Turkey's foreign policy has been strictly criticized in recent years. While it is argued that the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) governments have not been successful and the "zero problems with neighbors," it is also said that Turkey has conflicts with almost all its neighbors and the prestige of the country is lost in the Middle East. However, when looked at calmly, a strange thing might catch our attention. The Middle East is a region where the foreign policies of all countries have failed in recent years. This is particularly valid for the EU and U.S. Consequently, expecting success from Turkey in a region where even the most influential actors have failed is not realistic.Besides, the principle of "zero problems with neighbors" emerged as a reaction that sought to reform the last 80 years of Turkish foreign policy. Although Kemalist Turkey had adopted the slogan: "Peace at home, peace in the world," it could not achieve being a peaceful country either at home or in the world. Nearly all neighbors were treated with a hostile attitude for dozens of years. The AK Party declared that it would reform this approach. "Zero problems with neighbors" is a principle meaning that we would not be the ones causing problems with our neighbors. In these terms, the policies of the AK Party have distinctively differed from the policies followed in the past. Turkey has turned into an extroverted country that cares about its neighbors. However, the Middle East is not a proper place for stability. The Arab Spring and the violent responses in its aftermath stuck the region between authoritarian governments and terrorist activist groups. In this conflict, Turkey tried to not side with any party, but tries to develop a long-term perspective that would directly address the people instead.The requirements of this strategy might not have been practiced. In other words, Turkey surely has failed on some points. However, it is ridiculous to call Turkey unsuccessful only because "zero problems with neighbors" could not be realized since only an artificial friendship can be built with such neighbors that would create problems in the long run. Expecting Turkey to adapt to every change in its neighborhood and setting this as a criterion for success is not rational.When looked at from a broader perspective, it can also be argued that it is essential to know about the targets of a country in order to measure the success of its foreign policy. Talking about failure or success only makes sense in light of certain targets. However, foreign policy commentators are still utilizing modernist criteria of the world of classical nation-states. According to this, the measurement of foreign policy implies the maximization of potential influence, having a web of foreign policy encompassing a large area and getting along with everyone.However, the maximization of potential influence is not the same as the maximization of influence. In other words, when the potential influence of a country increases, it does not mean that the country has turned more influential. The efforts to increase potential influence can enable a country to be present all around the world and form good relations. But in the face of a critical issue, it does not make that country influential in a real sense. A genuine stance and bargaining power are required for that.Turkey's foreign policy in the last decade aimed to strengthen such a stance and gain bargaining power. It has been assumed that the Middle East cannot remain as it is in today's world, that it will evolve on a democratic line sooner or later that this change might be quite painful and that Turkey could build relations with societies and develop an ethical attitude being influential in this process. For this reason, the AK Party does not regard disagreements with some Middle Eastern state regimes as a failure since Turkey already does not wish to build good relations with them.