Publications

This work analyses the escalation of the India–Pakistan conflict in 2025 and its regional and global consequences. Rather than viewing the crisis merely as a bilateral standoff, it is considered as a complex geopolitical challenge shaped by historical grievances, nuclear deterrence dynamics, internal politics and shifting regional alliances. The aim is to develop a more nuanced understanding of the crisis through a balanced, multidimensional approach that prioritises critical analysis over attribution of responsibility. Drawing on qualitative research and process-tracing methods, the study evaluates the evolution of this conflict across time, comparing current developments with earlier episodes of tension. It draws from a wide range of sources, including the latest academic literature, diplomatic communications, media discourse, and think tank assessments. Particular attention is paid to how national narratives, crisis management patterns, and public perception influence the trajectory of escalation or de-escalation. The work also reflects on the broader implications of the conflict for international security, given that both Pakistan and India are nuclear-armed states. The risks of miscalculation or limited war escalating into a broader catastrophe remain acute. In this regard, the potential roles of third parties, especially Türkiye, are analysed. Türkiye's evolving foreign policy, diplomatic tradition and regional engagement position it as a potential mediator in the resolution of international tensions. Unlike most Western-centric accounts, this research effectively contextualises the crisis by examining Türkiye's historical and strategic alignment, its role in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, and its potential diplomatic opportunities. The study addresses the security concerns of both sides equally sensitively across five scenarios, emphasising the urgent need to restore diplomatic channels and multilateral dialogue.

The semiconductor industry is at the heart of core case studies related to the understanding of broader dynamics of technological developments and international competition in the 21st century. Much has been written about the superpower rivalry between the United States (US) and China, but this chapter highlights significant and growing contributions from middle powers in research, development, and production of semiconductors. This chapter compares the changing role of middle powers in the global semiconductor industry, drawing examples from Japan, South Korea, Türkiye, and Malaysia. The book chapter makes a comparative analysis of research output, patent data, policy initiatives, and industry development in the countries under study and their respective positions. Also, the chapter makes a deeper analysis of Türkiye’s semiconductor research and development efforts. The results suggest diversified strategies and capacities of the established middle powers, Japan and South Korea, compared to the emerging middle powers, Türkiye and Malaysia. In this research, network analysis is used to map patterns of international collaboration and to identify nodes of influence within global semiconductor research and innovation networks. Our results reveal significant differences between well-established middle powers, such as Japan and South Korea, and emerging ones like Türkiye and Malaysia. Japan and South Korea have strong research output and are leaders in patent applications in semiconductor production. While their research impact is relatively much lower, Türkiye and Malaysia are building emerging strengths. Much of the work in Türkiye aims toward defense and strategic applications. In Malaysia, an existing position in semiconductor assembly provides the opportunity for moving up the value chain. In terms of publications, the output of both countries increased linearly since the beginning of the 2000s. In terms of patent applications, Japanese and South Korean companies dominate the patent application network, particularly in semiconductor production and intermediate products. The study helps to further our understanding of how middle powers can pursue various roadmaps in an era of technological innovation and economic competitiveness in the semiconductor industry.

This article examines the contributions of the English School to the development of Global International Relations (Global IR) through a critical analysis of its systemic framework, historical development, and normative theoretical focus. By undertaking a qualitative and historical analysis of foundational texts by figures such as Manning, Wight, and Bull, as well as relevant secondary literature, the study illuminates the interaction between the English School and Global IR. The study's key findings indicate that, while the English School's Eurocentric legacy presents theoretical constraints, its focus on norms, international society, and justice offers valuable frameworks for addressing contemporary global challenges. Furthermore, the study identifies the integration of emerging powers and non-Western perspectives as evidence of the English School's adaptability in a pluralistic global order. Methodologically, the study's focus on historical analysis and qualitative approaches constrains its capacity to offer broader empirical generalisations. Additionally, its theoretical scope reflects the challenges of reconciling diverse perspectives within a cohesive framework. Despite these limitations, the article highlights the potential for transformative dialogue between the English School and Global IR, with practical implications for fostering inclusive global governance and providing pathways for future interdisciplinary research.

"Today, Japan's political culture is represented by peace-lover (pacifist), economic and aesthetic imagery. With the exception of certain historical periods, the Japanese archipelago is known for its many cultural values such as Samurai, Buddhism, Shintoism and ikebana as the cradle of aesthetics and art. On the other hand, the non-aesthetic and non-cultural concept that comes to mind with Japan is “kamikaze” (suicide bomber). The term appeared in Japanese political history during World War II, when the Japanese armies made suicide plunges from the air to the enemy's naval forces. However, the deep meaning and concept of kamikaze can be traced back to the history of Mongo-Japanese relations. Imperial historical literature in Japan brings us with the assertion that Genghis Khan was a Japanese. Moreover, Japan is also said to be the architect of Mongolian nationalism, which is shaped by the perception of Genghis Khan today. Entitling the Japanese suicide operations as kamikaze towards the end of the Pacific War between the United States and Japan can be thought as an attempt to transmit a divine mission to these attacks. The divine meaning of the kamikaze for the Japanese brings along unstudied considerations. The main objective of this study is to reveal the contemporary impressions of Genghis Khan's legacy in Japan. This study deals with the phenomenon of Genghis Khan and his effects with an eclectic method, focusing on his effects on the political history of the Japanese rather than historical periodicity."

Japonya’da Uluslararası İlişkiler (Uİ) disiplinin kökenleri sayılan çalışmalar, Meiji Dönemi’nin öncesine kadar uzanmaktadır. 1905’de Japonların Ruslara karşı elde ettikleri galibiyet ile birçok konuda olduğu gibi Uİ’nin kapsamı Japonya’yı da kapsayacak şekilde genişlemiştir. Ancak Japonya’da uzun bir süre staatslehre geleneğinin (Alman genel devlet teorisi) etkisinde kalan disiplin, Pasifik Savaşı’ndaki yenilginin günah keçisi ilan edilerek 1970’lere kadar körelecektir. Yakın dönemde ise Nihonjinron (日本人論 - Japon ulusal ve kültürel kimliğine odaklanan) gelenek, kapsamlı güvenlik, insani güvenlik ve pasifizm tartışmaları arasından sıyrılarak öne çıkacaktır. Meiji Restorasyonu’nun başından itibaren dönemlendirmelerle Uİ disiplininin genel durumunun ele alındığı bu çalışma, 1973 sonrasında disiplinin geçirdiği dönüşüm açısından ayrıca önem arz etmektedir. Çalışmanın sonucunda disiplinin Japonya serüveni, uğradığı anlam durakları ve diğer disiplinlerden ayrılıp kurumsallaşması Uİ ve alan çalışmaları özelindeki rakamsal artışlar ışığında analiz edilmiştir.