Comparative study of Iranian and Turkish cultural diplomacy in Iraq (2003 to 2020)
Subject Areas : International Relations
parisa pourali
1
(Islamic Culture and Communication Organization)
mohammadreza dehshiri
2
(Faculty member of the School of International Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Director of the National Center for Globalization Studies)
mohammadreza ghaedi
3
(Associate Professor of Shiraz Azad University)
hasan khodaverdi
4
(Assistant Professor, Azad University, South Tehran Branch)
Keywords: Iran, Soft power, Iraq, Turkey, Cultural diplomacy, Neo-Ottomanism,
Abstract :
Iran and Turkey, as two influential powers in the developments in the Middle East, are trying to advance their cultural diplomacy in Iraq according to the nature of their government, goals and aspirations. The main question of the research is what are the effective characteristics of the cultural diplomacy of Iran and Turkey in Iraq in the years 2003 to 2020? The hypothesis is that Iranian cultural diplomacy in Iraq after 2003 has been proposed with the approach of Shiism, the axis of resistance and urban Iran as opposed to Turkish cultural diplomacy with the approach of Turkish nationalism and neo-Ottomanism. On this basis, each of these governments is trying to exert influence in Iraq with the approach of soft power and cultural diplomacy. In this way, Iran and Turkey have different conditions, opportunities, threats and tools to advance their cultural diplomacy. The research findings indicate that Iran is in a better position than Turkey in terms of conditions, opportunities and tools but the focus on Shiism and the issue of resistance in Iraq has led to little attention paid to other features of cultural diplomacy. In contrast, Turkey, with its utilitarian and opportunistic approach, has been able to make the most of it from tools such as Kurdish language and literature, media diplomacy, tourism development, scientific and educational topics, etc. through careful planning and gained more influence in Iraq. Data analysis was done by descriptive-analytical method and data collection was done by library method.
_||_