Sinanoglu, Semuhi
Wo king Pape
S a egic humani a ian aid, us in Eu ope and suppo
o au ho i a ianism
IDOS Discussion Pape , No. 28/2025
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS), Bonn
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Sinanoglu, Semuhi (2025) : S a egic humani a ian aid, us in Eu ope and
suppo o au ho i a ianism, IDOS Discussion Pape , No. 28/2025, ISBN 978-3-96021-273-7,
Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS), Bonn,
h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp28.2025
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/327980
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
S a egic Humani a ian Aid, T us in
Eu ope and Suppo o Au ho i a ianism
Semuhi Sinanoglu
IDOS DISCUSSION PAPER
28/2025
S a egic humani a ian aid, us in
Eu ope and suppo o
au ho i a ianism
Semuhi Sinanoglu
Bonn 2025
D Semuhi Sinanoglu is a Resea che in he esea ch depa men “T ans o ma ion o Poli ical (Dis-)o de ” a
he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) in Bonn.
Email: semuhi.sinanoglu@idos- esea ch.de
The Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) is ins i u ionally inanced by he Fede al Minis y
o Economic Coope a ion and De elopmen (BMZ), based on a esolu ion o he Ge man Bundes ag, and he
s a e o No h Rhine-Wes phalia (NRW) as a membe o he Johannes-Rau-Fo schungsgemeinscha (JRF).
Sugges ed ci a ion:
Sinanoglu, S. (2025). S a egic humani a ian aid, us in Eu ope and suppo o au ho i a ianism (IDOS Discussion
Pape 28/2025). Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS). h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp28.2025
Disclaime :
The analyses exp essed in his pape a e hose o he au ho (s) and do no necessa ily e lec he iews o
policies o he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS).
Excep o he wise no ed, his publica ion is licensed unde C ea i e Commons A ibu ion (CC BY 4.0). You a e
ee o copy, communica e and adap his wo k, as long as you a ibu e he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen
and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH and he au ho (s).
IDOS Discussion Pape / Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH
ISSN 2751-4439 (P in )
ISSN 2751-4447 (Online)
ISBN 978-3-96021-273-7 (P in )
DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp28.2025
© Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH
Tulpen eld 6, 53113 Bonn
Email: publica ions@idos- esea ch.de
h ps://www.idos- esea ch.de
P in ed on eco- iendly, ce i ied pape .
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
III
Acknowledgemen s
The esea ch design has been app o ed by he IDOS E hics Commi ee wi h he ollowing
p o ocol numbe : 2024-D-011. The p e-analysis plan is egis e ed on OSF.1 I hank he MPSA
(2025) A ec i e Pola iza ion and Depola iza ion Mini-Con e ence, ECPR Join Sessions (2025)
“Ex e nal In luences on Democ a isa ion and Au oc a isa ion” wo kshop, and SISP “Poli ical
Regimes and hei Sea ch o Legi imacy” wo kshop (2025) pa icipan s o use ul ad ice. I also
hank Julia Leininge , Ani a B eue , A min on Schille and Ch is ine Hackenesch o hei
eedback.
1 How in e na ional solida i y back i es. OSF. h ps://doi.o g/10.17605/OSF.IO/Z837M
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
IV
Abs ac
How does in e na ional assis ance impac public a i udes owa ds dono s in he ecipien
coun y when ied o s a egic in e es s? Eu opean leade s inc easingly highligh he s a egic
and ansac ional na u e o in e na ional assis ance. Ye , we s ill do no know much abou how
such shi s in he aming o in e na ional assis ance a e pe cei ed by he ecipien public,
especially in con ex s wi h p e alen an i-Wes e n a i udes and p opaganda ha dismisses aid
as hypoc i ical and disingenuous. I conduc ed an online su ey expe imen in Tu key o assess
he a i udinal and quasi-beha iou al e ec s o di e en ypes o in e na ional assis ance pos -
disas e – condi ional, uncondi ional, and s a egic – and whe he hey help sway public a i udes
in he ace o au ho i a ian p opaganda. S a egically dis ibu ed humani a ian aid dec eased
us in he go e nmen as a de ende o na ional in e es among conse a i e, na ionalis and
Eu oscep ic egime suppo e s, and also inc eased us in Eu opean o ganisa ions. I did so
pa ly by mi iga ing conspi acism and e oking posi i e emo ions among p o-go e nmen o e s
whose iews a e ha d o change. Howe e , his comes a a cos : inc eased ade scep icism
and dec eased engagemen wi h o eign media ou le s among egime opponen s. The indings
ha e signi ican implica ions o in e na ional assis ance s a egies o inc easing Eu opean so
powe .
Keywo ds: p opaganda, pola isa ion, o eign aid, public suppo , pos -disas e elie , conspi a-
cism, expe imen al esea ch, Tu key
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
V
Con en s
Acknowledgemen s
Abs ac
Abb e ia ions
1 In oduc ion 1
2 S a egically dis ibu ed in e na ional assis ance 3
3 Mic o-le el ounda ions 4
4 Au ho i a ian coun e p opaganda 6
5 The Tu kish con ex 7
6 Empi ical se ing 9
7 Main indings 12
8 Ex e nal alidi y 15
9 Discussion 16
Re e ences 18
Appendix A: O he esul s 25
Appendix B: T ea men s 33
P opaganda ea men 33
Uncondi ional solida i y ea men 33
Condi ional solida i y ea men 34
S a egic solida i y ea men 34
Appendix C: Desc ip i e s a is ics 35
Co a ia e balance 36
Figu es
Figu e 1: E ec s on egime suppo e s ega ding us in go e nmen , us in Eu ope and
ade scep icism. Pai wise con as s wi h bias adjus men 13
Figu e 2: E ec s on egime opponen s ega ding us in go e nmen , us in Eu ope and
ade scep icism. Pai wise con as s wi h bias adjus men 13
Figu e 3: Causal pa hways: Conspi acism, posi i e and nega i e emo ions among egime
suppo e s 14
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
VI
Figu es in Appendix
Figu e A1: T us in go e nmen among egime suppo e s 25
Figu e A2: T us in Eu ope among egime suppo e s 26
Figu e A3: T ade scep icism among egime suppo e s 27
Figu e A4: T us in go e nmen among egime opponen s 28
Figu e A5: T us in Eu ope among egime opponen s 29
Figu e A6: T ade scep icism among egime opponen s 30
Figu e A7: Posi i e emo ions among egime suppo e s 31
Figu e A8: P edic ed p obabili y o epos ing o eign media ou le s among egime opponen s 32
Figu e C1: Poli ical pola isa ion in 2014 and 2024 wi h egime ype. The igu e labels he
coun ies wi h he highes le el o pola isa ion acco ding o V-DEM da a 35
Tables in Appendix
Table C1: Co a ia e balance o p o-go e nmen esponden s 36
Table C2: Co a ia e balance o an i-go e nmen esponden s 36
Table C3: Desc ip i e s a is ics 37
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
VII
Abb e ia ions
BMZ Bundesminis e ium ü wi scha liche Zusammena bei und En wicklung
(Fede al Minis y o Economic Coope a ion and De elopmen )
CEB Council o Eu ope De elopmen Bank
EBRD Eu opean Bank o Recons uc ion and De elopmen
EIB Eu opean In es men Bank
ERMA Eme gency Re ugee and Mig a ion Assis ance Fund
EU Eu opean Union
GIZ Deu sche Gesellscha ü In e na ionale Zusammena bei
(Ge man Agency o In e na ional Coope a ion)
GNI g oss na ional income
MRAA Mig a ion and Re ugee Assis ance Ac
ODA O icial De elopmen Assis ance
UK Uni ed Kingdom
UN Uni ed Na ions
US Uni ed S a es
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
7
exempli ied by he c i icism o he EU in 2016 by P esiden E dogan o Tu key ha €3 billion
pledged o a deal on mig a ion was ne e sen (Goula d, 2016).
To wha ex en would such au oc a ic coun e -p opaganda be e ec i e? Pan e al. (2022) show
ha au oc a ic egimes can use p opaganda ools e ec i ely o shi people’s iews o adop
di e gen o eign policy posi ions in line wi h he go e nmen ’s aming. Beyond aming e ec s,
p opaganda also o en se es as an a ec i e, iden i y-consis en a i ma ion o he egime’s
co e suppo g oups (Shi iko , 2024). In Geo gia, o ins ance, Geo gian D eam o icials asse
ha he e is a “Global Wa Pa y” – a shadow o ce manipula ing Wes e n go e nmen s and
unde mining Geo gian in e es s. Viewe s o p o-go e nmen channels a e mo e likely o belie e
such conspi acy heo ies and, in u n, suppo an i-Wes e n na a i es (Ci il Geo gia, 2025). In
such con ex s, s a egic aid may con i m na i is scep ical opinions (Singh & Williamson, 2022)
and p op up p opaganda by ein o cing he pe cep ion ha he go e nmen se es as he
de ende o na ional in e es s.
To summa ise, o eign aid in he o m o humani a ian assis ance may ha e di e en ami-
ica ions o public opinion in ecipien coun ies wi h a ce ain deg ee o s a e capaci y, pa isan
clea age along p o/an i- egime lines and a s ong p opaganda appa a us.
Fi s , I hypo hesise ha uncondi ional and s ong disas e elie di ec ly disbu sed o a ec ed
a eas may posi i ely sway he opinion o egime opponen s owa ds Wes e n dono s by in oking
eelings o solida i y. On he o he hand, s a egic engagemen wi h he egime may appea , o
his g oup, as hough he dono coun ies a e aking he go e nmen ’s side, and may he e o e
unde mine egime opponen s’ willingness o suppo economic engagemen wi h dono
coun ies. Go e nmen p opaganda in he ecipien coun y would be la gely ine ec i e o his
g oup.
Second, in his ype o ecipien con ex s, baseline suppo o Wes e n dono s is o en ela i ely
low, and he e is cynicism and scep icism o hei mo i a ions, especially among egime
suppo e s. In addi ion, go e nmen s o en ci cula e messages o hei co e base disc edi ing
in e na ional assis ance, d i ing no ma i e suppo o hei egime and p omp ing conspi a o ial
hinking. The e o e, I hypo hesise ha s a egic humani a ian assis ance may be coun e -
p oduc i e and con i m cynical p io belie s abou he mo i a ion behind aid. I may ein o ce he
go e nmen ’s alking poin s and add o he egime’s sco eboa d.
In he nex sec ion, I ace hese ac o s in he Tu kish con ex by elucida ing Wes e n o eign
aid and humani a ian assis ance in Tu key, and go e nmen coun e p opaganda.
5 The Tu kish con ex
Tu key is lis ed as an uppe -middle income coun y on he ODA-eligible lis (OECD, n.d.), and
ecei ed $1.46 billion ne in o eign aid in 2023 (Ou Wo ld in Da a, n.d.). As a non-DAC coun y,
Tu key also o e s de elopmen assis ance, especially o sub-Saha an A ica, which is a
s a egic a ge o Ge man and Eu opean de elopmen coope a ion. Tu key has he la ges
NATO a my in Eu ope, an expanding in luence in con lic -p one egions such as Sy ia, an
inc eased geos a egic ole in he de ence o Uk aine, and Eu opean mili a y capabili ies. In ac ,
Eu ope’s secu i y a chi ec u e is likely o ely mo e and mo e on Tu key. The e o e,
unde s anding Tu kish public opinion would be key o s eng hening hese coope a ions. Tu key
also p esen s a good candida e h ough which o examine he e ec i eness o in e na ional
assis ance in shi ing a i udes, because o he coun y’s ex ensi e go e nmen p opaganda
appa a us, deeply en enched pa isan and e hnic clea ages, and p e alen an i-Wes e n public
sen imen s.
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
8
The AKP egime unde Recep Tayyip E doğan has o ce ully aken o e he mains eam media
o e he yea s (A a & Pamuk, 2019, p. 129). P o-go e nmen ou le s la gely domina e he media
landscape, including digi al pla o ms, popula ed by a sizable numbe o p o- egime olls and
bo s. A g owing schola ship explo es he e ec i eness o his p opaganda appa a us (Ay aç,
2021; Öz ü k, 2023) – he go e nmen has deployed i o consolida e i s o e base and imp o e
no ma i e suppo o he egime ha emains inelas ic o economic down u ns and poli ical
c ises (Neundo e al., 2024). They did so by deepening pola isa ion and uelling eligious and
na ionalis sen imen s (Some , 2022), so much so ha Tu key has one o he highes poli ical
pola isa ion le els globally, acco ding o he V-DEM da a (see Figu e C1).
One majo a ge o egime p opaganda was Wes e n/Eu opean o ganisa ions and coun ies.
The egime ames any ype o in e na ional in e en ion and engagemen as o eign meddling,
weaponising hem o uel na ionalis sen imen s, e ode us in Wes e n ins i u ions, and eed
conspi a o ial na a i es among i s o e base. Fo ins ance, in 2021, when ambassado s om
en coun ies, mos o hem Eu opean, publicly condemned he unlaw ul imp isonmen o Osman
Ka ala – a p ominen businesspe son and human igh s de ende – and called o compliance
wi h he Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s’ uling o elease him, he egime launched a ull-
scale p opaganda campaign, po aying he c i icism as Wes e n in e e ence in he Tu kish
legal sys em (Deu sche Welle, 2021). The ambassado s’ public s a emen played in o he
egime’s hands, e en ually o cing hem o back ack.
The waning Eu opean so powe in Tu key is e iden in polling da a. Despi e a ecen up ick in
ends, mo e Tu ks ha e un a ou able han a ou able iews o he EU (Clancy e al., 2024).
Tu kish ci izens ha e g own disillusioned wi h he EU, pa ly due o iewing i s app oach o
Tu key’s accession p ocess as inconsis en and disc imina o y. The egime, in u n, has
exploi ed Eu opean double s anda ds – pa icula ly on he selec i e en o cemen o in e na ional
no ms – o unde mine he EU’s c edibili y. Fo example, Aydin-Duzgi and Tu han (2025) show
ha Ge many has aken a cau ious, o en eluc an , s ance on he ule o law issues in Tu key,
ac ing only when Anka a’s mo es h ea ened co e Ge man o EU in e es s. Ve y ecen ly, one
o E dogan’s op ad ise s c i icised he Eu opean Pa liamen ’s Tu key Rappo eu on he
g ounds ha EU should no iew Tu key solely in e ms o Eu ope’s secu i y needs and ha EU
is “a ogan ”, “colonialis ” and “ill-in ended” (Habe le , 2025).
The go e nmen has also exploi ed he Sy ian e ugee c isis as a ba gaining chip agains he
EU and o showcase Eu opean double s anda ds on human igh s. On he one hand, he Tu kish
go e nmen has ins umen alised he e ugee c isis and owed o “ lood Eu ope wi h e ugees”
o ex ac concessions om Eu opean leade s (Eu ac i , 2016). In Ma ch 2016, he Eu opean
Council and Tu key signed an ag eemen o p e en he low o i egula mig a ion ia Tu key o
Eu ope. Accusing Eu opean leade s o being wo- aced and hypoc i ical, E dogan said he
ag eed o sign such a deal only o “sa e Sy ian e ugees om de oga o y ea men a Eu opean
bo de s” (Chadwick, 2016). Ye , he go e nmen has epea edly h ea ened he EU o e oke
his deal as le e age in diploma ic nego ia ions. In 2020, he e was e en a show-down a he
G eek bo de , ollowing Tu key’s s a emen ha i would open he pa h o Eu ope, as housands
o e ugees ushed owa d he bo de (E gin, 2020).
Such poli icisa ion o humani a ian needs and in e na ional assis ance can be obse ed
ollowing na u al disas e s as well. One such inciden was he wild i es in 2021 in sou he n
coas al ci ies ha le hund eds o squa e miles o o es bu n and dozens hospi alised. The
go e nmen was ha shly c i icised o ailing o comba he wild i e. The go e nmen , in u n,
blamed an i-go e nmen celeb i ies who joined he “#HelpTu key” hash ag on Twi e o plead
o help om he in e na ional communi y o po aying he Tu kish s a e as weak and
incapaci a ed (Sinanoglu & Donnelly, 2024).
In 2023, sou he n Tu key and no hwes e n Sy ia we e s uck by deadly win ea hquakes ha
killed housands o people and displaced millions. The go e nmen was o e whelmed and
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
9
unable o espond and, gi en he shee scale o i , amed he ea hquakes as “ he ca as ophe
o he cen u y” o jus i y such incapaci a ion. Tha is why, due o he se e i y o he c isis, hey
did no e use in e na ional aid, and ins ead welcomed and encou aged i , hough hey ied o
ake owne ship o o eign aid wi h go e nmen b anding (Bellini & Sau e , 2025).
Di e en ypes o pos -disas e elie aid we e o e ed by Eu opean go e nmen s and he EU:
uncondi ional, condi ional and s a egic. Fi s , igh a e he ea hquakes, Eu opean
go e nmen s uncondi ionally p o ided eme gency aid. In addi ion o bila e al aid, he EU
mobilised i s la ges e e sea ch and escue ope a ions h ough he EU Ci il P o ec ion
Mechanism, wi h o e 1,500 escue wo ke s. Also, a o al o €400 million was disbu sed o
Tu key h ough he Eu opean Union Solida i y Fund – he la ges amoun e e awa ded o a
candida e coun y (ECHO, 2023).
Second: condi ional aid. A e he In e na ional Dono s’ Con e ence, EBRD, CEB and EIB
pledged pos -disas e elie aid wo h €2.5 billion in he o m o loans o help wi h econs uc ion
ha comes wi h s ings a ached (EEAS [Eu opean Ex e nal Ac ion], 2023). These concessional
loans we e ied o econs uc ion e o s in quake-hi a eas, equi ing compliance wi h lending
s anda ds and public p ocu emen ules.
Finally, he EU ea ma ked €78.2 million o i s humani a ian unding o Tu key o Sy ian e ugees
impac ed by he ea hquake, which was deli e ed h ough he EU’s humani a ian pa ne
o ganisa ions. This s a egic unding aimed o inc ease he unding o cash ca ds dis ibu ed o
some o he mo e han 4 million egis e ed e ugees in Tu key o p e en u he i egula bo de -
c ossing o he EU, hough i is unclea whe he aid eached hese a ge ed g oups (Eu onews,
2024). This majo disas e coincided wi h a ime o hea ed deba es wi hin he EU on how o igh
i egula mig a ion (Ma hieson, 2023).
I conduc ed an expe imen al su ey o p obe he e ec s o hese di e en ypes o in e na ional
humani a ian assis ance on suppo o au ho i a ian go e nmen , us in Eu opean
o ganisa ions, and suppo o in e na ional ade.
6 Empi ical se ing
I hi ed a epu able Tu key-based su ey esea ch company o conduc an online su ey
(N≈1,400) om 19 Decembe 2024 o 20 Janua y 2025. The i m used quo a samples om 26
NUTS-2 egions, wi h esponden s balanced on gende , age and educa ion. The esponden s
a e all adul Tu kish ci izens. Pa icipan s we e compensa ed o hei pa icipa ion h ough he
company ha p o ided access o he panel.
I designed a be ween-subjec , igne e-based expe imen . I used block andomisa ion, whe e
pa icipan s we e s a i ied based on hei pa y iden i ica ion – whe he hey a e suppo e s o
he incumben elec o al alliance o o he opposi ion.5 Then I andomly assigned hem o
ea men condi ions. The eason behind his choice o andomisa ion is ha democ acy–
au ho i a ianism clea age is he new de ining ea u e o pa y poli ics in Tu key ollowing he
2017 cons i u ional e e endum (Selçuk & Hekimci, 2020) – ha is why he e ec o p opaganda
would be condi ional on he esponden ’s suppo o he incumben .
5
I iden i ied esponden s’ pa y posi ions using wo ques ions. Fi s ,
I
asked which pa y hey
would o e o i an elec ion we e held his Sunday. Fo hose who le his ques ion unanswe ed,
I
ollowed up by asking which pa y hey eel closes o, ega dless o o ing in en ions.
I
hen
classi ied he sample based on whe he he iden i ied pa y is pa o he incumben elec o al
coali ion.
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
10
Du ing he online ield conduc ed on Qual ics, I implemen ed se e al da a quali y con ols o
iden i y po en ial bo esponses and audulen comple ions wi h di e en p o ocols, including
bu no limi ed o: emo ing epea ed esponses om he same IP add ess, esponses wi h ailed
geo-loca ion con ols, ailed p e- ea men a en ion checks, suspicious use o AI, and incon-
sis en and non-se ious esponse pa e ns.
The design includes i e a ms (see Appendix). The ea men s a e designed based on a
compila ion o eal news a icles and da a. The e was a ime ha did no allow esponden s o
skip he ques ion o a ixed ime. The pu e con ol g oup did no ecei e any in o ma ion. All
o he g oups ecei ed he p opaganda igne e, which se es as a baseline p iming condi ion
emphasising an i-Wes e n na a i es. In addi ion o he p opaganda igne e, some esponden s
we e also ea ed wi h uncondi ional, condi ional and s a egic-aid igne es. I used such a
nes ed design o p obe he e ec s o di e en assis ance in he ace o go e nmen p opaganda.
On he one hand, go e nmen p opaganda appa a us is qui e s ong and ex ensi e in Tu key,
exe ing almos comple e con ol o e he public and p i a e adi ional media landscape. Tha
is why i is e y di icul o be immune o o a oid go e nmen aming. Tha said, I included bo h
a pu e con ol, and a baseline con ol wi h a go e nmen p opaganda igne e.
The ea men a ms we e as ollows:
•
P opaganda ea men : The p opaganda ea men , a cu a ed news a icle igne e,
consis s o pieces o in o ma ion om he egime’s di e en p opaganda ma e ials ha
highligh he Wes ’s “hypoc isy”, how hey ins umen alise o eign aid o s a egic/in elli-
gence pu poses, how duplici ous Wes e n o ganisa ions a e in hei ea men o human
igh s, and how li le hey do in e ms o inancial suppo . This is a s ongly ein o ced
ea men ha p imes he egime’s main alking poin s, disc edi ing he Wes e n coun ies/
o ganisa ions o e all.
•
P opaganda + Uncondi ional solida i y ea men : In addi ion o he p opaganda
ea men , a se o esponden s ecei ed a pos -disas e eco e y aid ea men highligh ing
millions o eu os dona ed by mul iple Eu opean coun ies, and ens o echnical aid c ews
a i ing in Tu key wi h ons o equipmen o help in impac ed a eas. Showcasing he
pe sonnel on he g ound om Ge many, F ance and G eece, his is a s ongly ein o ced
solida i y ea men . The o de o p opaganda and aid igne es was andomised.6
•
P opaganda + Condi ional solida i y ea men : In addi ion o he p opaganda ea men ,
a se o esponden s ecei ed a pos -disas e eco e y solida i y ea men highligh ing i s
condi ionali y, and he ac ha i was c edi a he han g an s. The o de o p opaganda and
aid igne es was andomised. See also Findley, Ha is e al. (2017).
•
P opaganda + S a egic solida i y ea men : In addi ion o he p opaganda ea men , a
se o esponden s ecei ed a di e en aid ea men ha highligh s Wes e n inancial
suppo o e ugees impac ed by he ea hquake in Tu key. This ea men unde sco es aid
o e ugees because i has been p esen ed as a s a egic p io i y by bo h Ame ican and
Eu opean coun e pa s. The o de o p opaganda and aid igne es was andomised.
The su ey s a s wi h a demog aphics module ha comp ises ques ions on age, gende , ci y o
esidence, le el o educa ion, eligiosi y, income and poli ical ideology. I measu e pa y
iden i ica ion wi h wo ques ions: i he e was an elec ion his Sunday, which pa y would hey
o e o , and which pa y hey eel closes o, ega dless o whe he hey o e o no .
6
The design does no di e en ia e bila e al and mul ila e al aid in o de o p ime in e na ional
solida i y o e all.
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
11
P e- ea men , I asked whe he hey o hei close kin had e e expe ienced a na u al disas e .
I included a ba e y o ques ions ha measu e hei pe cep ion o go e nmen esponsi eness,
us in public ins i u ions, and sa is ac ion wi h social deli e y se ices. I also measu ed hei
isk assessmen ega ding o he coun ies, including F ance, Ge many, G eece and he USA. I
added a module o measu e hei con ac wi h Sy ian e ugees in hei daily li e. I also asked a
he mome e ques ion abou how a esponden eels owa d di e en poli ical pa ies’ suppo e s
on a scale o 0 o 100 o measu e p e- ea men pola isa ion. Las ly, I asked a ques ion on
conce ns o e globalisa ion and dependence on o eign ma ke s. Following he ea men , he e
was a sho ques ion module o dis ac esponden s and a manipula ion check.
As o he dependen a iables, I asked he ollowing se s o ques ions. In he modules, I included
bo h posi i e and nega i e i ems o mi iga e ag eemen bias. I measu ed esponden s’ a i udes
owa ds each ques ion i em sepa a ely, bu also c ea ed a unidimensional g aded esponse
model o cons uc a la en index o each module: suppo o au ho i a ian go e nmen , us in
Eu ope, and ade scep icism.
•
Go e nmen e alua ion: A ba e y o ques ions ha measu es hei pe cep ion o he
go e nmen and incumben elec o al alliance as he de ende o na ional in e es s: he
go e nmen de ends Tu key’s na ional in e es s agains o eign in e e ence; he
go e nmen ’s o eign policy choices enhance na ional p ide and digni y; he go e nmen is
no anspa en abou i s dealings wi h o eign coun ies and in e na ional o ganisa ions; he
go e nmen does no manage in e na ional a ai s in ways ha p io i ise he needs o Tu kish
ci izens; he go e nmen ensu es ha Tu key’s pa ne ships wi h o eign coun ies a e ai
and mu ually bene icial.
•
T us in Eu opean o ganisa ions and coun ies: A ba e y o ques ions ha measu es
hei us in Wes e n/Eu opean o ganisa ions, and whe he hey would suppo hese
o ganisa ions o ope a e in Tu key: Wes e n o ganisa ions like he EU a e biased agains
Tu key in hei policies and ac ions; Tu key should ely on he EU o deal wi h he
epe cussions o he majo ea hquake; Eu opean o ganisa ions should moni o and epo
on human igh s condi ions in Tu key; Eu opean o ganisa ions a e no anspa en abou
hei goals and ac ions in Tu key; Eu opean o ganisa ions should be allowed o ope a e
eely in Tu key o suppo de elopmen and humani a ian e o s; Eu opean coun ies apply
double s anda ds o Tu key, c i icising i un ai ly while igno ing hei own mis akes.
•
Suppo o ade p o ec ionism and sel -su iciency: A ba e y o ques ions on a i udes
owa ds ade and na ional sel -su iciency: Tu key should s eng hen i s open ade ela ions
wi h he EU coun ies; Tu key should s i e o be as sel -su icien as possible, e en i i
means highe cos s o ewe choices o consume s; depending on ade wi h o he coun ies
weakens Tu key’s economy and so e eign y; Tu key does no need help om o he
coun ies, i should ely on i sel o sol e i s p oblems.
The e we e also wo quasi-beha iou al ou comes. Fi s , showing a p e iew o a call o
olun ee s om di e en dono o ganisa ions, USAID, he Tu kish Red C escen and he
Ge man Agency o In e na ional Coope a ion (GIZ) o online suppo in disas e -a lic ed a eas,
I asked whe he hey would epos his call on hei social media accoun s o no . Second,
showing ou al e na i e sou ces o in o ma ion, he go e nmen -con olled Anadolu Agency, he
o icial p esiden ial o ice websi e, an o icial EU websi e and Deu sche Welle, which is cu en ly
banned in Tu key, I asked which sou ce hey would sugges a iend eads o u he in o ma ion
on pos -disas e elie aid.
I p obed wo causal pa hways by which he in e na ional solida i y ea men s may impac
esponden s’ a i udes. Following Chaudoin e al. (2021), I andomised he o de o modules o
media o and ou come a iables. Fi s , especially among he co e suppo g oups o he egime,
s a egic o condi ional solida i y may p omp emo ions and conside a ions ha his aid is
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
12
disingenuous and humilia ing, and make hem eel ang y, while among opposi ion o e s,
uncondi ional aid would be pe cei ed as solida i y.
Second, o eign aid may con i m hei p io belie s, p op up go e nmen p opaganda, and u he
conspi a o ial hinking among co e suppo g oups ha is pe cei ed as an a ack on Tu key’s
na ional so e eign y. I included a ba e y o ques ions o measu e conspi acism: The e is a
coo dina ed e o among powe ul coun ies o keep Tu key om becoming a s ong and
independen na ion; Tu key is alone in he wo ld; i canno ely on any o he coun y o genuine
suppo .
7 Main indings
Following my p e- egis a ion, I an pai wise con as s wi h Tukey-adjus ed p- alues o bias
co ec ion. Figu e 1 isualises pai wise con as s o ea men s o la en index sco es o each
dependen a iable o he subse o egime suppo e s ( o disagg ega ed indi idual i ems, see
Figu es A1, A2 and A3). O e all, he esul s demons a e ha , con a y o my expec a ions,
s a egic solida i y ea men helped dec ease us in he go e nmen among egime
suppo e s, bu also inc eased hei us in Eu opean o ganisa ions and suppo o in e na ional
ade.
An analysis o indi idual i ems e eals ha s a egic aid, communica ed as such, has signi ican
e ec s on ou ou o i e a i udinal measu es. Fi s , i dec eased us in go e nmen as he
de ende o na ional in e es s, and he di e ence in ma ginal means is conside able (≈ 0.5, hal
s anda d de ia ion). To pu hings in pe spec i e, he a e age suppo o go e nmen as
de ende o na ional in e es is qui e high, 4.37 ou o 5, among hose exposed o he baseline
p opaganda ea men , while i d ops o 3.85 among hose ea ed wi h he s a egic-aid igne e.
P o-go e nmen o e s we e also less likely o hink ha he go e nmen p io i ises Tu kish
ci izens in in e na ional a ai s and imp o es na ional p ide wi h o eign policy once hey had
been exposed o he s a egic-aid ea men . The e ec size is subs an i e, 0.65, compa ed o
he p opaganda baseline.
In e es ingly, on a e age, he s a egic-aid ea men inc eased he pe cep ion ha he
go e nmen is no anspa en in i s o eign policy, while i had he exac opposi e e ec o
Eu opean o ganisa ions. S a egic solida i y ea men has s a is ically signi ican and posi i e
e ec s among egime suppo e s on all indi idual a i udinal measu es o us in
Eu ope/Eu opean o ganisa ions. Exposed o s a egic aid, hey, on a e age, become mo e likely
o suppo allowing EU o ganisa ions o moni o human igh s in Tu key, and ope a e eely. The
e ec sizes a e subs an i e o a pa isan g oup whose a i udes a e ha d o shi : compa ed o
baseline p opaganda ea men , he di e ences in ma ginal means co espond o app oxima ely
1.02 and 1.32, espec i ely. Conside ing he e y low baseline us in Eu opean o ganisa ions
among his pa icula g oup ( anging om 0.9 o 1.8 based on di e en a i udinal measu es),
he posi i e e ec sizes a e p onounced. Uncondi ional solida i y also has signi ican and
posi i e e ec s o h ee ou o i e measu es o us in Eu opean o ganisa ions.
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
13
Figu e 1: E ec s on egime suppo e s ega ding us in go e nmen , us in Eu ope
and ade scep icism. Pai wise con as s wi h bias adjus men
Sou ce: Au ho
On he o he hand, as o egime opponen s, he ea men s we e la gely insigni ican , wi h wo
no able excep ions. Figu e 2 isualises pai wise con as s o ea men s o he subse o egime
opponen s ( o disagg ega ed indi idual i ems, see Figu es A4, A5 and A6). In line wi h
hypo heses, on a e age, uncondi ional solida i y boos ed hei suppo o in e na ional ade,
while s a egic aid exace ba ed hei ade scep icism. Uncondi ional in e na ional solida i y
made egime opponen s less likely o hink ha Tu key should y o be sel -su icien and does
no need help om o he s. On he o he hand, s a egic aid, anspa en abou sel -in e es
mo i a ions behind i , shi ed egime opponen s’ a i udes owa d sel -su iciency. This is in line
wi h wha I expec ed o ind, as he e ec s o side- aking on economic engagemen (Bush &
P a he , 2020).
Figu e 2: E ec s on egime opponen s ega ding us in go e nmen , us in Eu ope
and ade scep icism. Pai wise con as s wi h bias adjus men
Sou ce: Au ho
The e a e h ee po en ial explana ions o unexpec ed indings o e ec s on egime suppo e s.
Fi s , i may be associa ed wi h audience cos s in o eign policy. Responden s may hink ha
he go e nmen succumbs o in e na ional p essu e by accep ing s a egic aid, and conside
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
14
go e nmen p opaganda as cheap alk (Li & Chen, 2020). Tha may be he eason why hey, on
a e age, end o hink ha he go e nmen does no p io i ise Tu kish ci izens in i s o eign a ai s
and p o ec na ional epu a ion.
Second, o e s may p e e anspa ency in public communica ion abou bo h he p o ision and
eceip o in e na ional assis ance (Ga u i, 2024). Making he s a egic in en behind aid
alloca ion explici con i med hei p io s. Tha is why s a egic aid communica ed as such
educes conspi acism and cynicism abou Eu opean aid, while i ende s he go e nmen
p opaganda ine ec i e, as i c ea es he imp ession ha i is no he Eu opeans bu he
go e nmen i sel no being anspa en in i s dealings. Figu e 3 illus a es pai wise con as s o
conspi acism and con i med i as a po en ial causal pa hway.
The hi d and inal mechanism could be a ec i e. In e na ional solida i y, in he a e ma h o a
de as a ing ea hquake, may e oke posi i e sen imen s owa ds he Eu opean o ganisa ions
among he egime’s co e suppo g oups, e en hough some was s a egically dis ibu ed. The
esul s sugges ha uncondi ional aid educed he e ec i eness o go e nmen p opaganda,
and s a egic-aid ea men also induced posi i e emo ions among his g oup (Figu e 3), hough
he ea men s a e insigni ican o measu es o nega i e emo ions (Figu e 3). Figu e A7
illus a es esul s o each indi idual a ec i e measu e. The s a egic-aid ea men , on a e age,
signi ican ly dec eases hei hope ulness abou he u u e, which migh explain hei e alua ion
o he go e nmen . On he o he hand, bo h uncondi ional and s a egic aid make hem
signi ican ly mo e likely o eel ouched by he in e na ional solida i y.
Figu e 3: Causal pa hways: Conspi acism, posi i e and nega i e emo ions among
egime suppo e s
Sou ce: Au ho
How abou quasi-beha iou al ou comes? To pu hings in pe spec i e, oughly 17 pe cen o
he o e all sample we e willing o sha e o eign ou le s, whe he i ’s Ge man o Eu opean, and
epos calls om o eign dono s, including F ench, Ge man and Ame ican de elopmen
agencies. The e was conside able a ia ion based on pa isan iden i y: Only 3 pe cen o egime
suppo e s picked a o eign news ou le , only 7 pe cen chose a call om a o eign agency o
be epos ed, while among egime opponen s, he sha e is much highe , co esponding o 24 pe
cen and 22 pe cen , espec i ely. The esul s display no signi ican e ec s on quasi-beha iou al
ou comes in e ms o ei he educing epos ing/engaging wi h go e nmen p opaganda, o
inc easing engagemen wi h o eign ou le s and agencies, wi h one impo an excep ion: egime
opponen s on a e age become signi ican ly less likely o sha e o eign media ou le s ollowing
he s a egic-aid ea men (Figu e A8).
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
15
8 Ex e nal alidi y
Wha a e he scope condi ions o hese indings? The esul s may apply o o he coun ies ac oss
di e en egions ha expe ience disas e s and ecei e humani a ian assis ance, and ha BMZ
iden i ies as candida e coun ies o bila e al de elopmen coope a ion. They may also apply
mo e gene ally o o he middle-income ODA-eligible elec o al au oc acies wi h widesp ead an i-
Wes e n a i udes and pa isan pola isa ion.
One illus a i e example is Indonesia, an elec o al au oc acy wi h a ela i ely high deg ee o
pola isa ion and go e nmen censo ship. The Indonesian go e nmen has been coping wi h he
Rohingya e ugee c isis, and has pleaded wi h he in e na ional communi y o in e ene mo e
esponsibly o esol e he c isis (Ta igan & Sai ullah, 2023). Indonesia also has a his o y o
poli icised humani a ian assis ance – a e he 2004 Indian Ocean sunami, Indonesia accep ed
subs an ial Wes e n aid bu was also wa y o o eign p esence, especially in Aceh, whe e he e
was an ongoing sepa a is con lic a he ime (Deu sche P esse, 2005).
Pakis an was also c i ical o he unde whelming in e na ional solida i y ollowing de as a ing
loods in 2022. The humani a ian aid agencies we e pa ly demobilised, as new laws ha e made
egis a ion and unding access di icul , wi h se e al domes ic NGOs de egis e ed in 2019. To
pu hings in pe spec i e, only $267 million in o icial humani a ian aid had been alloca ed in
2022: oughly en imes less han he $3.2 billion p o ided a e he 2010 loods (Ha ey e al.,
2022). The go e nmen was also unable o quickly access concessiona y clima e unds,
because nea ly 90% o he aid pledged o Pakis an a he Gene a con e ence consis ed o
p ojec loans sp ead o e h ee yea s, and disbu semen depended on how as p ojec s we e
designed (Nabi, 2023). This unde whelming in e na ional esponse gene a ed g ie ances
a ound clima e jus ice, and was also le e aged by go e nmen o icials o shi blame.
In Venezuela, ano he elec o al au oc acy wi h a high le el o pola isa ion and s ong
p opaganda messaging, he go e nmen aims o disc edi he in e na ional humani a ian space.
In 2019, Madu o denied en y o humani a ian agencies and said: “Wi h humani a ian aid, hey
wan o ea us like begga s.” (Lapa illa, 2019) The go e nmen passed ‘an i-NGO law’ ha
subsc ibes o he go e nmen ’s in e p e a ion o in e na ional coope a ion wi h a clea in en ion
o con ol and punish o ganisa ions collabo a ing wi h in e na ional de elopmen coope a ion
ac o s (Amnes y In e na ional, 2022). Gi en such poli icisa ion o he humani a ian landscape
wi h an i-Wes e n go e nmen p opaganda, anspa en communica ion o s a egic aid may
ha e simila implica ions.
In Kazakhs an, an elec o al au oc acy wi h a s ong egime appa a us, e en hough Eu ope is
ecognised as a po en ial economic pa ne i is also pe cei ed as a po en ial h ea agains
poli ical s abili y and cul u al no ms (A yno , 2022). And i has been dealing wi h loods and
d ough s ecen ly, necessi a ing an in e na ional humani a ian esponse. In 2024, se e e loods
hi Kazakhs an, displacing housands o people, and causing millions o dolla s in damage. While
he go e nmen ’s disas e eco e y was skewed and inadequa e, he EU p o ided €200,000 in
humani a ian unding o assis he mos a ec ed amilies (Delega ion o he Eu opean Union o
he Republic o Kazakhs an, 2024). Howe e , he EU’s con ibu ions could no keep up wi h he
Chinese “gene osi y” (Times o Cen al Asia, 2024). Though he e is no schola ly e idence ha
measu es he e ec o his pos -disas e elie aid in he con ex o such geopoli ical compe i ion,
in e es ingly, Eu opean High Rep esen a i e Moghe ini asse s ha “We as Eu opeans a e no
he e o geopoli ical in e es s o games. You know ha well. This is no wha d i es ou o eign
policy. [...] This is he co e o ou new S a egy on Cen al Asia.” (EEAS, 2019) Ins ead, in such
a con ex , whe e Eu ope is ecognised as a po en ial s a egic pa ne wi h ese a ions,
anspa en communica ion o s a egic in en may be he key o s eng hening coope a ion in
he ace o geopoli ical i al y.
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
16
9 Discussion
How does in e na ional assis ance ied o s a egic in e es s impac he ecipien public’s
sen imen s owa ds dono s agains he backd op o hea y au ho i a ian coun e p opaganda?
The e a e good easons o be wo ied abou i s po en ial nega i e epe cussions on public
pe cep ion o he dono s. Fi s , dono s’ ocus on s a egic in e es s may play in o au oc a ic
p opaganda. Unde igh ening iscal cons ain s, dono s may inc easingly p io i ise hei
geos a egic in e es s o e humani a ian needs. As ins umen ali y akes o e in e na ional
solida i y, au oc a ic go e nmen s may exploi hese ends o unde mine us in dono s, uel
scep icism o he in e na ional communi y, and ha ness ideological legi imacy o hei own
egime. Second, s a egic p io i ies may esul in inc eased Wes e n coope a ion wi h
au ho i a ian egimes, deepen pa isan clea ages, and a nish he dono ’s epu a ion in he
ecipien coun y, especially among p o-EU, p o-democ acy pa isan g oups.
I conduc ed an online su ey expe imen in Tu key, a middle-income elec o al au oc acy wi h
high pola isa ion and widesp ead an i-Wes e n a i udes, o p obe he e ec s o di e en ypes
o in e na ional assis ance pos -disas e – uncondi ional, condi ional and s a egic – in he ace
o go e nmen p opaganda ha aims o dismiss i as disingenuous, hypoc i ical and sinis e .
Con a y o my expec a ions, making he s a egic and ansac ional in en behind o eign
assis ance explici inc eased us in Eu opean o ganisa ions and suppo o in e na ional ade
among egime suppo e s, who a e o e all conse a i e, na ionalis and Eu oscep ic, and whose
a i udes a e o en e y di icul o sway. To gi e a clea e pic u e abou he go e nmen ’s suppo
base, hei a e age eligiosi y is 4.67, and baseline us in EU is 2.03 ou o 5.00. Eigh y- ou
pe cen o p o-go e nmen esponden s iden i y hemsel es as conse a i e, Islamis o Tu kish
na ionalis . They cons i u e he backbone o he egime’s main suppo g oup, i al o i s
esilience. Tha is why hese subs an i e shi s in hei a i udes a e c i ical o e o s o
democ a isa ion and o egaining us in libe al o de .
The e may be se e al easons o hese unexpec ed indings. Fi s , i may be a ype o audience
cos e ec . P o-go e nmen o e s may pe cei e he eceip o s a egic aid as a sign o
go e nmen weakness unde in e na ional p essu e, and conside go e nmen p opaganda as
cheap alk. Second, s a egic aid, communica ed anspa en ly as such, ende s he “ ules o
he game” clea o he egime suppo e s, mi iga ing hei conspi a o ial hinking, while educing
us in he go e nmen as he de ende o na ional in e es s, as hey pe cei e i as less
anspa en in i s o eign a ai s. In o he wo ds, anspa ency pays o and go e nmen
p opaganda back i es (see Ga u i, 2024). Thi d, he e may be an a ec i e mechanism a play:
in e na ional solida i y, especially a e he de as a ing ea hquake, may ha e e oked posi i e
emo ions e en among co e egime suppo e s.
Howe e , posi i e shi s in p o-go e nmen o e s’ a i udes come a a cos . While uncondi ional
aid imp o es an i-go e nmen o e s’ suppo o in e na ional ade, s a egic aid ha is
anspa en abou he ins umen al mo i a ions behind i shi s egime opponen s’ a i udes
owa d ade p o ec ionism. I may also ha e po en ial beha iou al ou comes – hey may be less
us ing o , and less likely o engage wi h, o eign media ou le s.
Why does his ma e in he gene al scheme o hings? Fi s , he a ailable s a is ical e idence
sugges s ha hese na u al disas e s may exace ba e pola isa ion (Sinanoglu & Donnelly,
2024). Wi h he inc eased equency o clima e- ela ed disas e s globally, e en a leas -likely
case such as in e na ional solida i y in he o m o pos -disas e eco e y aid may u he
poli icise a socie y, disc edi in e na ional o ganisa ions, and be exploi ed by au oc a s o
poli ical gains. In o he wo ds, he e may be unin ended consequences o s a egically
dis ibu ed aid in e ms o public suppo o in e na ional engagemen in he ecipien coun ies.
Tha is why he e a e policy and p og amming implica ions o hese indings in e ms o
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
23
Pan, J., Shao, Z., & Xu, Y. (2022). How go e nmen -con olled media shi s policy a i udes h ough
aming. Poli ical Science Resea ch and Me hods, 10(2), 317–332.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/ps m.2021.35
Pe iko a, I., & Lazell, M. (2022). “Secu i ized” UK aid p ojec s in A ica: E idence om Kenya, Nige ia
and Sou h Sudan. De elopmen Policy Re iew, 40(1), e12551. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/dp .12551
P a he , L. (2020). T ansna ional ies and suppo o o eign aid. In e na ional S udies Qua e ly, 64(1),
133–147. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/isq/sqz096
Ri chie, H. (2025, Ma ch). Fo many o us, i doesn’ cos much o imp o e someone’s li e, and we can do
much mo e o i . Ou Wo ld in Da a. h ps://ou wo ldinda a.o g/ o eign-aid-dona ions-inc ease
Robe son, G. (2017). Poli ical o ien a ion, in o ma ion and pe cep ions o elec ion aud: E idence om
Russia. B i ish Jou nal o Poli ical Science, 47(3), 589–608.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S0007123415000356
Rozenas, A., & S ukal, D. (2019). How au oc a s manipula e economic news: E idence om Russia’s
s a e-con olled ele ision. Jou nal o Poli ics, 81(3), 982–996. h ps://doi.o g/10.1086/703208
Sandlin, E. W. (2016). Compe ing conce ns: Balancing human igh s and na ional secu i y in US economic
aid alloca ion. Human Righ s Re iew, 17(4), 439–462. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s12142-016-0426-2
Selçuk, O., & Hekimci, D. (2020). The ise o he democ acy – Au ho i a ianism clea age and opposi ion
coo dina ion in Tu key (2014–2019). Democ a iza ion, 27(8), 1496–1514.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13510347.2020.1803841
Shi iko , A. (2024). Re hinking p opaganda: How s a e media build us h ough belie a i ma ion. The
Jou nal o Poli ics, 86(4), 1319–1332. h ps://doi.o g/10.1086/729941
Sinanoglu, S., & Donnelly, M. J. (2024). Clima e disas e s exace ba e pola iza ion: Could c oss-pa isan
ou each help? Resea chGa e,
h ps://www. esea chga e.ne /publica ion/392093494_Clima e_disas e s_and_pola iza ion_unde _a
u ho i a ianism_Could_c oss-pa isan_ou each_help
Singh, R., & Williamson, S. (2022). Whe e is he money om? A i udes owa d dono coun ies and o eign
aid in he A ab wo ld. In e na ional S udies Qua e ly, 66(4), 1–10. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/isq/sqac068
Smi h, H., & O’Ca oll, L. (2024). Eu opean Commission accused o ‘bank olling dic a o s’ by MEPs a e
Tunisia deal. The Gua dian. h ps://www. hegua dian.com/wo ld/2024/ma /13/eu opean-
commission-accused-o -bank olling-dic a o s-by-meps-a e - unisia-deal
Some , M. (2022, Ap il). Old and new pola iza ions and ailed democ a iza ions in Tu key. In G. M. Tezcü
(Ed.), The Ox o d Handbook o Tu kish Poli ics (pp. 295–318). Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/ox o dhb/9780190064891.013.5
Ta igan, E., & Sai ullah, R. (2023, Decembe ). As mo e Rohingya a i e by boa , Indonesia asks he
in e na ional communi y o sha e i s bu den. AP News. h ps://apnews.com/a icle/indonesia-
myanma - e ugees- ohingya-6a4ab1304c 7e2b6c5 a1b8a456d9aca
Te man, R., & Byun, J. (2022). Punishmen and poli iciza ion in he in e na ional human igh s egime.
Ame ican Poli ical Science Re iew, 116(2), 385–402. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S0003055421001167
Times o Cen al Asia. (2024, May). Chinese companies’ gene ous aid o people hi by Kazakhs an’s loods.
h ps:// imesca.com/chinese-%D1%81ompanies-gene ous-aid- o -people-hi -by-kazakhs ans- loods/
Tokdemi , E. (2017). Winning hea s & minds (!): The dilemma o o eign aid in an i-Ame icanism. Jou nal
o Peace Resea ch, 54(6), 819–832. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0022343317708831
Tokdemi , E. (2022). ‘You a e no my ype’: The ole o iden i y in e alua ing democ acy & human igh s
p omo ion. The B i ish Jou nal o Poli ics and In e na ional Rela ions, 24(1), 74–94.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/13691481211016946
Uzonyi, G., & Ride , T. (2017). De e minan s o o eign aid: Ri al y and domes ic ins abili y. In e na ional
In e ac ions, 43(2), 272–299. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/03050629.2016.1171763
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
24
Wang, H., & Coope , A. F. (2023). Public opinion on chinese o eign aid policy: Calcula ed opposi ion o
gene al discon en ? Jou nal o Con empo a y China, 32(141), 455–472.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/10670564.2022.2090101
Weise, Z. (2017, Oc obe ). ’Massi e anxie y’ as Tu key c acks down on in e na ional NGOs. De ex.
h ps://www.de ex.com/news/massi e-anxie y-as- u key-c acks-down-on-in e na ional-ngos-91004
Weiss, J. C., & Da oe, A. (2019). Au ho i a ian audiences, he o ic, and p opaganda in in e na ional c ises:
E idence om China. In e na ional S udies Qua e ly, 63(4), 963–973.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/isq/sqz059
Williamson, S., & Malik, M. (2021). Con es ing na a i es o ep ession: Expe imen al e idence om Sisi’s
Egyp . Jou nal o Peace Resea ch, 58(5), 1018–1033. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0022343320961835
Win e s, M. S., Die ich, S., & Mahmud, M. (2017). Pe cep ions o o eign aid p ojec quali y in Bangladesh.
Resea ch & Poli ics, 4(4), 1–6. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/2053168017735200
Woo, B., & Chung, E. (2018). Aid o o e? Uni ed Na ions Gene al Assembly o ing and Ame ican aid
alloca ion. Poli ical S udies, 66(4), 1002–1026. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0032321717739144
Wood, T., Hoy, C., & P yke, J. (2021). The e ec o geos a egic compe i ion on public a i udes o aid.
Jou nal o Expe imen al Poli ical Science, 8(3), 285–295. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/XPS.2020.27
Wood, T., & Hoy, C. (2022). Helping us o helping hem? Wha makes o eign aid popula wi h dono
publics? Economic De elopmen and Cul u al Change, 70(2), 567–586.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1086/713930
W igh , J. (2009). How o eign aid can os e democ a iza ion in au ho i a ian egimes. Ame ican Jou nal
o Poli ical Science, 53(3), 552–571. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00386.x
Zhang, Q. (2024). When does secu i y coope a ion inc ease o eign aid alloca ion? Jou nal o Con lic
Resolu ion, 68(5), 875–902. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/00220027231183945
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
25
Appendix A: O he esul s
Figu e A1: T us in go e nmen among egime suppo e s
Sou ce: Au ho
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
26
Figu e A2: T us in Eu ope among egime suppo e s
Sou ce: Au ho
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
27
Figu e A3: T ade scep icism among egime suppo e s
Sou ce: Au ho
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
28
Figu e A4: T us in go e nmen among egime opponen s
Sou ce: Au ho
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
29
Figu e A5: T us in Eu ope among egime opponen s
Sou ce: Au ho
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
30
Figu e A6: T ade scep icism among egime opponen s
Sou ce: Au ho
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
31
Figu e A7: Posi i e emo ions among egime suppo e s
Sou ce: Au ho
IDOS Discussion Pape 28/2025
32
Figu e A8: P edic ed p obabili y o epos ing o eign media ou le s among egime
opponen s
Sou ce: Au ho
