There is a recurrent state crisis in Turkey. The failed July 15, 2016, coup attempt exposed the failure of available mechanisms to tackle this crisis, which surfaced at a time of systemic transformation from parliamentary rule to an executive presidential system in Turkey. The ruling political elite suggested this transformation as a panacea to bureaucratic tutelage, which was considered as a barrier to an effective government. The shift from an administrative to entrepreneurial mode of executive rule was designed to defeat the crisis through improving good governance. In this sense, the presidential system brought a new state structure and majoritarian understanding of politics, with the president holding the monopoly on power at the center. While the shift to the presidential system is still a process in the making, it is far from addressing the state crisis and the toxic atmosphere of political polarization and deinstitutionalization in Turkey. This special issue on state crisis in Turkey provides snapshots of the crisis across different realms of the state Senem B. Çevik’s article examines Turkey’s global influence from a soft power perspective. The concept of soft power in international affairs was popularized at the end of the Cold War with the expansion of the liberal hegemony. Soft power aims to extend a country’s influence at times of peace and thus prevent wars and conflict. By this token, soft power promotes the values of the liberal hegemony and is thus defined by those values. As the foundations of power moved away from hard resources to softer resources after the end of the Cold War, governance, democracy, and cultural values became indispensable in determining a nation’s global influence. A nation’s tangible and intangible assets are assumed to produce attraction and by extension influence. The founding father of soft power, Joseph Nye, argues that countries may obtain the outcomes they want in world politics because other countries are admiring their values, emulating their example, and aspiring to their level of prosperity and openness. Despite the growing popularity of the use of soft power since the end of the Cold War, the trend has been in a downward spiral over the last few years with the resurgence of hard power politics in global affairs. Although soft power has still not fully fallen out of favor, it has received significant pushback from authoritarian regimes and illiberal democracies. For example, in a June 2019 interview with the Financial Times, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that the liberal order has become obsolete. Thus, the appeal of hard power in international relations and the apparent decline of liberal hegemony have shifted discussions on soft power. Today, a plethora of new actors are employing new methods to expand their global influence. Given this momentous change in discussions regarding soft power, this article examines Turkey’s current soft power capacity and attributes by analyzing its soft power resources in the period from

中文翻译：

---

土耳其的国家问题

土耳其反复出现国家危机。2016 年 7 月 15 日失败的政变企图暴露了应对这场危机的可用机制的失败，这场危机在土耳其从议会统治到行政总统制的系统性转变时期浮出水面。执政的政治精英建议将这种转变作为应对官僚监管的灵丹妙药，官僚监管被认为是有效政府的障碍。行政规则从行政模式到创业模式的转变旨在通过改善善治来战胜危机。从这个意义上说，总统制带来了一种新的国家结构和对政治的多数主义理解，以总统对权力的垄断为中心。虽然向总统制的转变仍在进行中，它远未解决土耳其的国家危机以及政治两极分化和去机构化的有害气氛。这个关于土耳其国家危机的特刊提供了国家不同领域的危机快照。塞内姆 B. Çevik 的文章从软实力的角度审视了土耳其的全球影响力。冷战末期，随着自由主义霸权的扩张，国际事务中的软实力概念得到普及。软实力旨在在和平时期扩大一个国家的影响力，从而防止战争和冲突。因此，软实力促进了自由主义霸权的价值观，并因此被这些价值观所定义。随着冷战结束后权力基础从硬资源转向软资源，治理、民主、文化价值观在决定一个国家的全球影响力方面变得不可或缺。假设一个国家的有形和无形资产会产生吸引力并由此产生影响。软实力之父约瑟夫·奈 (Joseph Nye) 认为，各国可能会在世界政治中获得他们想要的结果，因为其他国家正在欣赏他们的价值观，效仿他们的榜样，并渴望达到他们的繁荣和开放水平。尽管自冷战结束以来软实力的使用越来越受欢迎，但随着硬实力政治在全球事务中的死灰复燃，这种趋势在过去几年一直呈螺旋式下降。尽管软实力还没有完全失宠，但它已经受到了威权政权和非自由民主国家的严重抵制。例如，在 2019 年 6 月接受《金融时报》采访时，俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京声称自由主义秩序已经过时。因此，硬实力在国际关系中的吸引力和自由主义霸权的明显衰落已经改变了对软实力的讨论。今天，大量新参与者正在采用新方法来扩大其全球影响力。鉴于有关软实力的讨论发生了这一重大变化，本文通过分析土耳其从 许多新行为者正在采用新方法扩大其全球影响力。鉴于有关软实力的讨论发生了这一重大变化，本文通过分析土耳其从 许多新行为者正在采用新方法扩大其全球影响力。鉴于有关软实力的讨论发生了这一重大变化，本文通过分析土耳其从