This study proposes a conceptual model that depicts middle power mediation as a foreign policy strategy in the context of asymmetric alliance dynamics. It expands on Touval’s (2003) mediation-as-foreign policy perspective and argues that once mediation is conceived of as a viable political option in the conduct of foreign policy, engaging in mediation activity enables middle powers to create an extra space of political power not otherwise available. The article introduces an analytical model that explains the dynamics of mediation-as-foreign policy approach and the mechanisms that translate mediation engagement into political leverage. The analysis focuses on aspects of Turkish mediation efforts between 2002 and 2009 in the context of Turkish-us/eu relations.
BercovitchJacob and A.Houston (1996). “The Study of International Mediation: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Evidence,” in JacobBercovitch editor Resolving International Conflicts: The Theory and Practice of Mediation. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner.
BerikerNimet (2009). “Conflict Resolution: The Missing Link between Liberal International Relations Theory and Realistic Practice,” in J. DennisSandoleS.BryneI.Sandole-Staroste and J.Senehi editors Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution. Abingdon: Routledge256–271.
FrazierDerrick V. and R.Stewart-Ingersoll (2010). “Regional Powers and Security: A Framework for Understanding Order within Regional Security Complexes.”European Journal of International Relations164: 731–753.
HiggottRichard A. (1997). “Issues, Institutions and Middle Power Diplomacy: Action and Agendas in the Post-Cold War Era,” in Andrew F.Cooper editor Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers after the Cold War. New York: St. Martin’s Press25–45.
NeackL. (2000). “Middle Powers Once Removed: The Diminished Global Role of Middle Powers and American Grand Strategy.”Paper presented at the International Studies Association 41st Annual ConventionLos Angeles, CA.