English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article traces the Turkish voting preferences in the UN General Assembly during the AK Party era between 2002 and 2020. It seeks to understand as to whether there is a congruence between Turkey’s critical view of international society as epitomized by Tayyip Erdoğan’s motto, 'The World is Bigger Than Five', and the way Turkish representatives voted during the same period in the UN General Assembly on questions such as nuclear disarmament, self-determination, search for a new international order, and human rights. Based on primary materials, this paper concludes that there exists an undisputable contradiction between Turkey’s anti-establishment posture and behavioural attitude towards the outside world since 2002 on the one hand and it’s voting orientation in the UN General Assembly on the other. The latter is largely the outcome of the ‘Europeanization’ of Turkish foreign policy based on Turkey’s candidacy for EU membership and its NATO commitments. Hence, during the period under investigation, Turkey was broadly allied to the European position in the context of its voting pattern in the UN General Assembly which was conspicuous with its aloofness towards calls for substantial changes intended to bring about a more just and peaceful international order.

Turkey’s Voting Preferences in the UN General Assembly During the AK Party Era as a Counterchallenge to Its ‘New’ Foreign Policy