the 21st century, swinging away from the Global North towards the Global South. This is affecting international relations and foreign policy as there are increasing different visions and perspectives that move away from established Western-oriented theory and practice. The result is a need to rethink such key concepts and their application as soft power, which has evolved in practice rather differently than envisioned by Nye. Using online materials in Russia and Turkey, a qualitative analysis is conducted on the quality of relations and interactions of the two countries and whether this constitutes soft power and/or strategic pragmatism. A rather nuanced result suggests that although strategic pragmatism is at the forefront of their relationship, soft power has not been forgotten and plays a complementary role in supporting a functioning relationship in difficult times.
BrooksS. G.WohlforthW.C. (2016). America Abroad: The United States’ global role in the 21st century. Oxford University Press.
4.
BuzanB.WaeverO.de WildeJ. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishing.
5.
ChifuI.SimonsG. (2023). Rethinking warfare in the 21st century: The influence and effects of the politics, information and communication mix. Cambridge University Press.
6.
CooleyA.NexonD. (2020). Exit from hegemony: The unravelling of the American global order. Oxford University Press.
7.
DemiryolT. (2015). Interdependence, balancing and conflict in Russian-Turkish relations. In KliemanA. (Ed.), Great powers and geopolitics: International affairs in a rebalancing world (pp. 65–86). Springer.
8.
DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Sage.
9.
DunneT.KurkiM.SmithS. (2007). International relations theories: Discipline and diversity. Oxford University Press.
10.
FaubionJ. D. (Ed.). (2000). Michel Foucault: Power. The New Press.
11.
FlintC. (2017). Introduction to geopolitics (3rd ed.). Routledge.
12.
ForbesI.HoffmanM. (Eds.). (1993). Political theory, international relations and the ethics of intervention. St. Martin’s Press Inc.
13.
FranklinB.HamerM.HannaM.KinseyM.RichardsonJ. E. (2011). Key concepts in journalism studies. Sage.
14.
HaydenC. (2012). The rhetoric of soft power: Public diplomacy in global contexts. Lexington Books.
IslamovD. R.AkhmetkarimovB. G.GrishinY. Y.VagapovaF. G. (2024). The Russia and Turkey factors in Hungary-Serbia tandem’s policies. Russia in Global Affairs, 22(1), 130–150. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2024-22-1-130-150
17.
JiangP. (2023). Geostrategic psychology and the rise of forbearance. Routledge.
SimonsG. (2014). Russian public diplomacy in the 21st century: Structure, means and message. Public Relations Review, 40(3), 440–449.
35.
SimonsG. (2021). Geopolitical regionalisms resulting from US-led GWOT, Colour Revolutions and Arab Spring: Implications for Turkish defence and foreign policy. Marmara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.14782/marmarasbd.996928
