Breaking News Israel strikes Doha

Sanchez

Experienced member
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
3,366
Reactions
103 15,198
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Let me remind you that at that point, Erdoğan's party had a two-thirds majority (quorum) in the Grand National Assembly.
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.
 

Iskander

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
775
Reactions
14 2,035
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
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

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
765
Reactions
27 2,298
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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

Experienced member
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
3,366
Reactions
103 15,198
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
775
Reactions
14 2,035
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
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

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
775
Reactions
14 2,035
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
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

Committed member
Messages
262
Reactions
4 399
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom