The world of international relations has long been a dance with the devil – a reality dominated by realpolitik, a cold, calculating approach that prioritizes national interest above all else. While the allure of immediate gain and raw power holds undeniable sway, the challenges of the 21st century demand a more nuanced approach, one that acknowledges the strategic role of moral values in crafting a stable and prosperous future.

Closing the gap between realpolitik and moral values is not simply a lofty ideal, but a "principal and political necessity," as highlighted by Ibrahim Kalın, the chief of Türkiye’s National Intelligence Organization (MIT), in a piece titled "Hybrid Threats and Strategic Foresight in the Age of Uncertainty."

Pure realpolitik, focused solely on short-term advantages, often sows the seeds of future problems, while pure moralism can be naive and impractical. True leadership lies in finding the intersection between national interest and ethical principles. This means pursuing national security and economic well-being while also considering the broader implications of actions taken.

In other words, the path forward lies in a more holistic approach – one that recognizes that morality and self-interest are not mutually exclusive. Moral considerations can ensure policies deliver sustainable advantages in the long run, from security to diplomacy, in every field. This may seem a bit gloomy, but this is the last option to trust and invest in, given the world’s bleak future.

It is safe to say that the world’s future is pretty bleak. Worse, today is even bleaker than the future. Every traditional concept is being reimagined. Post-truth has been a phenomenon for some time, but it is more than that. We are in the middle of an extreme transition toward something unpredictable. There is no foreshadowing. No clue. Nothing. It is good to see the old and rigid structures of the world order being reshaped, but what is coming after?

Many, therefore, deem our times as "the age of uncertainty." I also call it "the labyrinthine age" – an age we will remain stuck in without strategic foresight, or i.e. the strategic harmony of moral and realpolitik.

Having explored this, we now turn to a crucial question: Why is such strategic harmony so important?

Picture a world where moral considerations are absent. Alliances would change like the desert sands, promises would be broken with no consequences, and the pursuit of national interest would justify any action, no matter how brutal. This is the dystopian vision of a purely realpolitik world. History provides numerous examples of societies that have experienced a breakdown in the moral guidance that has traditionally been expected of them. In the present day, there are also instances of such a breakdown, which can be observed in the absence of a clear moral direction.

Israel’s war on Gaza has so far killed over 34,000 people. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has confirmed 30,457 civilian casualties resulting from Russia's invasion of Ukraine as of Feb. 15, 2024. It is noted that these figures may actually be higher. The ongoing civil war in Yemen, now in its 10th year, has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Yemenis and has triggered a severe humanitarian crisis. The U.N. has recorded the casualties of the Syrian civil war as 350,209 (minimum, identified only). Many, small or big, can be added to these war statistics.

Alternatively, we could discuss the less visible, but equally problematic, aspects of immorality, such as the impact of asymmetrical competitions, wild capitalism, power struggles, discrimination and more. These factors all contribute to significant burdens and challenges for societies.

However, it is important to acknowledge the reality of the world we live in. It is a messy place. Morality and ideals are noble aspirations, but in the hard-headed sphere of international relations, a dose of realism is often the bitter pill we need to swallow. This is where realpolitik steps in.

Realpolitik, a German term meaning "realistic politics," emphasizes practical considerations over ideals in foreign policy. Firstly, realpolitik forces us to confront the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. It compels us to acknowledge the power imbalances and competing interests that dominate international relations. It doesn't equate to ruthlessness. It simply acknowledges that cooperation often serves national interests better than conflict. It doesn't preclude ethical considerations entirely. It simply argues that morality should be a guiding principle, not a rigid constraint. Realpolitik, then, is not a celebration of cynicism; it's a recognition of reality. It reminds us that effective foreign policy requires a clear understanding of national interests, a willingness to compromise, and the ability to leverage power strategically.

The challenge, here, lies in achieving the harmony of morals and realpolitik. Simply invoking moral principles without considering the realities of power dynamics can lead to naive idealism.

The key lies in strategic morality and the application of ethical principles while acknowledging the constraints and opportunities of the international system. This requires an understanding of power relations, a willingness to engage in diplomacy, and the ability to find common ground where possible. Once, late American theologian and ethicist Reinhold Niebuhr said, "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." The key lies in realizing this difference.

The Türkiye example

It has been some time since Türkiye has adopted pragmatism and realism as the primary guiding principles in its foreign policy. While the country has sought to maintain its traditional alliance with Western countries, it has also been engaged in a challenging journey toward the East, including Russia. (Please forgive me, as I am often uncertain regarding the appropriate categorization of Russia in the East-West debates.)

In summary, Türkiye's foreign policy is driven by a desire to maximize its interests through realpolitik. The country's adept maneuvering skills have occasionally led to criticism at home and abroad regarding discussions of idealism. However, there are certain issues where the country has demonstrated a consistent stance. These include the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Cyprus dispute and the Azerbaijan-Armenia rift, among others.

It would be inaccurate to suggest that Türkiye is drifting away from its traditional alliances, whether in the East or the West. For instance, it openly supports NATO’s expansion, while it looks forward to pushing for renewed EU accession talks or seeking more cooperation with Russia. Partnerships with Gulf states are also on the table. In Latin America or Africa, one can see Türkiye. China is another partner in some fields. If we wish to suggest that Türkiye is drifting away from a particular approach, one might suggest that the country has distanced itself from the tenets of romanticism.

Well, is this "realpolitik defender" and "romanticism hater" Türkiye lacking in moral values?

The answer is no!

Fatima Gülhan Abushanab, an advisor to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has developed the term "Muslim Realist" to describe Türkiye as a country that strives to strike a graceful balance in a world that has become a giant ball of chaos around conflicts, alliances, power plays and many other factors, and thereby contribute to the establishment of lasting peace. Thanks to this concept, she refers to the fact that Türkiye is trying to fight evil with a realistic perspective and a state mind that has adopted the sacred moral red lines of the holy religion of Islam.

For example, in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Türkiye has balanced realpolitik with moral concerns. It has maintained open communication channels with both Moscow and Kyiv, facilitating dialogue in hopes of ending the conflict. While condemning civilian casualties caused by the Kremlin, Ankara has recognized the importance of maintaining diplomatic relations with the Russian administration. A purely moralistic stance might have severed communication with Russia, hindering peace efforts. Conversely, a purely realpolitik-driven approach could have led Türkiye to align with the more powerful party. By pursuing a balanced approach, Türkiye has established itself as a mediator in the region. This is how it was able to organize the famous Istanbul talks.

To give another example, Türkiye's approach to EU affairs is characterized by a balanced stance. While the country’s relationship with the European Union is thorny enough, Ankara remains open to a positive agenda with Brussels while raising concerns over issues such as discrimination and social problems. It does not simply acquiesce to all EU demands but instead emphasizes its desire for full membership based on a mutually beneficial platform. Shortly, it seeks fair treatment, rather than biased approaches, within the bloc.

Türkiye's position within the United Nations exemplifies its ability to balance realpolitik and moral considerations as well. The country is a staunch supporter of the U.N. while also advocating for systemic change within the organization. Ankara believes that the current structure of the U.N. leads to injustices and is vocal about the need for reforms. This does not imply a call for the dissolution of the U.N., but rather a call for modifications such as the elimination of the privilege of the five permanent members of the Security Council, to promote a fairer world.

In short, the world we live in today calls for a strategic balance between moral values and realpolitik in international relations. This strategic balance isn't just a theoretical concept; it's a practical necessity for dealing with challenges and building a more peaceful and just world. Otherwise, it will be hard for states to find a way out in the labyrinthine age. The proliferation of conflict zones and common security threats has become a matter of concern, and this concern is particularly acute in the context of the labyrinthine age.