No, It is not the same meaning, It literally means " The food (which is) in turkey is nice..
mesela; The restaurant that is in Istanbul is better = Istanbul'deki restoran daha iyi/guzel
so you went to a specific restaurant in Istanbul and you liked it, not all the restaurants are good but it is one specific restaurant that you liked.
back to the main sentence; Those specific dishes you ate in Turkey were so nice, so you be like "The food (that is) in turkey is very nice.
p.s; you can always omit (that/which is) in English and people would understand you though, But in Turkce, you can't do that cause it will give you a different meaning.
I hope that answer your question.
This distinction would make sense even in English if it were in the past tense or comparative, but for this specific sentence I can't imagine a scenario where the two sentences would have different meanings. That is, I agree that "The food is very nice in Turkey" should be accepted.
Türkiye'deki ("in Turkey" so as "that is in Turkey") is a specification or characteristic of the food, it works like an adjective and relates to the noun: WHICH food? Türkiye'deki yemekler
Türkiye'de ("in Turkey") is an adverbial clause that relates to the verb in the sentence: WHERE is the food nice? Türkiye'de...
You could say iyi and it wouldn't be wrong, but güzel is a more normal way to say this kind of thing. Güzel is a very all-purpose compliment: to say that food is tasty, a place is beautiful, a girl is pretty, the weather is fine, etc... It's just the general word that comes to mind for all things like that.
This so stupid translations in english. To say this phrase is different ways, why am i oblige to use only this version or their register version? Am not learning english at all here, who cares, i understand the sentence, but they are repeating the same thing all time. Pfff stupid