Van broederschap tot machtspolitiek: Hoe Turkije woorden inzet als wapen in de Karabach-oorlog
Een oorlog van woorden
Toen in de herfst van 2020 de tweede oorlog om Nagorno-Karabach uitbrak, spraken Turkse leiders niet alleen in termen van wapens en strategie. Hun taal was doorspekt met woorden als broederschap, solidariteit en historische verantwoordelijkheid. Turkije’s steun aan Azerbeidzjan leek meer op een familieaangelegenheid dan op een klassiek militair bondgenootschap. Maar achter die warme woorden ging een diepere politieke logica schuil: taal als instrument om oorlog te legitimeren.
Mijn masteronderzoek aan de Universiteit Gent richtte zich precies op dat punt. Hoe construeerde Turkije via politieke en mediatieke discoursen de legitimiteit van zijn betrokkenheid in het Karabach-conflict? En hoe reageerde de internationale gemeenschap op die verhalen?
Een conflict met lange wortels
Het conflict om Nagorno-Karabach – een bergachtige regio in de Zuidelijke Kaukasus – begon eind jaren tachtig nog in Sovjettijd. Wat begon als etnische spanningen tussen Armeniërs en Azerbeidzjanen mondde uit in een bloedige oorlog (1988-1994). Armenië bezette niet alleen Karabach maar ook zeven omliggende Azerbeidzjaanse districten.
Voor Turkije, dat zichzelf historisch en cultureel nauw verbonden voelt met Azerbeidzjan, was dit een gevoelige kwestie. Toch bleef Ankara in de jaren negentig voorzichtig. Het steunde Azerbeidzjan retorisch, maar vermeed directe militaire betrokkenheid – deels uit vrees voor Rusland.
Pas decennia later, tijdens de tweede Karabach-oorlog in 2020, verschoof het discours. Turkije positioneerde zich nu luidruchtig als de trouwe bondgenoot van Azerbeidzjan.
Van terughoudendheid naar assertieve solidariteit
In mijn analyse van toespraken, mediaberichten en officiële verklaringen ontdekte ik drie fases in de Turkse retoriek:
- 1988–1999: terughoudend maar betrokken
De nadruk lag op diplomatie en voorzichtigheid. Solidariteit met Azerbeidzjan werd uitgesproken, maar steeds omgeven door verwijzingen naar internationale rechtspraak en vrede.
- 2000–2010: continuïteit en versterking
De retoriek draaide meer rond historische en culturele banden. Termen als twee staten, één natie werden populair. Turkije presenteerde zichzelf als de morele steunpilaar van Azerbeidzjan.
- 2020: assertieve solidariteit en securitisering
Tijdens de oorlog in 2020 sprak Ankara openlijk over een “existentiële strijd”. Het conflict werd voorgesteld als een aanval op de hele Turkse en islamitische gemeenschap. De taal werd harder, emotioneler en nadrukkelijker gekoppeld aan veiligheid.
Kortom: de toon verschoof van diplomatieke voorzichtigheid naar een assertieve, bijna strijdlustige solidariteit.
Woorden die macht scheppen
Waarom is die taal zo belangrijk? Constructivistische theorie in de internationale betrekkingen stelt dat de wereldorde niet enkel gevormd wordt door tanks en verdragen, maar ook door ideeën, verhalen en symbolen. Taal schept realiteit.
Door het conflict te framen als een kwestie van “broederschap” kon Turkije zijn militaire steun voorstellen als morele plicht, niet als agressieve inmenging. Door Armenië neer te zetten als bedreiging voor regionale stabiliteit, kreeg de steun bovendien een defensieve glans.
Zo ontstaat legitimiteit niet uit wetten of verdragen, maar uit overtuigende verhalen.
Botsende verhalen op het wereldtoneel
Internationaal werd dit discours niet overal geslikt.
- Frankrijk en de VS wezen Turkije’s rol af als destabiliserend. Zij betwijfelden of Ankara’s retoriek van solidariteit wel strookte met internationale normen.
- Iran vreesde dat Turkije’s inmenging het evenwicht in de regio zou verstoren en gebruikte een eigen tegen-discours.
- Armenië schilderde Turkije af als een neo-imperiale macht die achter de schermen de oorlog aanwakkerde.
Die botsende verhalen tonen hoe legitimiteit altijd relationeel en betwist is: wat voor de ene partij een morele plicht is, wordt door de ander gezien als ongeoorloofde inmenging.
Nieuwe spelregels voor internationale interventie
Mijn onderzoek laat zien dat de Turkse discursieve strategieën meer waren dan binnenlandse retoriek. Ze beïnvloedden ook hoe internationale normen over interventie verschuiven.
- Van multilateralisme naar unilateralisme: Turkije stelde dat het, ongeacht internationale instellingen, de plicht had om Azerbeidzjan te steunen. Daarmee werd de rol van multilaterale organisaties als de VN verder uitgehold.
- Van onderhandelen naar macht tonen: Het idee dat conflicten via onderhandelingen moeten worden opgelost, maakte plaats voor de legitimering van geweld als snelle en legitieme oplossing.
- Van neutraliteit naar identiteit: Solidariteit gebaseerd op culturele en religieuze banden won aan kracht tegenover abstracte juridische principes.
Met andere woorden: woorden zetten nieuwe spelregels in beweging, die de internationale politiek van morgen kunnen bepalen.
Waarom dit ertoe doet
De Karabach-oorlog lijkt misschien een ver-van-mijn-bed-show, maar de manier waarop staten hun inmenging verpakken in mooie verhalen raakt ons allemaal. Want als solidariteit of “historische verantwoordelijkheid” een vrijgeleide wordt voor militair ingrijpen, wat betekent dat dan voor toekomstige conflicten – van Oekraïne tot het Midden-Oosten?
Door te kijken naar taal, zie je dat macht niet enkel met wapens wordt uitgeoefend, maar ook met woorden die legitimiteit scheppen of ondermijnen.
Conclusie
Mijn thesis toont hoe Turkije’s betrokkenheid in Nagorno-Karabach niet enkel een verhaal is van tanks en drones, maar vooral van woorden die legitimiteit claimen. In internationale politiek zijn verhalen vaak even krachtig als kogels.
Het is daarom cruciaal om kritisch te kijken naar hoe staten hun acties presenteren. Achter elk discours schuilt een poging om macht, invloed en normen te herschrijven.
Of zoals een oud Vlaams gezegde stelt: “Het leven is niet altijd rozengeur en maneschijn.” Ook in de internationale politiek niet – maar met een scherp oog voor taal kunnen we tenminste zien hoe de spelregels worden herschreven.
Bibliografie
I. Academic Publications
Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics. European
Journal of International Relations, 3(3), s. 319-363.
Atanesyan, A. (2020). Media Framing on Armed Conflicts: Limits of Peace Journalism on
the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, pp. 1-17.
Braspenning-Balzacq, T. (2005). The three faces of securitization: Political agency,
audience and context. European Journal of International Relations, 11(2), pp. 171-201.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066105052960
Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis.
Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Campbell, D. (1998). Writing security: United States foreign policy and the politics of
identity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Checkel, J. T. (1988). The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory. World
Politics, 50(2), pp. 324-348.
Düzgit, S. A. (2012). Constructions of European Identity: Debates and Discourses on
Turkey. Palgrave Macmillan.
Düzgit, S. A. (2017). De-Europeanisation through Discourse: A Critical Discourse
Analysis of AKP’s Election Speeches. In A. Kaliber, & S. Aydın-Düzgit (Eds.), Is Turkey De-
Europeanising? (pp. 45-58). New York: Routledge.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of
Communication, 43(4), pp. 51-58.
Ercan, P. G. (2014). R2P: From Slogan to an International Ethical Norm. Uluslararası
İlişkiler Dergisi, 11(43), pp. 35-52. http://www.pinargozen.com/OA_Publications/43-
1GozenErcan.pdf
Eren, E. (2022, Haziran). Turgut Özal’ın Orta Asya (Türkistan) Politikası. Electronic
Journal of Political Science Studies, 13(2), pp. 60-84. [PPM.02]
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language.
London: Longman.
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International Norm Dynamics and Political
Change. International Organization, 52(4), pp. 887-917.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience.
Harvard University Press.
Hakobyan, A. (2021). Armenian Digital Communications in Karabakh War of 2020:
Critical Discourse Analysis. Journal of Sociology, pp. 32-48.
Hale, W. (2013). Turkish Foreign Policy Since 1774. Routledge.
Hall, S. (2021). Whites of Their Eyes: Racist Ideologies and the Media. In P. Gilroy, & R.
W. Gilmore (Eds.), Selected Writings on Race and Difference. Duke University Press.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1215/9781478021223
Hansen, L. (2006). Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War.
Routledge.
Hedlund, S. (2023, December 21). New masters in the South Caucasus. Geopolitical
Intelligence Services. https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/new-masters-in-the-south-caucasus/
Heracleous, L. (2006). Critical approaches: Michel Foucault's conceptions of discourse.
Discourse, Interpretation, Organization (s. 79-107). Cambridge University Press.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511488573.005
Heywood, A. (2016). Siyasetin ve Uluslararası İlişkilerin Temel Kavramları. (S. Durgut,
Dü., & F. Bakırcı, Çev.) Ankara: BB101 Yayınları.
Imranli-Lowe, K. (2023). Karabakh: Historical Background. In M. H. Yavuz, & M. M.
Gunter (Eds.), The Nagorno-Karabakh Confict, Historical and Political Perspectives (pp. 15-33).
New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003261209-3
Kemp, W., Popovski, V., & Thakur, R. (Eds.). (2011). Blood and borders: The
responsibility to protect and the problem of the kin-state. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
Kılıçoğlu, G. (2021). Türkiye Azerbaycan İlişkilerinde Karabağ. Journal of Academic
Opinion, 1(2), pp. 50-55.
Kleingeld, P. (1998). Kant's Cosmopolitan Law: World Citizenship for a Global Order. In
Kantian Review (Vol. 2, pp. 72-90). University of Groningen.
Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton University Press.
Milliken, J. (1999). The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of
Research and Methods. European Journal of International Relations, 5(2), s. 225-254.
doi:ttps://doi.org/10.1177/135406619900500200
Öniş, Z. (2010, April). Multiple Faces of the New Turkish Foreign Policy: Underlying
Dynamics and a Critique. GLODEM Working Paper Series.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches.
Academy of Management Review, 20(3), pp. 571-610.
Şeşen, E., Ünalan, D., & Doğan, Ş. (2022). Political Discourse Analysis of Aliyev’s
Address to the Nation Regarding the Second Karabakh War. MANAS Journal of Social Studies,
11(4), pp. 1739-1751.
Ülker, H. (2019). Türk Dış Politikasında Mezhepçilik ve Haşdi Şabi Örneği. International
Journal of Humanities and Education, 5(9), pp. 293-309.
Vásquez, C., & Liska, D. (2023). Online Identity and Discourse Analysis. The Routledge
Handbook of Discourse Analysis (s. 454-466). Routledge.
Wiener, A. (2004). Contested Compliance: Interventions on the Normative Structure of
World Politics. European Journal of International Relations, 10(2), pp. 189-234.
Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak, & M. Meyer, Methods
of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 63-94). London: SAGE.
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE.
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power
Politics. International Organization, 46(2), pp. 391–425.
Yamskov, A. N. (1991, October). Ethnic Conflict in the Transcausasus: The Case of
Nagorno-Karabakh. Theory and Society, 20(5), pp. 631-660.
Yapıcı, U. (2015, October). Türkiye’nin Güney Kafkasya Politikası (1989-1993): Batı’nın
Belirleyiciliği. Alternatif Politika, 7(3), pp. 425-456. [PPM.01]
Yemelianova, G. M. (2023). Turkey, the Karabakh Conflict and the Legacy of the Eastern
Question. Caucasus Survey, pp. 1-30. doi:.30965/23761202-bja10020
Yükselen, H. (2020). Strategy and Strategic Discourse in Turkish Foreign Policy.
Palgrave Macmillan.
Zarakol, A. (2014). What Made the Modern World Hang Together: Socialisation or
Stigmatisation? International Theory, 6(2), pp. 311-332.
II. News Media Sources [Coded References]
2.1. Turkish News Media Sources
Abay, E. G. (2020, October 5). Azerbaycan Cumhurbaşkanı Aliyev: Türkiye Karabağ’daki
çözüm sürecinde yer almalıdır. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-
hatti/azerbaycan-cumhurbaskani-aliyev-turkiye-karabag-daki-cozum-surecinde-yer-
almalidir/1996140 [AA.03]
Abay, E. G. (2020, November 21). Ermeni generalden 'Dağlık Karabağ çatışmalarında
İskender füzesi kullanıldı' itirafı. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-
hatti/ermeni-generalden-daglik-karabag-catismalarinda-iskender-fuzesi-kullanildi-itirafi/2050918
[AA.09]
Balcı, Ç. (2020, November 02). İran’ın Karabağ propagandası neden başarısız oldu?
Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/analiz/iran-in-karabag-propagandasi-neden-basa…-
oldu/2027725 [AA.05]
Boyraz, H. M., & Güngörmez, O. (2020, December 13). Karabağ zaferinin anatomisi.
Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/analiz/karabag-zaferinin-anatomisi/2073631 [AA.15]
Chirciu, D. (2020, November 10). Azerbaycan ve Ermenistan Dağlık Karabağ'da
anlaşmaya vardı. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti/azerbaycan-
ve-ermenistan-daglik-karabagda-anlasmaya-vardi/2037860 [AA.08]
Cura, A., & Abay, E. G. (2020, September 29). Azerbaycan'ın işgal altındaki toprakları
Karabağ. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti/azerbaycanin-isgal-
altindaki-topraklari-karabag/1989594 [AA.02]
Esen, H. (2020, November 11). İngiliz basını: Azerbaycan-Ermenistan savaşının en büyük
galibi Türkiye. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti/ingiliz-basini-
azerbaycan-ermenistan-savasinin-en-buyuk-galibi-turkiye/2040173 [AA.07]
İncekaya, G. (2020, December 30). Karabağ zaferi 2020 Türk dış politikasının en büyük
kazanımı oldu. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti/karabag-zaferi-
2020-turk-dis-politikasinin-en-buyuk-kazanimi-oldu/2093171 adresinden alındı [AA.12]
İsaev, S. (2021, January 05). GÖRÜŞ - Karabağ'da kim kazandı? Anadolu Ajansı.
https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/analiz/gorus-karabagda-kim-kazandi/2098531 [AA.14]
Özgenç, T. (2020, September 28). Dağlık Karabağ konusunda bilinmesi gerekenler: 6
soruda Dağlık Karabağ. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti/daglik-
karabag-konusunda-bilinmesi-gerekenler-6-soruda-daglik-karabag/1987993 [AA.01]
Rehimov, R. (2020, December 3). Azerbaycan ordusu, Dağlık Karabağ'daki savaşta 2 bin
783 şehit verdi. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti/azerbaycan-
ordusu-daglik-karabagdaki-savasta-2-bin-783-sehit-verdi/2064295 [AA.13]
Rehimov, R. (2020, October 25). Ermenistan, Dağlık Karabağ'a getirdiği PKK'lı
teröristlere Azerbaycan askeri üniforması giydirdi. Anadolu Ajansı.
https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/ermenistan-daglik-karabaga-getirdigi-pkk…-
azerbaycan-askeri-uniformasi-giydirdi/2018759 [AA.04]
Rehimov, R. (2020, December 5). Ermenistan'ın 2. Dağlık Karabağ savaşında imha edilen
silahlarının maddi karşılığı 4,8 milyar dolar. Anadolu Ajansı.
https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti/ermenistanin-2-daglik-k…-
edilen-silahlarinin-maddi-karsiligi-4-8-milyar-dolar/2066420 [AA.10]
Rehimov, R. (2021, April 13). Azerbaycan, 2. Karabağ Savaşı'nda ele geçirdiği
Ermenistan silahlarını 'Ganimetler Müzesi'nde sergiliyor. Anadolu Ajansı.
https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/azerbaycan-2-karabag-savasinda-ele-gecir…-
silahlarini-ganimetler-muzesinde-sergiliyor/2207772 [AA.15]
Rehimov, R. (2021, November 08). Azerbaycan'ın Karabağ zaferinin 1. yılında binlerce
kişi Bakü'de yürüdü. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/azerbaycanin-karabag-
zaferinin-1-yilinda-binlerce-kisi-bakude-yurudu/2414714 [AA.18]
Rehimov, R. (2021, November 8). Azerbaycan'ın Karabağ'daki zaferinin üzerinden bir yıl
geçti. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/azerbaycanin-karabagdaki-zaferinin-
uzerinden-bir-yil-gecti/2414733 adresinden alındı [AA.19]
Rehimov, R., & Özkan, B. (2020, November 10). Azerbaycanlılar Dağlık Karabağ'da
varılan anlaşmayı coşkuyla kutluyor. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-
hatti/azerbaycanlilar-daglik-karabagda-varilan-anlasmayi-coskuyla-kutluyor/2037987 [AA.06]
Rehimov, R. (2020, February 25). Azerbaycan Cumhurbaşkanı Aliyev: Azerbaycan
devleti ve halkı Türkiye'nin yanındadır. Anadolu Ajansı.
https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/azerbaycan-cumhurbaskani-aliyev-azerbayc…-
turkiyenin-yanindadir/1744593
Uslu, S., & Özden, A. A. (2020, February 25). MHP Genel Başkanı Bahçeli: Hepsi aynı
alçak ve karanlık yolun yolcularıdır. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/politika/mhp-
genel-baskani-bahceli-hepsi-ayni-alcak-ve-karanlik-yolun-yolcularidir/1744109
2.2. French News Media Sources
Antonie, S. (2020, October 19). Armenian president: 'Turkey has a completely destructive
role in Nagorno-Karabakh'. France 24. https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/the-
interview/20201019-armenian-president-turkey-has-a-completely-destructive-role-in-nagorno-
karabakh [FR.01]
Armenians warn ethnic cleansing risks being forgotten – again. (2023, November 25).
Radio France Internationale. https://www.rfi.fr/en/international/20231125-armenians-warn-
ethnic-cleansing-risks-being-forgotten-%E2%80%93-again [FR.02]
Azerbaijan and Turkey build bridges amid declining influence of Iran. (2025, February 2).
Radio France Internationale. https://www.rfi.fr/en/podcasts/international-report/20250204-
azerbaijan-and-turkey-build-bridges-amid-declining-influence-of-iran [FR.03]
France's Macron clashes with Turkey over Caucasus conflict. (2020, September 30).
Radio France Internationale. https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20200930-macron-clashes-with-turkey-
over-caucasus-conflict [FR.05]
Jones, D. (2023, October 22). As Azerbaijan and Turkey join forces, fears of Armenia
conflict grow. Radio France Internationale. https://www.rfi.fr/en/podcasts/international-
report/20231022-as-azerbaijan-and-turkey-join-forces-fears-of-conflict-with-armenia-grow
[FR.08]
Jones, D. (2023, October 8). Can Turkey tip the balance of power in the Caucasus
conflict? Radio France Internationale. https://www.rfi.fr/en/podcasts/international-
report/20231008-can-turkey-tip-the-balance-of-power-in-the-caucusus-conflict [FR.09]
Jones, D. (2024, August 25). Growing military buildup in Azerbaijan and Armenia a
concern for peace talks. Radio France Internationale. https://www.rfi.fr/en/podcasts/international-
report/20240825-growing-military-buildup-in-azerbaijan-armenia-a-concern-for-peace-talks
[FR.10]
Morel, J. M. (2021, March 23 ). Turkey and Iran Face Off… But Pull Their Punches.
Orient XXI.http://orientxxi.info/magazine/turkey-and-iran-face-off-but-pull-their-…
[FR.11]
No end in sight to brutal conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. (2020, October 2).
Radio France Internationale. Retrieved from https://www.rfi.fr/en/international/20201002-no-
end-in-sight-to-brutal-conflict-between-armenia-and-azerbaijan-nagorno-karabakh-france-russia-
turkey-us [FR.12]
Turkey's Erdogan urges France to 'get rid' of Macron. (2020, December 5). Radio France
Internationale. Retrieved from https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20201205-turkey-s-erdogan-urges-france-to-…
[FR.13]
Grynszpan, E., & Vincent, F. (2023, September 29). Nagorno-Karabakh: The fall of an
enclave born of the disintegration of the USSR. Le Monde.
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/09/29/nagorno-kara…-
enclave-born-of-the-disintegration-of-the-ussr_6140604_4.html
Nagorno-Karabakh: A tragic but predictable outcome. (2023, September 30). Le Monde.
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/article/2023/09/30/nagorno-karabakh-a…-
predictable-outcome_6142006_23.html#
2.3. Iranian News Media Sources
Azerbaijan accuses Armenia of troop build-up on border. (2023, August 15). Iran Daily.
https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7363/2/4254 [IRN.04]
Boltuc, S. (2023, August 23). Turkey’s goal of restoring Turkic bloc a threat to Iran? Iran
Daily. https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7370/1/4470 [IRN.05]
Dolatabadi, F. (2023, September 4). Setting the stage for Tehran-Ankara ties. Iran Daily.
https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7380/2/4732 [IRN.09]
Harutyunyan, V. (2023, August 30). Unveiled Motives Behind Azerbaijan’s Blockade of
Nagorno-Karabakh. Iran Daily. https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7376/5/4635 [IRN.08]
Iran, Turkey considering trilateral trade meeting with Saudi Arabia. (2023, September 4).
Iran Daily. https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7380/2/4732 [IRN.10]
Matevosyan, E. (2023, August 30). Blockade Closed ‘Arteries of Artsakh’s Economy.
Iran Daily. https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7376/4/4634 [IRN.07]
Pakaein, M. (2023, June 18). Turkey, main obstacle to peace in Caucasus. Iran Daily.
https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7317/1/2767 [IRN.01]
Raeisi to Pashinyan: Any geographic change in region a red line. (2023, September 10).
Iran Daily. https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7383/2/4800 [IRN.11]
Raeisi: Iran supports Yerevan-Baku peace talks. (2023, July 25). Iran Daily.
https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7348/1/3763 [IRN.02]
Vardanyan, Z. (2023, August 27). Some Want to ‘Wipe Iran, Armenia Off Map’. Iran
Daily. https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7373/5/4561 [IRN.06]
Vardanyan, Z., Petrosyan, A., & Khachatryan, A. (2023, July 26). Perspectives on
Armenia. Iran Daily. https://newspaper.irandaily.ir/7349/4/3831 [IRN.03]
2.4. Other News Media Sources (Uncoded)
In Threat To Israel, Erdogan Cites Turkish ‘Entry’ Into Karabakh. (2024, July 29). Radio
Free Europe/Radio Liberty. https://www.azatutyun.am/a/33055076.html
Kelly, L. (2020, September 29). Biden says Turkey must stay out of Azerbaijan-Armenia
conflict. The Hill. https://thehill.com/policy/international/518794-biden-says-turkey-must-…-
out-of-armenia-azerbaijan-conflict/
Kelly, L. (2020, September 29). Democrats warn Turkey over involvement in Azerbaijan-
Armenia conflict. The Hill. https://thehill.com/policy/international/518737-democrats-warn-
turkey-over-involvement-in-azerbaijan-armenia-conflict/
Andreias, V. (n.d.). Anticipatory self-defense in international law: legal or just a construct
for using force? Retrieved from https://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=122935
Turkey officially changes name at UN to Türkiye. (2022, June 3). Retrieved from The
Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/03/turkey-changes-name-to-tu…-
other-name-is-for-the-birds
Putin, Erdogan Discuss Progress of Implementation of Agreements on Karabakh. (2021,
November 24). Sputnik. Retrieved from https://sputnikglobe.com/20201124/putin-erdogan-
discuss-progress-of-implementation-of-agreements-on-karabakh-1081263154.html
Yacoubian, K. (2024, December 10). What are the prospects of Turkish-Armenian
normalization? Retrieved from The Armenian Weekly:
https://armenianweekly.com/2024/12/10/what-are-the-prospects-of-turkish…-
normalization/
Erdoğan Azerbaycan'da: Batılı emperyalistlerin gaz vermesiyle bir yere varılmayacağı
görülmeli. (2020, December 10). Euronews. https://tr.euronews.com/2020/12/10/cumhurbaskan-
erdogan-dagl-k-karabag-zafer-gecidine-kat-lmak-uzere-azerbaycan-da
Erdoğan: Dağlık Karabağ'da çözüm vakti geldi. (2020, September 28). Deutsche Welle
Türkçe. https://www.dw.com/tr/erdo%C4%9Fan-da%C4%9Fl%C4%B1k-karaba%C4%9Fda-
%C3%A7%C3%B6z%C3%BCm-vakti-geldi/a-55079318
III. Official Documents and Archival Records
Dışişleri Bakanlığı Tarihçesi. (1992). Ankara: Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi.
https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1992-2.pdf [MFA.04-MFA.24]
Dışişleri Bakanlığı Tarihçesi. (1993). Ankara: Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi.
https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1993-2.pdf [MFA.25-MFA.32]
Dışişleri Bakanlığı Tarihçesi. (1994). Ankara: Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi.
https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1994-2.pdf [MFA.33]
Dışişleri Bakanlığı Tarihçesi. (1995). Ankara: Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi.
https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1995-2.pdf [MFA.34] [PPM.05-PPM.08]
Dışişleri Bakanlığı Tarihçesi. (1996). Ankara: Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi.
https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1996-2.pdf [MFA.35-MFA.37]
Dışişleri Bakanlığı Tarihçesi. (1998). Ankara: Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi.
https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1998-2.pdf [MFA.38]
Dışişleri Bakanlığı Tarihçesi. (1999). Ankara: Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi.
https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1999-2.pdf [MFA.39]
UN. (1945). United Nations Charter. United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-
charter/full-text
UNGA. (1970). Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly
Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
United Nations General Assembly. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/202170?v=pdf
Yılmaz, H. (Ed.). (2011). Tarihe Düşülen Notlar: Yasama Yılı Açılışlarında
Cumhurbaşkanlarının Konuşmaları. Ankara: Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi Yayınevi. [PPM.03,
PPM.04]
IV. Policy and Research Reports
Aras, B. (2009). Davutoğlu Era in Turkish Foreign Policy. Ankara: SETA.
Duclos, M. (2020, November 13). Nagorno-Karabakh: Lessons From a Peace Deal
Brokered by Russia and Turkey. Montaigne Institut.
https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/expressions/nagorno-karabakh-lesso…-
brokered-russia-and-turkey [FR.04]
Giragosian, R. (2020, October 6). The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: What is at Stake?
Montaigne Institut. https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/expressions/nagorno-karabakh-confl…-
what-stake [FR.06]
Górecki, W., & Chudziak, M. (2021). The (pan-)Turkic Caucasus The Baku-Ankara
alliance and its regional importance. OSW Commentary.
https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2021-02-01/pan-turk…-
ankara-alliance-and-its-regional
Işık, Y. (2022, February 8). Turkey: Walking the Tightrope between NATO, Russia and
Ukraine. Montaigne Institut. https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/expressions/turkey-walking-
tightrope-between-nato-russia-and-ukraine [FR.07]
Landgraf, W., & Seferian, N. (2024). A “Frozen Conflict” Boils Over: Nagorno-
Karabakh in 2023 and Future Implications. Foreign Policy Research Institute.
https://www.fpri.org/article/2024/01/a-frozen-conflict-boils-over-nagor…-
future-implications/
Russian News Agency Sputnik: Turkey's Penetration Into South Caucasus Is Causing
Concern In Tehran; Iran Will Do Everything In Its Power To Regain Its Influence In The Region.
(2021, February 26). The Middle East Media Research Institute.
https://www.memri.org/reports/russian-news-agency-sputnik-turkeys-penet…-
causing-concern-tehran-iran
