intertrendsМеждународные процессыInternational Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy1728-27561811-2773AEFIR10.17994/2023.21.3.74.6intertrends-367Research ArticleФИКСИРУЕМ ТЕНДЕНЦИЮCATCHING A TRENDСимбиоз и соперничество: динамика российско-турецких отношений в перспективе теории международного статусаSymbiosis and Rivalry: The Russian-Turkish Relations from the Perspective of the International Status TheoryСилаевНиколайSilaevNikolaiСафранчукИванSafranchukIvanМГИМО МИД России, МоскваРоссияMGIMO-University, MoscowRussian Federation20231902202421386102Copyright © Силаев Н., Сафранчук И., 20232023Силаев Н., Сафранчук И.Silaev N., Safranchuk I.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.intertrends.ru/jour/article/view/367

Как объяснить противоречивость российско-турецких отношений, сочетающих тесное сотрудничество с враждебностью, а постоянство с непредсказуемостью? Существующие объяснения, основанные на материальных факторах экономической выгоды и безопасности, не работают в тех случаях, когда Москва и/или Анкара приносят экономическую составляющую своих отношений в жертву соображениям иного порядка. Эти объяснения также не учитывают социально конструируемую природу безопасности. В исследованиях, основанных на экстраполяции длинных циклов общей истории двух стран, не затрагиваются механизмы, посредством которых эти циклы проявляют себя в постоянно меняющейся мировой политике. В статье предложен анализ российско-турецкой динамики взаимодействия, связанного с теорией международного статуса как набора коллективных представлений о месте государства в ряду других государств. Мы применяем статусный подход к анализу двусторонних отношений, проследив на примерах Сирии и Карабаха, как Москва и Анкара признают и подкрепляют или отвергают и подрывают статусные притязания друг друга. Переменчивый характер российско-турецких отношений определяется двумя обстоятельствами. С одной стороны, Россия и Турция обеспечивают друг другу взаимное статусное признание. В сущности, они представляют друг для друга международный коллектив или референтную группу, в рамках которого удовлетворяются их притязания на высокий международный статус. Именно поэтому Москве и Анкаре необходимо поддерживать хотя бы минимальный уровень сотрудничества: разрыв и конфронтация подорвали бы механизм взаимного статусного признания. С другой стороны, между Россией и Турцией сохраняется статусное неравенство. Россия – ядерная держава и постоянный член Совета Безопасности ООН. Турция – держава средней величины, претендующая на статус великой державы. Это неравенство порождает статусную конкуренцию, подталкивающую Москву и Анкару к внешнеполитическому соперничеству.

The relations between Russia and Turkey paradoxically combine close cooperation with enmity as well as consistency with unpredictability. How can such ambiguous and controversial nature of Russo-Turkish relations be explained? The existing arguments predicated upon the material factors of security and economic benefits are not able to grasp the essence as to why the two countries forgo benefits for other considerations. Furthermore, these works do not allow for the socially constructed nature of “security”. Putting the current state of relations between Moscow and Ankara in the long historical trends context fails to expose the mechanisms which make these trends function. The paper seeks to shed light on the dynamics of Russo-Turkish relations from the perspective of international status theory. We understand status as the set of collective beliefs about the place a given state possesses among the other states. We apply the status approach to analyze how Russia and Turkey dealt with the conflicts in Syria and in Nagorno-Karabakh. On the one hand, Moscow and Ankara give each other mutual status recognition. In fact they constitute for each other the reference group which satisfies their status aspirations. Therefore it is dramatically important for both states to sustain cooperation. Otherwise the confrontation breaks the mechanism of mutual status recognition. On the other hand there is status disparity between Russia and Turkey. Russia is a nuclear power and the permanent member of UN Security Council. Turkey is a middle range power, claiming great power status. The disparity leads to status competition between Moscow and Ankara and informs rivalry between them.

РоссияТурциявнешняя политикамеждународный статусКарабах.RussiaTurkeyforeign policyinternational statusKarabakh.ReferencesБибикова О.П. Интересы Турции в Идлибе // Россия и мусульманский мир. 2020. №. 2 (316). С. 70–80. DOI: 10.31249/rimm/2020.02.06Aghaie Joobani H., Mousavipour M. (2015). Russia, Turkey, and Iran: Moving Towards Strategic Synergy in the Middle East? Strategic Analysis. Vol. 39. No. 2. P. 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09700 161.2014.1000658Буря на Кавказе / Под ред. Р.Н. Пухова. М.: Центр анализа стратегий и технологий, 2021. 128 с.Aktürk Ş. (2019). Relations between Russia and Turkey before, during, and after the failed coup of 2016. Insight Turkey. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 97–114. DOI: 10.25253/99.2019214.06Кенгерли З. Геостратегические интересы Турции на Кавказе // Центральная Азия и Кавказ. 2004. №6 (36). С. 111–121.Aktürk Ş. (2014). Toward a Turkish-Russian Axis? Conflicts in Georgia, Syria, and Ukraine, and Cooperation over Nuclear Energy. Insight Turkey. Vol. 16. No. 4. P. 13–22.Межуев Б.В. Турция, Россия и Европа с позиции «цивилизационного реализма» // Полис. Политические исследования. 2019. №. 6. С. 53–66. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.06.05Aktürk Ş. (2017). Turkey’s role in the Arab spring and the Syrian conflict. Turkish policy quarterly. Vol. 15. No. 4. P. 87–96.Надеин-Раевский В. Политика Турции на Ближнем Востоке // Пути к миру и безопасности. 2020. №. 1 (58). С. 139–156. DOI: 10.20542/2307-1494-2020-1-139-156Aktürk Ş. (2006). Turkish–Russian relations after the cold war (1992–2002). Turkish Studies. Vol. 7. No. 3. P. 337–364.Сучков М.А., Румачик И.А. Эволюция отношений Турции и ИГИЛ // Каспийский регион: политика, экономика, культура. 2018. №. 1 (54). С. 55–60.Berlinski C. (2010). Smile and smile: Turkey's feel-good foreign policy. World Affairs. Vol. 173. No. 2. P. 39–46. DOI: 10.3200/WAFS.173.2.39-46Сучков М.А., Ходынская-Голенищева М.С. Сравнительный анализ российских стратегий союзничества на Ближнем Востоке // Сравнительная политика. 2021. Т. 12. №. 1. С. 69–81. https://doi. org/10.24411/2221-3279-2021-10006Bibikova O. P. (2020). Interesy Turtsii v Idlibe [Turkish interests in Idlib]. Rossiya i musul'manskij mir. No. 2 (316). P. 70-80. DOI: 10.31249/rimm/2020.02.06Таки В. Зеркало друг для друга // Россия в глобальной политике. 2023. Т. 21. № 2. С. 104–118. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6439-2023-21-2-104-118Cengiz S. (2020). Assessing the Astana peace process for Syria: Actors, approaches, and differences. Contemporary Review of the Middle East. Vol. 7. No. 2. P. 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 2347798920901876Хасан А.А., Сейидли С.А. Идлиб в сирийском конфликте (2011–2020) // Вестник Института востоковедения РАН. 2021. №. 1. С. 225–237. DOI: 10.31696/2618-7302-2021-1-225-237Chekov A.D. (2014). Mirovoy opyt khimicheskogo razoruzheniya: uroki dlya Sirii [Global Record of Chemical Disarmament: Lessons for Syria]. Indeks bezopasnosti. Vol. 20. No. 1. P. 95–100.Чеков А.Д. Мировой опыт химического разоружения: уроки для Сирии // Индекс безопасности. 2014. Т. 20. №. 1. С. 95–100.Criss N.B., Güner S. (1999). Geopolitical Configurations: The Russia-Turkey-Iran Triangle. Security Dialogue. Vol. 30. No. 3. P. 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010699030003015Шерстюков С.А., Бодиштяну Н.В. Российско-турецкие отношения после 2015 г.: новые тренды, старые дилеммы // Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2021. Т. 65. №. 11. С. 88–96. DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-11-88-96Dal E.P. (2019). Status-seeking policies of middle powers in status clubs: the case of Turkey in the G20. Contemporary Politics. Vol. 25. No. 5. P. 586–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2019.162 7766Шлыков П.В. Турецкий кульбит // Россия в глобальной политике. 2023. Т. 21. № 3. С. 142–159. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6439-2023-21-3-142-159Demiryol T. (2015). Interdependence, balancing and conflict in Russian–Turkish relations. In: Klieman A. (ed.) Great powers and geopolitics: International affairs in a rebalancing world. Cham: Springer, 2015. P. 65–86. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-16289-8_4Aghaie Joobani H., Mousavipour M. Russia, Turkey, and Iran: Moving Towards Strategic Synergy in the Middle East? //Strategic Analysis. 2015. Vol. 39. No. 2. P. 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/0970 0161.2014.1000658Erşen E. (2017). Evaluating the fighter jet crisis in Turkish-Russian relations. Insight Turkey. Vol. 19. No. 4. P. 85–104. DOI: 10.25253/99.2017194.06Aktürk Ş. Relations between Russia and Turkey before, during, and after the failed coup of 2016 // Insight Turkey. 2019. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 97–114. DOI: 10.25253/99.2019214.06 Aktürk Ş. Toward a Turkish-Russian Axis? Conflicts in Georgia, Syria, and Ukraine, and Cooperation over Nuclear Energy // Insight Turkey. 2014. Vol. 16. No. 4. P. 13–22.Güvenç S., Özel S. (2012). NATO and Turkey in the post-Cold War world: between abandonment and entrapment. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. Vol. 12. No. 4. P. 533–553. DOI: 10.1080/ 14683857.2012.741845Aktürk Ş. Turkey’s role in the Arab spring and the Syrian conflict // Turkish policy quarterly. 2017. Vol. 15. No. 4. P. 87–96.Hill F., Taspinar O. (2006). Turkey and Russia: axis of the excluded? Survival. Vol. 48. No. 1. P. 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396330600594256Aktürk Ş. Turkish–Russian relations after the cold war (1992–2002) // Turkish Studies. 2006. Vol. 7. No. 3. P. 337–364.Hintz L. (2019). Rethinking Turkey’s ‘rapprochements’: Trouble with Germany and beyond. Survival. Vol. 61. No. 3. P. 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2019.1614787Berlinski C. Smile and smile: Turkey's feel-good foreign policy // World Affairs. 2010. Vol. 173. No. 2. P. 39–46. DOI: 10.3200/WAFS.173.2.39-46Kengerli Z. (2004). Geostrategicheskie interesy Turtsii na Kavkaze [Geostrategic interests of Turkey in the Caucasus]. Tsentral'naya Aziya i Kavkaz. No. 6 (36). P. 111–121.Cengiz S. Assessing the Astana peace process for Syria: Actors, approaches, and differences // Contemporary Review of the Middle East. 2020. Vol. 7. No. 2. P. 200–214. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/2347798920901876Khasan A.A., Seyidli S.A. (2021). Idlib v siriyskom konflikte (2011–2020) [Idlib in the Syrian conflict]. Vestnik Instituta vostokovedeniya RAN. No. 1. P. 225–237. DOI: 10.31696/2618-7302-2021-1- 225-237Criss N.B., Güner S. Geopolitical Configurations: The Russia-Turkey-Iran Triangle // Security Dialogue. 1999. Vol. 30. No. 3. P. 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010699030003015Köstem S. (2021). Russian-Turkish cooperation in Syria: geopolitical alignment with limits. Cambridge Review of International Affairs. Vol. 34. No. 6. P. 795–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.20 20.1719040Dal E.P. Status-seeking policies of middle powers in status clubs: the case of Turkey in the G20 // Contemporary Politics. 2019. Vol. 25. No. 5. P. 586–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.201 9.1627766Krickovic A., Zhang C. (2020). Fears of falling short versus anxieties of decline: Explaining Russia and China’s approach to status-seeking. The Chinese Journal of International Politics. Vol. 13. No. 2. P. 219–251. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poaa006Demiryol T. Interdependence, balancing and conflict in Russian–Turkish relations // Great powers and geopolitics: International affairs in a rebalancing world / Еd. by A. Klieman. Cham: Springer, 2015. P. 65–86. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-16289-8_4Larrabee S.F. (2010). Turkey's new geopolitics. Survival. Vol. 52. No. 2. P. 157–180. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00396331003764686Erşen E. Evaluating the fighter jet crisis in Turkish-Russian relations // Insight Turkey. 2017. Т. 19. No. 4. С. 85–104. DOI: 10.25253/99.2017194.06Larson D.W., Shevchenko A. (2014). Managing rising powers: The role of status concerns. In: // Paul T.V., Larson D.W., Wohlforth W.C. (eds) Status in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. P. 33–57. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107444409.004Güvenç S., Özel S. NATO and Turkey in the post-Cold War world: between abandonment and entrapment // Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. 2012. Vol. 12. No. 4. P. 533–553. DOI: 10.1080/ 14683857.2012.741845Larson D.W., Shevchenko A. (2019). Quest for status: Chinese and Russian foreign policy. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. 352 p. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvbnm3jdHill F., Taspinar O. Turkey and Russia: axis of the excluded? // Survival. 2006. Vol. 48. No. 1. P. 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396330600594256MacDonald P.K., Parent J.M. (2021). The status of status in world politics. World Politics. Vol. 73. No. 2. P. 358–391. doi:10.1017/S0043887120000301Hintz L. Rethinking Turkey’s ‘rapprochements’: Trouble with Germany and beyond // Survival. 2019. Vol. 61. No. 3. P. 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2019.1614787Menon R., Enders Wimbush S. (2007). The US and Turkey: End of an Alliance? Survival. Vol. 49. No. 2. P. 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396330701437785Köstem S. Russian-Turkish cooperation in Syria: geopolitical alignment with limits // Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 2021. Vol. 34. No. 6. P. 795–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2020. 1719040Mezhuyev B.V. (2019). Turkey, Russia and Europe from the Perspective of “Civilizational Realism”. Polis. Political Studies. No. 6. P. 53–66. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.06.05Krickovic A., Zhang C. Fears of falling short versus anxieties of decline: Explaining Russia and China’s approach to status-seeking // The Chinese Journal of International Politics. 2020. Vol. 13. No. 2. P. 219–251. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poaa006Murray M. (2018). The struggle for recognition in international relations: status, revisionism, and rising powers. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 281 p. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/978019087 8900.001.0001Larrabee S.F. Turkey's new geopolitics // Survival. 2010. Vol. 52. No. 2. P. 157–180. https://doi. org/10.1080/00396331003764686Nadein-Raevskiy V. (2020). Politika Turtsii na Blizhnem Vostoke [Policy of Turkey in the Middle East]. Puti k miru i bezopasnosti. No. 1 (58). P. 139–156. DOI: 10.20542/2307-1494-2020-1-139-156Larson D.W., Shevchenko A. Managing rising powers: The role of status concerns // Status in world politics / Еd. by Paul T. V., D. W. Larson, W. C. Wohlforth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. P. 33–57. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107444409.004Nesmashnyi A.D., Zhornist V.M., Safranchuk I.A. (2022). International Hierarchy and Functional Differentiation of States: Results of an Expert Survey. Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta. Vol. 15. No. 3. P. 7–38. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2022-olf2Larson D.W., Shevchenko A. Quest for status: Chinese and Russian foreign policy. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2019. 352 p. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvbnm3jdNeumann I. B. (2014). Status is cultural: Durkheimian Poles and Weberian Russians seek great-power status. In: Paul T.V., Larson D.W., Wohlforth W.C. (eds) Status in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P. 85–112. DOI:10.1017/CBO9781107444409.006MacDonald P.K., Parent J.M. The status of status in world politics // World Politics. 2021. Vol. 73. No. 2. P. 358–391. DOI:10.1017/S0043887120000301Öniş Z., Yılmaz Ş. (2016). Turkey and Russia in a shifting global order: cooperation, conflict and asymmetric interdependence in a turbulent region. Third World Quarterly. Vol. 37. No. 1. P. 71–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1086638Menon R., Enders Wimbush S. The US and Turkey: End of an Alliance? // Survival. 2007. Vol. 49. No. 2. P. 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396330701437785Paul T.V., Larson D.W., Wohlforth W. C. (2014). Status and World Order. In: Paul T.V., Larson D.W., Wohlforth W.C. (eds) Status in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P. 3–32. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107444409.002Murray M. The struggle for recognition in international relations: status, revisionism, and rising powers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. 281 p. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/ 9780190878900.001.0001Pukhov R.N. (2021). Burya na Kavkaze [Storm over the Caucasus]. Moscow: Tsentr analiza strategiy i tekhnologiy. 128 p.Nesmashnyi A.D., Zhornist V.M., Safranchuk I.A. International Hierarchy and Functional Differentiation of States: Results of an Expert Survey // Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta. 2022. Vol. 15. No. 3. P. 7–38. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2022-olf2Sherstyukov S.A., Bodishtyanu N.V. (2021). Rossiysko-turetskie otnosheniya posle 2015 g.: novye trendy, starye dilemmy [Russian-Turkish relations after 2015: new trends and old dilemmas]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 65. No. 11. P. 88–96. DOI: 10.20542/ 0131-2227-2021-65-11-88-96Neumann I.B. Status is cultural: Durkheimian Poles and Weberian Russians seek great-power status. // Status in world politics / Ed. by Paul T. V., D. W. Larson, W. C. Wohlforth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. P. 85–112. DOI:10.1017/CBO9781107444409.006Shlykov P.V. (2023). Turetskiy kul'bit [Turkish flip-flop]. Rossiya v global'noy politike. Vol. 21. No 3. P. 142–159. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6439-2023-21-3-142-159Öniş Z., Yılmaz Ş. Turkey and Russia in a shifting global order: cooperation, conflict and asymmetric interdependence in a turbulent region // Third World Quarterly. 2016. Vol. 37. No. 1. P. 71–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1086638Suchkov M.A., Khodynskaya-Golenishcheva M.S. (2021). Sravnitel'nyy analiz rossiyskikh strategiy soyuznichestva na Blizhnem Vostoke. Sravnitel'naya politika. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 69–81. https://doi. org/10.24411/2221-3279-2021-10006Paul T.V., Larson D.W., Wohlforth W.C. Status and World Order // Status in world / Ed. by Paul T.V., D.W. Larson, W.C. Wohlforth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. P. 3–32. DOI:10.1017/ CBO9781107444409.002Suchkov M.A., Rumachik I.A. (2018). Evolyutsiya otnosheniy Turtsii i IGIL [Evolution of relations between Turkey and ISIS]. Kaspiyskiy region: politika, ekonomika, kul'tura. No. 1 (54). P. 55–60.Tajfel H. Social categorization, social identity and social comparison // Differentiation between social group / Ed. by H. Tajfel. L.: Academic Press, 1978. P. 61–76.Tajfel H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison. In: Tajfel H. (ed.) Differentiation between social group. London: Academic press. P. 61–76.Warhola J.W., Mitchell W.A. The Warming of Turkish-Russian Relations: Motives and Implications // Demokratizatsiya. 2006. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 127–143.Taki V. Zerkalo drug dlya druga // Rossiya v global'noy politike. 2023. T. 21. № 2. S. 104–118. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6439-2023-21-2-104-118White D., Herzog M. Examining state capacity in the context of electoral authoritarianism, regime formation and consolidation in Russia and Turkey // Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. 2016. Vol. 16. No. 4. P. 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1242891Warhola J.W., Mitchell W.A. (2006). The Warming of Turkish-Russian Relations: Motives and Implications. Demokratizatsiya. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 127–143.Wolf R. Respect and disrespect in international politics: the significance of status recognition // International Theory. 2011. Vol. 3. No. 1. P. 105–142. DOI:10.1017/S1752971910000308White D., Herzog M. (2016). Examining state capacity in the context of electoral authoritarianism, regime formation and consolidation in Russia and Turkey. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. Vol. 16. No. 4. P. 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1242891Yorulmazlar E., Turhan E. Turkish foreign policy towards the Arab Spring: Between Western orientation and regional disorder // Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. 2015. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 337– 352. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2015.1063805Wolf R. (2011). Respect and disrespect in international politics: the significance of status recognition. International Theory. Vol. 3. No. 1. P. 105–142. DOI:10.1017/S1752971910000308Yorulmazlar E., Turhan E. (2015). Turkish foreign policy towards the Arab Spring: Between Western orientation and regional disorder. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 337–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2015.1063805Yorulmazlar E., Turhan E. (2015). Turkish foreign policy towards the Arab Spring: Between Western orientation and regional disorder. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 337–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2015.1063805

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.