This article examines the role of mediation in emerging middle power conduct in an increasingly fragmented world. It asks why and how emerging middle powers seek mediator roles in international conflicts, focusing on Turkey and Indonesia's responses to the Russia–Ukraine war. Through content analysis of public documents and interviews with diplomats, it argues that the war has enabled emerging middle powers to seek influence by emphasising their bridge-building capacity. While the conventional literature on middle powers explains such activism in terms of the traditional leadership–followership dynamic—where middle powers are seen as followers who act as ‘good international citizens’—our findings suggest that international systemic instability, the search for status and domestic factors provide better explanations for their actions. Specifically, we argue that the saliency of middle power followership diminishes as a source of status under conditions of structural uncertainty and manifests through stability-seeking conduct like mediation. Concurrently, we show that mediatory approaches are motivated not only by international considerations but also significantly by domestic elite concerns. These findings contribute to middle power scholarship by illustrating how these states use mediation to seek both domestic regime support and international recognition, offering a more nuanced understanding of emerging middle power agency.
Policy implications
- Recognising the role of emerging middle powers in mediation may offer valuable insights for international conflict management, particularly in contexts where great powers are divided. A better understanding of the status-related and domestic drivers behind these mediation efforts can help international actors interpret and engage with them more effectively.
- Examples such as the Black Sea Grain Initiative underscore the potential and limitations of collaboration between emerging middle powers and international institutions. Learning from both the successes and shortcomings of such efforts could help shape more adaptable cooperative frameworks.
- Increasing fragmentation and pluralisation of global governance highlight the growing relevance of regional organisations like ASEAN and global forums such as the G20. These platforms offer emerging middle powers opportunities to initiate or contribute to conflict-mitigation efforts of global significance.
- Greater cooperation amongst emerging middle powers themselves may open further avenues for coordinated mediation. Proposals for informal groupings—such as a World Economic Forum white paper's call for a ‘middle powers mediation group’—reflect growing recognition of these actors' diplomatic potential. The viability of such initiatives may depend on aligning emerging middle powers' domestic imperatives with broader multilateral goals.
-
Cooperation between ‘traditional’ middle powers and emerging middle powers may offer an opportunity to strengthen mediation initiatives that bridge South–North divides, for instance, in the area of climate change.
Photo by Marta Nogueira