MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli said, "If the rule of the negotiation table had been maintained and military methods had not been resorted to, today we would be talking not about the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, but about the principles on which the final agreement would be based. Therefore, first of all, the attacks should be stopped, the violated provisions of the agreement should be made operational again, and the parties should comply with their mutual obligations." he said.
At his party's Grand National Assembly Group Meeting, Bahçeli stated that reading the NATO Ankara Summit as an ordinary diplomatic activity would be an incomplete, shallow and flawed evaluation.
Stating that more than 70 years of alliance law has been accounted for in Ankara and touching on the issues discussed, Bahçeli emphasized that it is clearly understood that in Ankara, alliance is not just about poses under the bright lights of cameras, insipid condemnation messages published on crisis days, and listing polished sentences on podiums, but that true alliance will be built on equity, sincerity, production, sharing and solidarity.
Stating that Türkiye has become one of the founding actors of the new era in NATO, not only with its geostrategic position, but also with its historical background, state experience, political will and national power, Bahçeli said that the political and strategic level that Türkiye has reached was seen once again at the Ankara Summit. Bahçeli said:
"Today, NATO is at the dawn of a new era. This era is not just an era in which zeros are added to the right of the defense budgets and the numbers are enlarged. This era is a new phase in which commitment on paper will turn into production in the factory, production into capability in the field, capability into deterrence, and deterrence into the guarantee of peace. In such an era, security will be measured not only by the size of the budget, but by the continuity of production that will turn that budget into capability. This is actually the issue before NATO today. Has the alliance realized this new security era? Will it base burden and burden sharing on a real basis of justice? Will it be able to eliminate the contradictions that harm alliance law such as covert embargoes, license restrictions, political blockages and supply barriers among its allies?
Our President's call to end defense industry restrictions is one of the main warnings of the Ankara Summit. The will to lift CAATSA sanctions and reconsider the F-35 process is important, but the point we need to focus on is to eliminate the erosion of trust in the alliance system caused by the unfair treatment that Türkiye has been faced with for years. Because it is unwise to accept Türkiye's sacrifice on the field and make its defense capability the subject of political calculations. If today, our domestic and national production rate in the war inventory of the glorious Turkish Armed Forces has exceeded eighty percent and turned into a tremendous growth, this magnificent picture is the picture of how the bondage pressure imposed on our nation is being torn apart. For this reason, every positive step taken on behalf of Türkiye from now on is not a blessing, but a sign of justice and truth finding its place, even if it is late or difficult."
Bahçeli stated that Türkiye's first domestic and national observation satellite with sub-meter resolution, İMECE, has come to the fore as a new capability on NATO's space horizon, showing that Türkiye has reached a state mind that thinks about defense not only on land, at sea and in the air, but also in space. Recalling the systems produced in the defense industry, especially the national combat aircraft KAAN, Bayraktar KIZILELMA and Akıncı, he pointed out that Türkiye does not have easy access to a huge inventory.
Stating that the roots of the said rise should be sought in the experiences of the historical impositions that Türkiye was subjected to, Bahçeli said, "The embargo nooses that were wanted to be wrapped around our necks right after the Cyprus Peace Operation, the hypocritical diplomacy staged in the fight against terrorism, the insidious traps set in the F-35 corridors and the artificial walls built with CAATSA sanctions have left our noble nation with no other way than to cut its own belly." "The Turkish state has fulfilled its noble nature and shattered the circle of siege around it by resorting to its own essence. That mighty spirit, which personally built its tent centuries ago, forged its sword on its own anvil, and raised its standard in the front line, has come to life again in our age with our local and national defense industry." he said.
"Agreement is the commitment of states, not of an individual"
Reminding US President Donald Trump's words about Iran, stating that "the agreement process is over for him", Bahçeli said, "The neutralization of the agreement, which gave hope to the region only a short time ago, stopped the fire of the conflict and set out a timetable for reaching a final agreement, within a month, and then bombed Iranian lands again, has shaken the confidence in the possibility of peace." he said. Pointing out that Iran was attacked while it was a party to the agreement, Bahçeli said:
"Ignoring this fact and evaluating the subsequent decisions taken by the Tehran administration to close the Strait of Hormuz under the title of an independent aggression, as if nothing had happened before, would not be a correct, fair and conscientious approach. Presenting the cause as the effect and the effect as the cause would mean nothing but turning the truth upside down. Iran has the right to protect its security, to defend its sovereign rights and to ensure the safety of its nation in the face of attacks against its country. No state can violate the agreement it has signed. "It is not obliged to tolerate sudden bombing while believing that it will protect itself. No nation has to meet the bombs falling on its land with suggestions of calm."
Stating that those who expect moderation from Iran should first explain the legitimate reason for the military intervention targeting Iran, Bahçeli pointed out that it is natural for the USA to have concerns about Iran's nuclear program, its military activities in the region and the safety of ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
Emphasizing that it is possible to address these concerns at the negotiation table, bind them to auditable provisions and eliminate them with mutual assurances, and that this is the purpose of the agreement, Bahçeli continued as follows:
"However, security concerns cannot be used as a justification for creating a greater crisis and chaos in our region. Relations between states are carried out on the principle of pacta keeping, not on personal actions that are considered valid one day and declared invalid the next day for arbitrary reasons. The US President's statement that 'the agreement is over for me' is therefore problematic. The agreement is not a commitment of a person, but of states. The agreement reached with Iran today can easily be abandoned tomorrow, not only by Tehran, but also by Tehran." "It will raise the same question in the minds of all capitals that will sit at the table with Washington in the future: When will the cauldron of crisis begin to boil again? When will the time bomb laid under the negotiation table explode? For what purpose will the hope of peace be abandoned once again? Moreover, the fact that the statement in question was made during the NATO Summit is thought-provoking."
Bahçeli stated that presenting the situation in the Strait of Hormuz as an unreasonable and arbitrary action by Iran only tells half the truth, and said:
"Hormuz is a strategic passage where the world economy, energy supply, maritime trade and livelihoods of millions of people are interconnected. Any disruption experienced here will extend from ships carrying oil and natural gas to production costs, transportation costs, food prices and finally to the citizens' tables. The key and source of the deadlock in Hormuz should be sought in the place where the agreement was broken. If the rule of the negotiation table had not been preserved and military methods had not been resorted to, the Strait of Hormuz would have been closed today." Rather, we would be talking about the principles on which the final agreement will be based. Therefore, the attacks must be stopped, the violated provisions of the agreement must be made operational again, and the parties must comply with their mutual obligations. The door to peace has recently been opened. The responsibility of removing the shadow that has fallen on peace belongs to the parties of the agreement. The USA must see the consequences of the military intervention that are incompatible with negotiations and return to the security of the passages in Hormuz. "The tension rising from Hormuz must be stopped before it turns into a bigger disaster. The Republic of Turkey will continue its uncompromising stance in favor of peace, as it has done so far, and must continue to fulfill its responsibilities in the name of preserving regional stability. Let us not forget that there will be no winners in war, nor will there be losers in keeping the promise."