Let's hope its fate is not the same!

In the days when the US and Israel began firing missiles at Iran, and Iran began firing back at Israel and the Gulf line, I thought to myself, "Within three days, a new 'domestic and national missile' show will start in our country too."

And so it happened.

At the SAHA Expo held in Istanbul, we were introduced to "Turkey's first intercontinental ballistic missile." They named it Yıldırım Han, in reference to the Ottoman Empire's fourth sultan, Yıldırım Bayezid.

Naturally, the pro-government media began marketing this as a new epic of the regime without wasting any time.

"Global power," "game-changing technology," "a message to the world," "Turkey is now in a different league"... and so on, stirring up excitement among my fellow citizens...

I don't have a crystal ball.

But I know very well that the government uses every moment when regional tensions rise to fortify its position among my fellow citizens at home.

It was clear that as the smell of gunpowder rose in the Middle East, more maps, more missile animations, and more "global power Turkey" headlines would be reflected on screens here.

Because things are not going very well. The economic crisis has now turned into a social depression; people are furious; they have turned Özgür Özel into a punching bag; the CHP is increasingly dashing hopes with scandals in its municipalities, but for Tayyip Erdoğan, the continuation of his power is not a sure thing.

He no longer has a new prosperity story to sell. Almost half of my fellow citizens are below the hunger threshold; decay in politics and society has reached a new level.

Young people are looking for their future in other countries.

The government only has "power" shows to sell with homeland-nation rhetoric. It is clear that it is very cornered both at home and abroad, and now it has pinned its hopes on 'Yıldırım Han'.

Let poverty not be discussed, let foreign dependency not be discussed, let the collapsing economy not be discussed; let everyone be distracted by the fairy tale that "We are now an intercontinental power."

And of course, whoever the mastermind was, they placed the Ottoman tughra and Atatürk's signature on the missile; that is, the cleverness of melting both the Islamist vein and the secular nationalist reflex in the same propaganda pot...

And then there is the name of the missile... If it were me, I would have thought a little before announcing it to the public. It is clear that they are also ignorant of the Ottoman Empire they admire so much.

Let us still say, "May its fate not resemble that of Yıldırım Bayezid," and continue.

An old master of mine used to say, "A journalist is not someone who knows everything, but someone who knows who knows what well."

That is why I asked an expert, whom I have known to have been studying the technical and strategic dimensions of these issues for years.

The first answer I received was:

"There is a platform on display, but the real capability is still a big question mark."

Then he continued:

"To be able to build an intercontinental ballistic missile, one must possess certain qualifications. Let's categorize these. First of all, the question everyone is asking: Does Turkey have a Yıldırım Han missile? I want to change this question: 'Does Turkey need an intercontinental ballistic missile like the Yıldırım Han missile?' Let's think about this first; possessing such a missile should have a purpose. I am building a 6,000-kilometer missile today, and tomorrow or the next day I will build a 12,000-kilometer one, and inevitably I will attach a nuclear warhead to it along with a conventional one."

That is where the shoe pinches!

If the issue of a nuclear warhead comes to the agenda, the color of the situation changes.

Our expert says;

"Then the world's nuclear club comes into play, and the trouble starts there. Aside from the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council, only Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea remain as nuclear powers."

Our expert has assessments of critical importance:

"Now let's say we have detected an intercontinental threat. Are we really in a position to respond to this threat with missiles? Do we have such an intercontinental power approach, a view of this power? It is clear that an intercontinental ballistic missile is not actually a defensive missile. We are doing defense planning in a structure that prioritizes deterrence and defense. Ranges of 6,000 kilometers, or even 5,500 kilometers and above, inevitably bring to mind the offensive dimension of this business, not the defensive one. The US, Russia, and China are conducting operations in very distant countries, and they feel the need to do so. Because their view of the world is through an imperial window. China uses soft power more, it does some services with its money. The Russians have not conducted many operations to date. But the US has been conducting operations everywhere, especially since World War II, and continues to do so. It already uses its aircraft carriers for this purpose, with the intention of shifting strategic power."

What about Turkey...

Are Brazil, Argentina, Canada, the US, Japan, or Australia hostile countries for us? Are we thinking of conducting operations there? Is there a country 10,000 kilometers away that we can say, "Don't make us angry, we'll come and fire two missiles and leave nothing standing"?

For example, are we hostile to South Africa? Or Madagascar... One needs to evaluate these first.

Actually, in light of the assessment accepted in the National Security Policy Document, these should be planned downwards. That is, a country does not wake up in the morning and start working by saying, 'I want to build an intercontinental ballistic missile,' and then pop it out three days later saying 'voila'.

Our expert says,

"Because they ask the man why he did it. Then the answer to why he did it becomes 'because I can.' However, Japan, Norway, Germany, and Italy also have the capability to build these missiles, but they do not. Because there is a reason for this. First of all, they do not look at the world through such a window. Italy does not have such a target in Australia or Japan, or Norway, which could build such technology, does not have a target in New Zealand or the US. For this reason, they do not get into such a business. We are a country that cannot drill in the Mediterranean and cannot speak up against the islands that Greece has occupied in the Aegean."

Let's come to the economic dimension of the business.

"To really build a missile properly, development costs would be between 20 and 40 billion dollars. These are just development costs. After building the missile, testing and trial studies would also cost around 10 billion dollars. In total, you need to set aside 50 billion dollars just to finish the program successfully. These 50 billion dollars are not just about building the missile; there are many layers, from the training of the people who will design and develop it to the development of the materials to be used in this business. We are a country that sold its tank-pallet factory for 50 million dollars."

Let's also point out the maintenance dimension of the business.

That is, after the missile is built, its deployment, if possible, will be secret, its personnel will be nearby, etc... Even if it is not used, it will be maintained for years, its personnel will live in housing, vehicles in the barracks... Each one is a cost.

Also, you cannot sell what you produce and make money because of the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime).

These things are not like selling UAVs or SİHAs.

There is also the technology issue.

High-energy fuel chemistry, satellite-assisted guidance, inertial guidance, heat-resistant composite materials, microelectronic components...

Our expert's assessments are important; let's convey his final sentences and put a period to our article.

"We are dependent on the outside for a part of these. Can't we do it? We definitely can.

However, there is a condition:

First, you will raise young individuals and a society that catches up with the era by making education modern in essence rather than modern in appearance. Then you will set the right goals and create ecosystems. You will provide the appropriate financing and demand results. Otherwise, we cannot help but argue 'how so, is it real?' when we wake up one morning and see that Turkey has an intercontinental ballistic missile. We will feed ourselves to the imperialists for 3 votes. Let's go back to the beginning, should Turkey have an intercontinental ballistic missile? Unnecessary... Cruise missiles with a range of 2,500-3,000 kilometers meet almost all our needs. Therefore, when resources are found, they should be directed to these and air defense options."