Breaking News Israel strikes Doha

[Iskander]

And it wasn't a leader's party then like it is now. Nayers were pretty open about it while Erdogan was pushing them to accept.

At that time, Turkey was unable to pursue a fully independent foreign policy. However, Erdoğan decided to break this pattern from the very beginning. The Justice and Development Party (AKP) fully supported him. Not a single party member opposed him. And since the party held a majority in the Grand National Assembly, Washington's proposal was rejected. Even though Turkey would have been offered tens of billions of dollars and other benefits had it accepted.
I still believe Ankara made the right choice.

 

[Merzifonlu]

Of the 363 AKP deputies, 264 voted "yes." No one but AKP members voted "yes." So how could Erdoğan have blocked the passage of the parliament? And by the way, Erdoğan somehow purged from his party all the deputies who voted "no" in that vote.

Despite Erdoğan's support, the 367 "yes" vote wasn't reached in that vote. Not because Erdoğan wanted it to.

 

[Sanchez]

Turkey was unable to pursue a fully independent foreign policy.

Turkey rejecting demands to use Turkey as a launchbed for the 2003 invasion(for its benefits and problems) was a case of independent foreign policy.

 

[Iskander]

Turkey rejecting demands to use Turkey as a launchbed for the 2003 invasion(for its benefits and problems) was a case of independent foreign policy.

That's exactly how it was back then. Moreover, the Americans even interfered in Turkey's internal politics!

 

[Iskander]

Of the 363 AKP deputies, 264 voted "yes." No one but AKP members voted "yes." So how could Erdoğan have blocked the passage of the parliament? And by the way, Erdoğan somehow purged from his party all the deputies who voted "no" in that vote.

Despite Erdoğan's support, the 367 "yes" vote wasn't reached in that vote. Not because Erdoğan wanted it to.

I don't remember the exact number of voters now. But in the first vote, to Washington's surprise, his request was rejected. After that, pressure was brought to bear on Turkey, with offers of enormous sums of money. American ships carrying soldiers remained off the Turkish coast the entire time. If I'm not mistaken, the second and third votes ended the same way—the Americans were rejected.
(Expulsion from the party is an internal party matter that has never interested me.)

 

[begturan]

Frankly speaking, Türkiye said it would allow America to do so, but the parliament rejected it, and later America's attitude towards Türkiye deteriorated. America's plan to divide the Middle East into pieces could not be prevented at that time, but it was slowed down, just as the division in Syria was slowed down.

 

[Huelague]

Afghan Voice Agency (AVA) - International Service

At the recent summit of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Doha, Qatar, Egypt's proposed plan to form a regional defense force modeled on NATO, dubbed an "Arab NATO," to counter external threats, particularly Israel, encountered strong resistance from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates and effectively failed.
Egypt proposed this plan, based on the 1950 Treaty of Mutual Defense and Economic Cooperation, to ensure the security of Arab countries by creating a rapid-response alliance. However, the main disagreement among the countries present concerned the issue of leadership: Saudi Arabia wanted to command the coalition, while Egypt, drawing on its long-standing military experience, saw itself as a more suitable candidate for this role.
Countries, including Qatar and the UAE, did not support Egypt and rejected the proposal, and ultimately it was decided to limit security matters to the Gulf Defense Council. According to him, even Iran and Turkey were tacitly excluded from the coalition.
After this defeat, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi left the Doha meeting disappointed. Egypt had hoped that the summit would at least lead to a clear stance against Israel's genocide in Gaza and its opposition to the forced displacement of Palestinians to the Sinai Peninsula, but the influence of the United States, which sought to prevent the adoption of harsh resolutions against Israel, prevented these demands from being met.
As a result, the Arab countries present preferred to pressure the United States to find a solution for a ceasefire in Gaza rather than take direct action against Israel.

Egypts plan to form an Arab NATO fails; disagreement over US leadership and influence hinders Arab defense alliance | AVA

At the recent summit of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation held in Doha, Qatar, Egypts proposed plan to form a NATO-style regional defense force under the name quot;Arab NATOquot; with the aim of confronting external threats, especially Israel, faced serious opposition...

www.avapress.com

Saddam Hossein could have united the Arab countries! But the Arabs themselves hanged him with an American rope.
Erdogan refused to allow the US to attack Iraq from Turkish territory. But the Arab countries willingly provided such an opportunity.
Arabs unwilling to submit to Saddam Hossein, an Arab, will have to endure any humiliation from... Netanyahu!
As they say, c'est la vie

View attachment 77471

If we talk about “trouble making Arabs”, we mean S.A. , UAE and maybe Jordan in the first place. This counties are highly connected and dependent on USA and EU. The rest are fighting each others like Animals, what they basically are, according to Thomas Barrack on a speech during a conference.

 

[Iskander]

WASHINGTON/DUBAI, Sept 29 (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to his Qatari counterpart for Israel's attack in Doha during a telephone call from the White House on Monday, a source close to Netanyahu told Reuters.
The call to Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani came as Netanyahu met with U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israels-netanyahu-apologizes-qatar-attack-doha-source-says-2025-09-29/

 

[Huelague]

WASHINGTON/DUBAI, Sept 29 (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to his Qatari counterpart for Israel's attack in Doha during a telephone call from the White House on Monday, a source close to Netanyahu told Reuters.
The call to Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani came as Netanyahu met with U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israels-netanyahu-apologizes-qatar-attack-doha-source-says-2025-09-29/

It will not change anything.

 

[contricusc]

Article 5

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

If you read carefully Article 5, it clearly states that the attack must be in Europe or North America. This means that only Turkey’s European part is covered by Article 5. If Israel were to strike in Ankara, Turkey would not be able to invole Article 5.

There is a precedent to that, when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, and the UK could not invoke Article 5, because the attack was outside Europe or North America.

 

[Sanchez]

If you read carefully Article 5, it clearly states that the attack must be in Europe or North America. This means that only Turkey’s European part is covered by Article 5. If Israel were to strike in Ankara, Turkey would not be able to invole Article 5.

There is a precedent to that, when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, and the UK could not invoke Article 5, because the attack was outside Europe or North America.

You should read article 6:

"Article 6

“For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:

on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France(later removed), on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.”

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm

Entirety of Turkey fall under article 5.

 

[contricusc]

You should read article 6:

"Article 6

Thanks for the follow up, and for pointing out that Article 6 mentions the exceptions and adds the entire teritory of Turkey.

He just quoted Article 5 in the initial post, where the text didn’t include anything outside Europe and North America. It was weird to not cover the entire of Turkey, but Article 6 fixes that, as you have shown.

Thanks for the correction.