Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s recent visit to Kiev serves as a window to Ankara’s broader diplomatic doctrine rather than a narrow bilateral development.
Experts say the visit demonstrates Türkiye’s commitment to maintaining high-level channels during periods of conflict, protecting its enduring interests in the Black Sea, and pursuing cooperation across political, economic and security domains – all without locking itself into rigid geopolitical alignments.
Yasar Sari, director of the Haydar Aliyev Centre for Eurasian Studies at Ibn Haldun University, describes the Turkish approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict as one of strategic autonomy exercised through “strategic ambiguity” and “hedging”.
Rather than choosing sides, Ankara maintains a flexible posture that allows it to increase its influence with multiple parties simultaneously, he says.
“This isn’t indecision but a strategic choice, reflecting (Ankara’s) position as a middle power navigating overlapping security frameworks – NATO, the Black Sea region, and economic ties with Russia,” Sari tells TRT World.
He notes that Fidan made it a point during the visit to express Türkiye’s established position on Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, while also underscoring the strengthening of the bilateral strategic partnership.
At the same time, Fidan reaffirmed Türkiye’s readiness to facilitate the return of both parties to negotiations – a role sustained by Ankara’s continued diplomatic and economic engagement with Moscow and its decision not to join Western sanctions regimes.
This combination shows how Türkiye positions itself as an “indispensable power broker” and a “stabilising force” capable of engaging all relevant actors.
Sabir Askeroglu, a Russia and Eurasia expert at the Istanbul-based think tank Dunya Siyaseti, places Fidan’s visit within Türkiye’s concept of a “flexible balancing central power”.
However, that strategic autonomy does not mean distancing from NATO, he says.
“Rather, it refers to Türkiye’s capacity to pursue its own regional security priorities through independent diplomatic initiatives, while remaining committed to (NATO’s) core principles,” he tells TRT World.
Askeroglu says Ankara combines military deterrence with proactive diplomatic engagement, distinguishing it within NATO at a time when the US has signalled a more limited role in European security.
The Kiev meetings should also be seen as preparation for the post-war period, Askeroglu says.
Ankara’s aim is to contribute to the preservation of Ukraine’s state capacity through sustained cooperation in reconstruction, infrastructure, trade, energy and defence-industrial partnerships, Askeroglu notes.
These elements form the economic and institutional dimensions of Türkiye’s understanding of security – not as a purely military concept, but as long-term regional stability built on multiple pillars, he says.
Türkiye as a middle power
Helin Sari Ertem, professor of international relations at Istanbul Medeniyet University, says Türkiye’s conduct as a regional power has evolved within a wider global transition.
“It would be illogical to redivide the world into concrete blocks through which states would be obliged to take sides,” she tells TRT World, noting that the 21st century demands resilience through flexibility.
Emerging middle powers, such as Türkiye, operate with strategic autonomy, investing in open communication channels with diverse actors rather than confining themselves to fixed ideologies or blocs, she says.
