An interview  with  Prof. Dr. Mehmet Seyfettin EROL, President of ANKASAM (Ankara Center for Crisis and Policy Studies) for Azerbaijan Today magazine.

Questions prepared by Ali Askerli.

A.T.: The ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have significantly reshaped the global security environment. In your view, are we witnessing the emergence of a new international order, or are these conflicts merely accelerating existing geopolitical trends?

S.E.: Rather than the birth of a new international order, we are witnessing an amorphous transition phase that we could term Multipolar Fluidity. This is because the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have not only accelerated existing geopolitical trends but have also rendered the post-World War II institutional framework entirely dysfunctional.

The most critical dynamic in this process is the Flexibilization of Geopolitical Blocs. The rigid ideological alliances of the past are giving way to hybrid bonds, where states simultaneously form interest-based partnerships with different actors. The Global South bloc has generated an area of Geopolitical Arbitrage against Western-centric financial hegemony.

This fluidity is completely fragmenting global trade routes and energy corridors. While traditional arteries like the Suez Canal and the Red Sea harbor chronic security risks, the global trade and energy map is being redrawn along geopolitical axes. Russia, under Western sanctions, is redirecting its energy to Asia via the Northern Sea Route. Meanwhile, the Caspian-centered Middle Corridor, passing through the Turkic World, is transforming into a vital transit backbone between China and Europe. While Western-backed alternative projects like the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor remain suspended due to regional wars, trade routes are shifting away from efficiency-driven models toward purely friend-shoring logistics.

This fragmentation is undoubtedly shaping the global security architecture of the post-United Nations era. In the face of the UN’s legal and institutional paralysis, two possible scenarios emerge. In the first scenario, micro-alliances will replace global law, and regional security will be maintained through bilateral military balances via collective pacts, such as a consolidated NATO, AUKUS, or an expanding Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. In the second scenario, the capacity for global crisis resolution will be entirely lost; states and non-state armed actors will establish temporary coalitions and hybrid security architectures based on minilateralism to protect critical infrastructure and trade routes.

Consequently, current conflicts are deepening the structural fractures of the old order. They are pushing the global system toward a fragmented power and logistics ecosystem that lacks a single leader, remains unstable, and continuously generates conflict through hybrid-proxy wars.

A.T.: Türkiye has sought to maintain a delicate balance between NATO commitments and its relations with Russia, while also playing an active role in regional diplomacy. How sustainable is this balancing strategy in the current geopolitical climate? 

S.E.: Türkiye’s sensitive balance policy between its NATO commitments and Russia is not a temporary tactic, but a sustainable and mandatory Strategic Autonomy move that plugs structural gaps in the global system. In the current phase of Global Multipolar Fluidity, the need for rational actors to prevent blind conflicts between poles increases daily. Accordingly, Türkiye has assumed the mission of the “Balancer of Instability” at the center of geopolitical fault lines. Ankara acts as a global insurance policy, overcoming systemic bottlenecks with its constructive diplomacy centered on security, stability, prosperity, and a win-win approach.

The most tangible element reinforcing this role is Türkiye’s position as a Critical Connectivity Hub on the global logistics map. Where traditional routes between the West and Asia are blocked, the trans-Caspian Middle Corridor keeps China-Europe trade uninterrupted, secure, fast, and stable. Simultaneously, the Development Road Corridor project, which connects the Gulf region and Iraq to Europe via Türkiye, constructs a new, conflict-free, alternative economic backbone focused on shared prosperity for global trade and energy lines.

As structural cracks between the Western and Eurasian blocs grow, both sides will remain dependent on Türkiye’s rational mediation to prevent hot conflicts, protect global supply chains, and keep diplomatic back-channel communication open. In conclusion, Türkiye will resolutely maintain its role as a founding, stability-generating balancing actor in an era of vulnerabilities, standing at the very center of global trade corridors with its military deterrence within NATO, its unique position at the Eurasian intersection, and its logistical and economic flexibility.

A.T.: The confrontation between the United States and Iran carries the risk of expanding into a prolonged military conflict. What would be the likely geopolitical consequences for the Middle East, and how might such a conflict affect the strategic interests of Türkiye? 

S.E.: Despite the fragile ceasefire, the tension between the US and Iran continues as a “Controlled Attrition Crisis” where the parties test one another, rather than escalating into an all-out war. Not only do regional and global dynamics prohibit a major military showdown, but the US, even acting jointly with Israel, cannot achieve a definitive outcome in this asymmetric geography. In this respect, the process could turn into a second Russia-Ukraine example, and Iran may transform into an arena where proxy wars become much more intensified. Within this scope, we can state that the crisis and conflict/war could evolve into an asymmetric war of attrition backed by Russia and China supporting Iran behind the scenes, while remaining limited to precise pinpoint operations by the US-Israel axis.On the other hand, a potential loss of control carries the risk of spilling the crisis beyond the Middle East, triggering a vast “Intercontinental Instability Belt” that encompasses the Caucasus, Central Asia, and South Asia. Such a rupture would directly target the regional logistics and energy vision of Türkiye, which holds vital interests in these geographies. In particular, the Middle Corridor, which has gained further importance against the Houthis’ actions in the Red Sea, and the Development Road Project, designed to connect the Gulf to Europe via Iraq, could be disrupted due to security risks, leading to blocked trade routes and compromised energy supply security.Faced with this multidimensional threat matrix, Ankara therefore pursues a proactive policy based on a “Preventive Doctrine” that thwarts such a devastating crisis from the outset rather than confronting it later. To ensure the uninterrupted flow of global trade and energy lines, Türkiye appears poised to accelerate its roles as a “Soothing Reflex”, a “Reconciliatory Diplomacy Mechanism”, and a practitioner of “Shuttle Diplomacy” in the upcoming period. Thus, acting as a geopolitical insurance policy, Ankara will both secure these massive corridors and consolidate its strategic autonomy as a rational balancer between the parties.

A.T.: The United States will soon hold its midterm elections. If a military confrontation with Iran were to become prolonged, how might this influence President Trump’s political standing, public approval, and the electoral prospects of the Republican Party? 

S.E.: An prolonged military conflict with Iran ahead of the upcoming midterm elections in the US has transformed into a “Geopolitical Shackle” that directly threatens President Trump’s political future and the Republican Party’s congressional majority. Trump’s core campaign promise in both 2016 and 2024 to “End Endless Wars” has suffered a structural fracture due to the asymmetric futility on the Iranian front. This paradox has indeed triggered a “Promise Inflation and Rhetorical Attrition” among American voters, dragging Trump’s public approval ratings down to the 34% band.

The global energy shocks and instability in the Persian Gulf brought by the prolonged conflict are felt directly in the US domestic market as “War Inflation.” This situation weakens the economy card, which is Trump’s strongest asset. Although a temporary “rally ’round the flag” effect emerged in public opinion, the extension of operations has dragged the process into an “Attrition Impasse.” Voters have begun drawing a direct link between military expenditures and their declining standard of living.

The toll of this scenario on the Republican Party in the midterm elections is a “Centrifugal Syndrome.” To protect their fragile majorities in Congress, some Republican candidates have begun putting “Strategic Distance” between themselves and Trump’s war path to avoid voter backlash; some have even acted jointly with Democrats to restrict the White House’s war powers.

Even though Trump deploys an “Agenda-Diversion Engineering” that triggers domestic political fault lines and election security debates to consolidate his base, the prolonged war with Iran paralyzes Republican decision-making mechanisms in Congress. Consequently, the deadlock over the military budget in the Senate and rising asymmetric costs push the risk of paying a “Security Invoice at the Ballot Box” to its peak for the Republican Party in the upcoming midterms. The lingering crisis shakes Trump’s perception as a charismatic leader, offering Democrats a historic “Geopolitical Leverage” to reclaim Congress.

A.T.: Considering the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, growing U.S.-China strategic competition, and increasing instability in several regions, which geopolitical developments do you believe are most likely to shape global politics over the next five to ten years?

S.E.: In the five-to-ten-year projection ahead, global politics is entering a phase of Asymmetric Polarization and Tectonic Multi-Crisis, rather than a bipolar static cold war, where power centers constantly shift and alliances become fluid. The wars of attrition in Ukraine and the Middle East, along with the US-China rivalry, are dismantling the foundational elements of the current global architecture, triggering three core geopolitical developments that will shape the upcoming period.

First, the model of Geographical Bloc-building comes to the fore in global trade and energy lines. Global supply chains and energy routes are evolving into a framework of security-oriented Friend-shoring and a War of Corridors, rather than operating on liberal free-market principles. Instabilities in traditional maritime straits such as the Strait of Hormuz, the Red Sea, and the Strait of Malacca bring terrestrial and asymmetric routes to the forefront. In this process, a global backbone war will take place between China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the West-backed India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC), and the trans-Caspian Middle Corridor and Development Road Project, at the center of which Türkiye is located. Actors controlling the logistics and energy corridors will be the rule-makers of the new era.

Second, the process of Proxy Wars of Attrition and the collapse of nuclear deterrence is accelerating. The examples of Ukraine and the Middle East have initiated an era of Permanent Hybrid Warfare, where great powers exhaust one another through proxy forces and asymmetric instruments in regional crisis zones, rather than engaging in direct conflict. This situation renders the nuclear disarmament treaties and deterrence architecture remaining from the Cold War entirely dysfunctional. In the next decade, the frequent occurrence of micro-conventional conflicts conducted under a nuclear umbrella, particularly along the Asia-Pacific and Eastern Europe axes, and the quest of regional powers to develop their own nuclear capacities will form the most fragile fault line of global politics.

Finally, the trend of technological sovereignty and Critical Raw Material Nationalism will divide the global order. The geopolitical competition of the future will be determined not only by geographical borders but also by the hegemony war over artificial intelligence, quantum computing, semiconductors, and the green energy transition. The supply security of minerals such as rare earth elements, lithium, and cobalt, which are essential for the production of these technologies, will give rise to resource nationalism. The bloc-building to be developed by the US and its allies against China’s monopolistic position in supply chains will split the global economy in terms of technological standards. Consequently, the next decade will be a period in which international law gives way to Geopolitical Opportunism. In this fluid order, mid-sized global insurance actors capable of managing risks, securing logistical transit routes, and conducting asymmetric diplomacy will play a key role in the balance between great powers.