Evolution of Power Concept(s) in International Relations

Assoc. Prof. Buğra Sarı is an academic specializing in International Relations, with a focus on the concept of power and Turkish foreign policy. He earned his bachelor's degree in International Relations from Middle East Technical University (ODTÜ) in 2010, his master's degree in Middle East and African Studies from Gazi University in 2012, and his Ph.D. in International Relations from Bilkent University in 2018. Dr. Sarı currently serves as an Associate Professor at Mersin University's Department of International Relations. He has previously held positions at Gazi University and the Turkish National Police Academy's Institute of Security Sciences. His academic contributions include numerous articles:  -Sarı, Buğra (2023) “Security Aspect of the Integration in Turkic World under the Organization of Turkic States”, Insight Turkey, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 139-161. (ESCI) -Sarı, Buğra (2023) “From Prescription to Treatment: The Disciplinary (under)Achievement of IR in Turkey”, All Azimuth: Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 261-280. (ESCI) -Sarı, Buğra (2022) “Culture of Insecurity and Production of Foreign Policy Crises: Turkey’s Sèvres Syndrome and Syrian Support for the PKK during the 1998 October Crisis”, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 138-157. (SSCI) -Sarı, Buğra (2020) “Not only Relational but also Structural: Revisiting the Resolution of the 1998 October Crisis through Elements of Structural Power”, Journal of Political Power, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 106-122. (SSCI) -Sarı, Buğra (2019) “Making Sense of the New Episode of Great Power Rivalry in Africa through Neorealist Lenses: Sino-US Competition”, Meridiano 47- Journal of Global Studies, Vol. 20, pp. 1-16. (ESCI) -Sarı, Buğra (2018) “The Strategic Interaction between Turkey and Iran in the Syrian Crisis: A Game Theoretical Analysis of the Time Frame from 2011 to 2015”, Bilig, No. 87, pp. 203-227. (SSCI)

• 1.1. The State of Power in the Discipline.- 1.2. Organization of the Study and Questions.- 1.3. Methods of Inquiry.- 2. Limitations Within Current State of the Literature.- 2.1. Power as an Ambiguous Concept.- 2.1.1.  ‘Power Over’ or ‘Power To’.- 2.1.2. ‘Power’ or ‘Influence’.- 2.1.3. ‘Zero-Sum’ or ‘Non-Zero Sum’.- 2.2. Traditions on Political Power.- 2.3. Power in International Relations Limited to Weberian Tradition .- 2.4. Power in International Relations Beyond Weberian Tradition.- 2.5. Remarks.- 3. Historicization of Power in the Discipline.- 3.1. Power in Positivist Approaches.- 3.1.1. Inauguration: The Possessional Power.- 3.1.2. The Rise of Relational Power on Criticisms to the Possessional Power.- 3.1.2.1. Methodological Criticism.- 3.1.2.2. Practical Limitations.- 3.1.2.3. The Relational Power as a Solution.- 3.1.2.4. International Political Economy Aspect of Relational Power: Asymmetric Interdependence.- 3.1.3. The Need for a New Face: The North-South Debate and the Institutional Power.- 3.1.4. Shared Characteristics of Positivist Power Conceptualizations.- 3.2. Power in Post-Positivist Approaches.- 3.2.1. International Relations Theory in the Post-Cold War Era.- 3.2.1.1. The End of Cold War.- 3.2.1.2. The Third Great Debate.- 3.2.2. Power in Positivism and Post-Positivism: Epistemological and Ontological Differences.- 3.2.3. Critical Utilization of Power: The Structural Power.- 3.2.4. Discursive Turn: The Poststructural Power.- 3.3. Traditions on Power and Concept(s) of Power in International Relations.- 3.4. Remarks.- 4. Comparison of Power Concepts on A Case: The 1998 October Crisis between Türkiye and Syria.- 4.1. The Case.- 4.2. Possessional Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.3. Relational Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.4. Institutional Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.5. Structural Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.6. Poststructural Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.7. Comparison: Strengths and Weaknesses of Power Concepts.- 5.Conclusion.