GEOPOLITICAL PARADIGMS FROM THE TWENTIETH TO THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY: THE IMPLICATIONS OF SYKES–PICOT AND THE GREATER MIDDLE EAST PROJECT FOR SOVEREIGNTY, BORDERS, AND STATE-BUILDING

The Sykes-Picot Agreement, established in the early twentieth century, and the Greater Middle East Project, a geopolitical transformation initiative of the twenty-first century, have permanently influenced sovereignty understandings, border-drawing practices, and state-building processes in the Middle Eastern geography. This research comparatively examines the effects of these two geopolitical paradigms on the concepts of sovereignty, borders, and state-building. The central research question focuses on the mechanisms through which these paradigms shaped regional states' foreign policy capacities, security strategies, and alliance preferences. The research hypothesis suggests that despite employing different tools and discourses, both initiatives share a similar interventionist logic that limits the sovereignty capacity of regional states. The study adopts a qualitative research design and operates within the conceptual framework of critical geopolitics theory. Data were collected through historical institutionalism, discourse analysis, and comparative foreign policy examination methods, and interpreted using thematic analysis technique. Research findings reveal that the Sykes-Picot order established the foundation of regional instability by creating artificial borders and fragmented sovereignty structures. The Greater Middle East Project, while attempting legitimization through democratization and reform discourses, produced outcomes that further weakened state capacity in practice. The theoretical contribution of this research lies in demonstrating that critical geopolitics perspective provides a functional framework for understanding Middle Eastern state-building processes. Both paradigms redefined the concept of sovereignty along the axis of global power balances by excluding local dynamics. Findings demonstrate that geopolitical engineering initiatives permanently shape regional orders and constitute structural determinants of foreign policy behaviors. At the policy level, the research emphasizes that achieving regional stability requires strengthening local actors and eliminating external impositions. The conclusion drawn is that internally constructed orders, rather than externally imposed ones, can provide sustainable stability. The study offers original contribution to Middle East geopolitics literature by presenting an analytical model centered on foreign policy regarding the continuity-rupture relationship between twentieth and twenty-first century geopolitical paradigms.