Introduction
The climate crisis continues to stand as one of the most complex global challenges of the 21st century. Managing this crisis relates directly not only to scientific and technological solutions but also to diplomacy and mediation capacity. While developed countries face expectations for higher reduction targets and financial contributions proportional to their historical emission responsibilities, developing countries foreground demands for just transition, adaptation capacity, and social protection for vulnerable groups. These deep divergences of perspective keep climate negotiations under constant risk of deadlock and increase the need for mediating actors capable of establishing simultaneous dialogue with different parties, building trust, and developing technical solution proposals.
Türkiye is one of the rare countries that can respond to this need. By virtue of both its geographic position and its diplomatic experience, it possesses the capacity to bridge different blocs. Indeed, in recent years, the establishment of the grain corridor during the Russia-Ukraine war, mediation initiatives between Somalia and Ethiopia, and the expanding cooperation network in Africa and Central Asia have concretely demonstrated that Türkiye can assume an effective facilitating role in multilateral diplomacy. Türkiye also conducted its G20 presidency in 2015 in a manner that encompassed the climate agenda, has hosted international climate conferences, and continues to participate actively in multilateral climate negotiations. This accumulated experience establishes a strong foundation in the field of climate diplomacy.
This paper assesses Türkiye's current potential in climate diplomacy across three levels and offers recommendations on how this potential can be further strengthened through technical capacity building.
Three-Level Climate Diplomacy Potential
1. Macro Level: Facilitation in Multilateral Negotiations
The most critical line of tension in climate negotiations lies between developed and developing countries. While developed countries face demands for reduction targets and financial contributions proportional to their historical responsibility, developing countries prioritize just transition, adaptation capacity, and loss and damage mechanisms. This divergence leads to recurring deadlocks at the annual Conferences of the Parties (COP) on topics such as finance, differentiation, and transparency.
Türkiye holds a meaningful position between these two blocs. As both a G20 member with a voice in global economic arrangements and an actor in close contact with the priorities of developing countries, it offers a perspective capable of grasping the concerns of both sides. The "bridge country" role that Türkiye's official discourse has long emphasized carries the possibility of taking concrete form precisely at this macro level. Türkiye assuming a facilitating function in processes such as narrowing contested language in draft texts during COP negotiations, designing the finance architecture, and establishing monitoring and reporting mechanisms can be assessed as a realistic objective. The facilitative diplomacy that the host country demonstrated during the 2015 Paris Agreement negotiations provides an important reference point for how such a role can be institutionalized.
2. Sectoral Level: Conciliation in Just Energy Transition
The second critical area of tension in climate diplomacy takes shape between fossil fuel producing countries and consuming countries. Fossil fuel producers adopt a cautious stance regarding the pace of transformation and how costs will be shared, due to their dependence on energy revenues and employment. Consuming countries, meanwhile, face the necessity of managing energy security alongside rapid decarbonization targets. This tension takes concrete form in the design of mechanisms such as Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs).
Türkiye holds a distinctive position in this sectoral equation as a country that both uses fossil fuels and is rapidly increasing its renewable energy investments. It is in a position to develop concrete conciliation proposals drawing on its own experiences in areas such as workforce transformation, reskilling, grid capacity investments, and standards alignment. It is also a realistic expectation for Türkiye to mediate the establishment of matching mechanisms that take public priorities and just transition principles as their basis within the financing mix of grants, loans, guarantees, and blended finance. Türkiye's energy connections in Southeast Europe, Central Asia, and Africa provide a strong regional foundation for this conciliating role.
3. Micro Level: Technical Facilitation in Transboundary Environmental Disputes
The third level of climate diplomacy emerges in concrete, technically weighted disputes such as transboundary water, forest, and ecosystem conflicts. In such disputes, data harmonization, joint monitoring protocols, and impartial technical assessment constitute the fundamental components of resolution. The construction of an arrangement that endured for decades through the neutral technical expert mechanism in the Indus Waters Treaty between India and Pakistan serves as an important example demonstrating the impact of mediation at this level. Similarly, the efforts of technical expert panels appointed by a regional organization to manage data processes in the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) dispute on the Nile River reveal the indispensability of technical facilitation in transboundary resource conflicts.
Türkiye is a country with direct experience regarding transboundary water basins in its region and resource management issues in the Eastern Mediterranean. This experience provides Türkiye with a concrete accumulation of knowledge in areas such as developing data harmonization protocols between parties, coordinating monitoring processes, and formulating technical solution alternatives.
Existing Soft Power Infrastructure and Strengthening Technical Capacity
An important asset that should not be overlooked when assessing Türkiye's climate diplomacy potential is the soft power infrastructure the country already possesses. The extensive development cooperation network in Africa, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia; institutional presence in cultural and educational fields; global positioning in humanitarian aid; and active role in regional organizations significantly support the trust and legitimacy foundation necessary for climate diplomacy.
The diplomatic and development network that Türkiye has built on the African continent over the past twenty years is particularly noteworthy. The vast majority of African countries are among the parties most affected by the climate crisis yet least heard in the negotiations. The bilateral relationships Türkiye has established with these countries and its cooperation on multilateral platforms create a strong foundation for assuming a facilitating role in climate negotiations.
For this soft power infrastructure to be fully leveraged in climate diplomacy, strengthening technical capacity in parallel would be appropriate. Climate mediation, unlike traditional diplomatic mediation, is an extremely technical field. It requires in-depth technical knowledge on subjects such as energy systems, decarbonization timelines, climate finance mechanisms, monitoring-reporting-verification (MRV) systems, and data harmonization protocols. An effective climate mediator must not only manage political balances but also grasp the technical issues debated at the negotiation table, offer technical solution alternatives to the parties, and build trust on a data-driven basis.
Within this framework, several steps can be proposed for strengthening technical capacity. The first is expanding the pool of technical experts in climate negotiation preparation processes and training these experts to also possess mediation skills. The second is creating a climate-focused institutional infrastructure by drawing on the experiences of effective mediation and peace research centers operating internationally. Such centers, active in several Scandinavian and European countries, offer services to governments including technical support, expert pool management, and negotiation simulations, and reinforce their credibility through independent institutional structures. The third is institutionalizing practice-oriented skills through negotiation simulations, technical training programs, and the development of data management capacity.
Assessment and Recommendations
Türkiye possesses strong potential to assume a bridge role in climate diplomacy. The country's geographic position, diplomatic experience, regional soft power network, capacity for simultaneous dialogue with different blocs, and existing experience in international climate negotiations constitute the concrete foundations of this potential. The experience of hosting COP, the contribution to shaping the climate agenda during the G20 presidency process, and successful mediation practices in recent years confirm the solidity of this foundation.
For this potential to be leveraged at full capacity, complementing the existing diplomatic experience with technical mediation capacity would be appropriate. Facilitation in multilateral negotiations at the macro level, conciliation in just energy transition at the sectoral level, technical mediation in transboundary disputes at the micro level, and strengthening technical capacity across each of these three levels will consolidate Türkiye's existing potential. Expanding the pool of technical experts, creating a climate-focused institutional infrastructure, and systematically drawing on international experiences are assessed as the fundamental components of this strengthening.
Türkiye's existing soft power infrastructure offers an important starting point for this process. Supporting this infrastructure with technical knowledge, expertise, and solution-generating capability can carry Türkiye to the position of an indispensable actor not only in regional but also in global climate negotiations. Considering the increasingly complex agenda of COP processes and the growing need for mediation, leveraging this potential will represent a meaningful gain not only for Türkiye but also for global climate governance.
