'Populism at Home, Revisionism in the World': The Case of Turkey's Peacemaking Engagement in a Changing World Order

Spyros A. Sofos^*

• Global Humanities, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada

Populism has emerged as a transformative force in global politics, questioning the legitimacy of liberal democratic institutions and reshaping foreign policy—especially in emerging powers governed by populist leadership. This article explores the intersection between domestic populist governance and international revisionism, focusing on Turkey under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the Justice and Development Party. It argues that populism in power reconfigures not only domestic political institutions but also facilitates revisionist agendas internationally. This ambition is anti-institutional at its core, averse to mediation and deliberation, and favours personalistic, opaque politics affirming the leader’s direct mandate from “the people.” In Turkey, this marks a departure from the Kemalist principle of “Peace at home, peace in the world” toward a more assertive foreign policy that might be described as “Revisionism at home, revisionism in the world.” This discourse fuses sovereignty and injustice into a populist logic positioning Turkey as both regional power and moral actor. This has been especially visible in Turkey’s peacemaking, where humanitarianism and diplomacy are mobilized as tools of strategic assertion.The central question guiding this analysis is: What is the relationship between Turkey’s domestic populist imagination and its revisionist foreign and peacebuilding policies? What does this reveal about the international behaviour of populist regimes? These questions are examined through a focus on Somalia. With Turkey’s strategic presence there spanning over fifteen years, Somalia provides a vantage point to trace Turkey’s shift from reformist multilateralism to populist-revisionist assertiveness, and a critical site where narratives of injustice, contested sovereignty, and national vindication are projected outward.Methodologically, the article adopts a discursive approach, treating discourse as both performative and constitutive—representing but also enacting political realities. It emphasizes how populist-revisionist foreign policy is animated by narratives, historically situated emotional economies, and appeals to national memory and grievance and shows how populist leaders translate the logics of sovereignty, justice, and moral exceptionalism into international conduct, contributing to a foreign policy paradigm disrupting liberal norms. Through the case of Turkey the article offers insight into how populism travels across scales—from the domestic to the global stage—reshaping institutions and meanings and practices of foreign policy itself.