Forest fires that occurred in France during the summer of 2026 mobilized not only the country’s national response capacity but also a broad international solidarity network. Within the framework of the European Union Civil Protection Mechanism, a total of seven aircraft and four helicopters were deployed to France from Czechia, Croatia, Germany, Portugal, Slovakia, Sweden, and Türkiye; satellite mapping was provided through Copernicus, and the European Commission sent a liaison officer to Bordeaux to coordinate assistance.[i] Türkiye also supported France by sending two firefighting aircraft, and France later thanked all countries that provided assistance, including Türkiye.[ii]
This situation may initially be considered a contemporary example of disaster diplomacy. However, defining every cross-border disaster assistance effort directly as a diplomatic activity may blur the distinction between humanitarian solidarity and diplomatic influence. Therefore, the more significant question arising from the French case is under what conditions disaster assistance between states gains diplomatic meaning beyond humanitarian and technical cooperation.
Ilan Kelman, one of the leading scholars in the disaster diplomacy literature, defines the concept as a framework examining how activities related to disasters affect, or fail to affect, conflict and cooperation. This approach includes not only assistance provided after disasters but also pre-disaster activities such as disaster risk reduction and preparedness. One of the important findings of the literature is that disasters do not automatically create new diplomatic opportunities; rather, they may accelerate existing political processes under certain conditions.[iii] Therefore, instead of measuring the diplomatic value of assistance solely through the amount of equipment or personnel provided, it is useful to evaluate together the political context in which assistance takes place, its visibility, reciprocity, and level of institutionalization.
One of the best-known examples of this distinction is the 1999 Turkey–Greece earthquakes. Political rapprochement between the two countries had already begun developing through the dialogue initiated between the foreign ministers of the period, İsmail Cem and George Papandreou, before the earthquakes. Following the earthquakes that occurred in August and September 1999, the mutual assistance provided by both countries gave this process strong social and diplomatic momentum. Indeed, during reciprocal visits held in January and February 2000 following the atmosphere of solidarity, nine agreements were signed in areas such as tourism, environment, investments, economic cooperation, and combating organized crime.[iv] Academic studies therefore evaluate the impact of earthquake diplomacy not as creating a new rapprochement, but rather as a catalyst supporting an already developing political dialogue.
France’s forest fires present a different structure in this regard. The seven countries providing assistance do not have identical political relations with France, and a significant portion of the assistance was coordinated within the framework of the EU Civil Protection Mechanism rather than through direct bilateral initiatives. The aircraft sent by Türkiye were also part of this broader European response. Türkiye has participated in this mechanism since 2016, and today it covers 37 countries; it enables assistance requests to be communicated to participating states, the coordination of national capacities, and the use of the rescEU strategic reserve when these capacities prove insufficient.[v]
At this exact point, the impact of institutionalization on disaster diplomacy can be evaluated in two ways. On the one hand, multilateral mechanisms may reduce the visibility of assistance as a political gesture by one country toward another. The fact that support reaching France came from seven different countries and that a significant portion of it took place within previously established European capacities may limit the bilateral diplomatic meaning of the assistance. On the other hand, the same institutionalization makes the provision of assistance less dependent on the immediate state of political relations and creates a more stable field of cooperation between states. Therefore, the institutionalization of disaster assistance does not eliminate its diplomatic character; rather, it raises the question of at what level diplomatic influence emerges.
Indeed, before the beginning of the 2026 wildfire season, the EU had pre-positioned 777 firefighters from 14 countries in six high-risk countries, including France, and had kept 22 firefighting aircraft and five helicopters ready for intervention.[vi] This capacity-sharing demonstrates that international cooperation is not based solely on political decisions made after disasters occur. At the same time, the roles of assistance providers and recipients are not fixed. A state that provides capacity during one disaster may need the support of the same mechanism in another situation. Thus, reciprocity can be established not only through direct exchanges of assistance between two states but also through an institutional expectation that actors participating in a common mechanism will have access to capacity when needed.
The importance of this cooperation has become more visible alongside the current scale of wildfire risks in Europe. The European Environment Agency states that climate change is increasing wildfire risks across Europe and that the expansion of fire-prone areas and the extension of wildfire seasons are expected to continue.[vii] As of August 2026, more than 576,000 hectares had burned across Europe, and during the same period countries such as France, Spain, Greece, Belgium, Portugal, and Croatia were also fighting wildfires. This situation makes international capacity-sharing not merely an individual diplomatic choice but a matter of common resilience.[viii]
The diplomatic meaning of the assistance provided to France also differs according to the nature of existing relations with the countries providing aid. For example, Portugal’s contribution can be considered an extension of existing solidarity in the field of disaster management within the framework of close France–Portugal relations, which became further institutionalized through the Friendship and Cooperation Treaty that entered into force in 2026.[ix] In contrast, the fact that the assistance provided by Türkiye within the framework of the EU Civil Protection Mechanism was directly and publicly acknowledged by President Emmanuel Macron demonstrates that a multilateral humanitarian assistance activity can also gain bilateral diplomatic visibility.[x] However, this visibility has not yet produced a concrete diplomatic outcome reflected in broader political relations. Therefore, the same disaster response may strengthen existing cooperation in some relationships while creating a positive area of contact that may be used in the future in others. Whether this develops into a lasting diplomatic impact will depend not on the assistance itself, but on whether the parties carry this area into subsequent political contacts.
In conclusion, the forest fires in France demonstrate that the diplomatic significance of international disaster assistance derives not from the assistance activity itself, but from the political and institutional context in which it occurs. Support provided within the same multilateral response may reinforce existing solidarity in already close and institutionalized relationships, while creating new areas of positive engagement and diplomatic visibility in relationships with different political dynamics. However, transferring this potential into broader political relations depends on the parties’ subsequent diplomatic choices beyond disaster assistance. Although multilateral mechanisms may partially reduce the visibility of bilateral gestures, they can make disaster cooperation less dependent on individual political preferences by ensuring continuity. Therefore, the diplomatic significance of the French case should not be sought in the idea that disasters eliminate political differences, but rather in demonstrating under what conditions cooperation can become possible despite these differences in the face of shared risks.
[i] “The EU sends planes and firefighters as wildfires ravage France and Spain”, European Commission, https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/news-stories/news/eu-sends-planes-and-firefighters-wildfires-ravage-france-and-spain-2026-07-27_en, (Date of Access: 18.08.2026).
[ii] Esra Taşkın, “Fransa, orman yangınlarıyla mücadelesine destek veren Türkiye dahil tüm ülkelere teşekkür etti”, Anadolu Ajansı, https://aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/fransa-orman-yanginlariyla-mucadelesine-destek-veren-turkiye-dahil-tum-ulkelere-tesekkur-etti/4030193, (Date of Access: 18.08.2026).
[iii] “Disaster Diplomacy”, Disaster Diplomacy Project, https://www.disasterdiplomacy.org/index.html, (Date of Access: 18.08.2026).
[iv] Kaşif Eryalçın, “Türkiye ile Yunanistan Arasındaki Ticari ve Ekonomik İlişkiler”, T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı, https://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkiye-ile-yunanistan-arasindaki-ticari-ve-ekonomik-iliskiler.tr.mfa, (Date of Access: 20.08.2026).
[v] “EU civil protection mechanism”, European Commission, https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/what/civil-protection/eu-civil-protection-mechanism_en, (Date of Access: 20.08.2026).
[vi] “EU deploys largest ever wildfire response for 2026 summer”, European Commission, https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/news-stories/news/eu-deploys-largest-ever-wildfire-response-2026-summer-2026-06-02_en, (Date of Access: 18.08.2026).
[vii] “Forest fires in Europe”, European Environment Agency, https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/forest-fires-in-europe, (Date of Access: 18.08.2026).
[viii] “Rain aids fight against Belgium’s biggest wildfire, as blazes rip through Europe”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/rainfall-offers-new-hope-fight-against-belgiums-biggest-wildfire-2026-08-17/, (Date of Access: 18.08.2026).
[ix] “Le Traité d’amitié et de coopération entre la France et le Portugal entre en vigueur”, Ministère de l’europe et des affaires étrangères, https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/presse-et-ressources/decouvrir-et-informer/actualites/le-traite-d-amitie-et-de-cooperation-entre-la-france-et-le-portugal-entre-en-vigueur, (Date of Access: 20.08.2026).
[x] Ayvaz Çolakoğlu, “Macron remercie la Türkiye pour l’envoi de deux Canadairs contre les incendies, Anadolu Ajansı, https://www.aa.com.tr/fr/turkiye/macron-remercie-la-turkiye-pour-l-envoi-de-deux-canadairs-contre-les-incendies/4011081, (Date of Access: 20.08.2026).
