Australia, Turkey, and the US, c.1975-2018: Testing the "Wobbly Cross"

Abstract

This MPhil compares Turkish and Australian foreign policy relations with the United States (US) between the mid-1970s and 2018. This comparison will investigate whether these bilateral relations resemble the "wavy cross" explored in my doctoral thesis. From mid-1940s to the mid-1970s Turkish-American relations followed a fluctuating downward curve, while Australian-American relations followed a fluctuating upward curve. Turkey moved away from the US, Australia moved closer, a pattern like a "wavy cross". This thesis begins where my PhD concludes, c.1980. The thesis will test whether the divergence between global priorities of a great power and local/national priorities of two middle powers, together with the imbalance in their bilateral relations continued to affect the stability of the arms and tendency of the "wavy cross". Although the metaphorical depiction in my PhD is the "wavy cross", wobbly seems more appropriate in illustrating the fluctuations of the arms. Each chapter examines reasons inducing the wobbles and sustaining the tendency of the Turkish and the Australian arms, to test the validity of the "wobbly cross". The rationale behind comparing Turkey and Australia is threefold. First, both Turkey and Australia are well known examples of middle powers, but little research has been conducted on their comparison. Second, my ultimate aim is to combine the PhD and the MPhil theses and made them a book. Third, for International Relations and Political History literature middle powers' foreign policy actions is still an unclear area. Hopefully, this work could cast light on commonalities and differences of two significant middle powers' foreign policies. This is a Political History rather than an International Relations project, since it aims to compare foreign policies, primary records on policy makers' statements, and actions which are a reliable basis for analysis. As I experienced during my PhD research, International Relations theories and patterns do not explain middle powers' actions for such a big span of history. Show more