Middle powers’ grand strategy in a great power competition: a comparative analysis of Turkey and Australia

The growing multipolarity urges middle powers to elaborate a grand strategy that balances their regional aspirations with the systemic constraints and enhance their capabilities by relying on the partnership with fellow powers. In this context, middle powers gradually moved away from multilateralism to face great power competition. Aiming to comprehend how middle powers can actually develop a grand strategy beyond multilateralism, and seeking to comprehend whether secondary states are capable of formulating a strategic posture, the paper expands Ramon Pacheco Pardo’s framework to examine whether all middle powers possess the capacity to enact a grand strategy. Reconstructing the Turkish and Australian posture in the great power competition, respectively the Euro-Russian rivalry for Ankara and United States (US)-China rivalry for Canberra, the paper compares the grand strategy developed by the two middle powers. Arguing that not all middle powers are capable of enacting a grand strategy, the paper contends that while Turkey has embraced a transactionalist grand strategy that aims to take advantage of the rivalry to enhance its status, on the other hand, Australia has followed a US-based minilateralism, accepting the constraints of its status and capacity to the Sino-American rivalry.