Purpose

Conventional wisdom tells us that mediation without ripeness is a fool’s errand (Zartman and Touval, 1985). What, then, is Türkiye’s motivation for mediating the war in Ukraine in lieu of ripeness – and what can its behavior as a mediator tell us about that motivation? In pursuit of this question, this paper inductively analyzes Turkish mediation in the Ukraine war to unpack the relationship between a contextual (ripeness) and actor-level (motivation) variable. Of particular interest is the decision-making and behavior of third parties (like Türkiye in Ukraine) who elect to mediate highly complex conflicts in which ripeness is indiscernible. The purpose of this research is not to propose or test a causal relationship between obscured ripeness and mediation, but rather to examine mediation behavior in situations where ripeness is obscured.

Design/methodology/approach

The impact of weaponized information on ripeness and third-party mediation is evaluated through an original, systematic and inductive case study analysis of Turkish mediation in the Russia–Ukraine war. As an intense theater of operations for information warfare for well over a decade, the war in Ukraine serves as an especially apt choice for an analysis of “obscured ripeness.” Likewise, Türkiye’s anomalous position as the only substantive source of mediation in the conflict lends significance to an empirical examination of its motivation and behavior as a mediator.

Findings

This research reveals that the pervasive use of weaponized information in the Russia–Ukraine war has distorted and disordered the information environment, thereby obscuring the ability of third parties to determine if the conflict is or could be ripe for mediation. However, the condition of obscured ripeness that prevails in the conflict has not proven a deterrent for mediation by Türkiye, which, as the only mediator in the conflict, has used a transactional approach to mediation motivated by self-regarding interests and animated by a manipulative mediation strategy. In sum, this inductive analysis of Turkish mediation in Ukraine reveals that the use of weaponized information in a conflict indirectly selects on transactional mediation (and mediators). The significance of this finding is magnified by the widespread use of weaponized information in contemporary conflicts as well as the declining frequency of third-party mediation.

Originality/value

There have been few, if any, systematic assessments in Turkish mediation of the Russia–Ukraine war, and none specifically concerned with the effects of weaponized information. Additionally, the paper proposes a typology of mediator motivation that is used to structure that assessment, while also introducing a new concept (“obscured ripeness”) and linking that concept both to the existing literature on ripeness and to the use of weaponized information in contemporary armed conflicts. As such, this manuscript represents an important contribution both to the empirical and theoretical landscape with respect to the study of mediation and international conflict management.

中文翻译：

---

成熟度被掩盖：土耳其在俄罗斯-乌克兰战争中的（交易）调解的归纳教训

目的

传统智慧告诉我们，不成熟的调解是徒劳的（Zartman 和 Touval，1985）。那么，土耳其调停乌克兰战争而不是成熟的动机是什么？它作为调停者的行为可以告诉我们什么关于这种动机的信息？为了解决这个问题，本文归纳分析了土耳其在乌克兰战争中的调解，以揭示背景（成熟度）和行动者层面（动机）变量之间的关系。特别令人感兴趣的是第三方（如乌克兰的土耳其）的决策和行为，他们选择调解高度复杂的冲突，其中成熟度难以辨别。这项研究的目的不是提出或测试模糊成熟度与中介之间的因果关系，而是检查成熟度模糊情况下的中介行为。

设计/方法论/途径

通过对俄罗斯-乌克兰战争中土耳其调解的原创性、系统性和归纳性案例研究分析，评估了武器化信息对成熟度和第三方调解的影响。作为十多年来信息战的激烈战区，乌克兰战争是分析“模糊的成熟度”的一个特别合适的选择。同样，土耳其作为冲突中唯一实质性调解来源的反常地位，使其作为调解者的动机和行为的实证检验具有重要意义。

发现

这项研究表明，俄罗斯-乌克兰战争中武器化信息的普遍使用扭曲和扰乱了信息环境，从而模糊了第三方确定冲突是否已经或可能进行调解的能力。然而，冲突中普遍存在的不成熟的情况并没有被证明对土耳其的调解构成威慑，土耳其作为冲突中的唯一调解者，出于自身利益的动机和操纵性的目的，采用了交易性的调解方法。调解策略。总之，对土耳其在乌克兰调解的归纳分析表明，在冲突中使用武器化信息间接选择了交易调解（和调解员）。当代冲突中武器化信息的广泛使用以及第三方调解频率的下降放大了这一发现的重要性。

原创性/价值

在土耳其对俄罗斯-乌克兰战争的调解过程中，几乎没有进行系统的评估（如果有的话），也没有专门关注武器化信息的影响。此外，本文提出了一种中介动机的类型学，用于构建评估，同时还引入了一个新概念（“模糊的成熟度”），并将该概念与现有的成熟度文献以及当代武器化信息的使用联系起来。武装冲突。因此，本手稿对调解和国际冲突管理研究的实证和理论领域做出了重要贡献。