Russia and Turkey in the early 21st century: transformation of bilateral interaction models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the article, the author undertakes an examination of three distinct periods in the history of Russian-Turkish relations. From a chronological perspective, these periods encompass the 2000s, the 2010s, and the first half of the 2020s. By the end of the first quarter of the 21st century, Russia and Turkey had begun to accord a higher level of priority to their relations with each other in a number of areas, including diplomatic interaction at the global and regional levels, trade and economic relations, energy and military-technical cooperation. This situation starkly contrasts with the late 1990s, when Turkey demonstrated a tendency to align with the “collective West” in a manner driven by both inertia and ideology. The author posits that Russian-Turkish relations have undergone a dynamic transformation over the past quarter of a century, while each of the periods under consideration exhibiting a unique constellation of complementarity and competition. These two aspects defined the respective models of bilateral relations in each period. Existing research focuses mainly on various discrete aspects of the relationship between the two countries – be it diplomatic interaction, energy, or issues of intertwined or competing interests in specific hotspots and regions such as Syria, Libya, the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Caucasus. At the same time, a comprehensive analysis of the driving forces behind the transformation of Russia-Turkey relations is still lacking in academic publications on Turkey. In order to present such an analysis, this article draws on a number of important primary sources, including official documents of Russian and Turkish state agencies and structures involved in the implementation of foreign policy, national statistics, publications of news agencies, and leading media.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".