Introduction
attracting the global public opinion is one of the main functions of diplomacy in the era of globalization. Not only the domestic acceptance and legitimacy of government is a strategic necessity, but also they need reflecting an acceptable and attractive image of the nation and country as a whole on the global. States can no longer limit their foreign policy audiences to governments and politicians, but also need to engage constructively with communities, the media, non-governmental organizations, companies, and international institutions.
Turkey is one of the interesting cases of image building in the international arena. Until the 1990s, the Turkish government did not have a detailed plan for the image of the country to foreigners. Factors such as the desire to join the European Union and its related problems led Turkey to move in this direction. After applying for membership in the European Community in the 1980s and then the European Union in the 1990s, Turkish decision-makers realized that an unfavorable image in Western public opinion was the main obstacle to the country's accession to the European Union. They have taken a stronger will to rebuild and improve the image of country, especially during the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) period.

Materials and Methods
This article seeks to answer the question of what tools the Turkish government has used to project its image to the outside world and what results it has achieved. The initial hypothesis is that the Turkish government has used public diplomacy alongside official diplomacy to approach its ideal image and has achieved significant achievements in this way. The tool of public diplomacy has been of strategic importance, especially for the AK Party administration. The aim was for Turkey to be recognized among the Islamic world as a country that has been able to bridge the gap between tradition and modernity, Islam and secularism, and East and West, experiencing a successful entry into the development process. As a result of this strategy, significant changes were made in Turkey’s image and the public opinion of various countries towards it improved overall. However, the persistence of some issues has caused the West to remain pessimistic about the Turkish government and issues such as accession to the European Union to remain unresolved. To examine the hypothesis, the article uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative data related to the subject.

Discussion and Results
Over the past decade or two, the Turkish decision-makers have sought to create a new image of their country that contains several basic characteristics: democratic, freedom-loving, peace-loving, responsible, justice-seeking, progressive, development-oriented, reliable, supportive of global governance, with a rich cultural-civilizational background, and with a moderate Islam that is capable of creating reconciliation and cooperation between the Islamic world and the Western world. Turkey could even act as a bribge between the West and the East. With this image, Turkey can play a role in the international arena from the position of a cultural, economic, and even political inspirational axis.
Public diplomacy has played an important role in improving the country's international standing, although the level of achievements has decreased somewhat since the mid-2010s. For nearly two decades, Turkey has been the focus of attention and admiration of a wide section of the world's public opinion, especially in the Islamic world, for reasons such as institutional reforms in the country's governance system, improved economic, social, and political conditions at home, and constructive interactions with the outside world. For a while, Turkey emerged as an inspiring power in the region, and Erdogan himself became one of the most popular political figures in the Islamic world. Along with the relative improvement in the political and social situation, there has been admirable growth in the country's economy. All of these have led to Turkey being introduced as an inspiring development model in the developing world, especially in Islamic countries.
Despite these achievements, there have been challenges and setbacks. The government's democratic positions and reforms have not been as well received by the world's public opinion as they should have been. The Erdogan’s administration has been authoritarian against internal opposition on several occasions. In the field of foreign relations, some events including Ankara's controversial intervention in the Syrian civil war have had negative impacts on Turkey's international reputation. The Turkish economy has enjoyed acceptable growth for nearly two decades and has risen to the level of one of the world's top 20 economies. However, signs of malfunctioning became apparent in the early 2020s.
Overall, the performance of the AK Party government in its second decade has been less shining. An important criterion that can provide an acceptable assessment of the effects of Turkey's public diplomacy is the changes in the country's attractiveness and soft power. According to the 2010 IfG-Monocle Index, Turkey ranked 25th in the world in terms of soft power. This ranking changed to 23rd in 2011 and 20th in 2012. Turkey’s soft power began to decline from 2013 onwards. The country’s ranking dropped to 28th and 30th in 2015 and 2017, respectively. There was no significant improvement in the country’s situation in the following years.

Conclusion
Turkey is defined as a country with a rich and inspiring cultural-civilizational heritage in its peripheral regions, a compromise between Ottoman-era traditions and modern world values including democracy and market economy, a bridge between East and West, and an active partner for effective global governance. In this image, Turkey is a growing and prosperous power that has the ability to act and inspire in the regional and international arena. This strategy had many successes in the first decade of the AKP government. However, Turkey’s international credibility or soft power began to decline in the second decade. Although the domestic popularity of the AKP and Erdogan himself has been largely maintained, Turkey has somewhat distanced itself from the narrative and image that was the ideal of its leaders. Turkey’s image building strategy seems to have relied too much on Erdogan. That was productive for a while, but gradually became less efficient.