Do Erdoğan, Fidan, and Kalın also know that this state policy has not changed?

When the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, who visited Trabzon 2 years ago, was gifted a Trabzonspor jersey with the words "Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew" written on it, Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the MHP, a partner in the People's Alliance, reacted with these exact words:

"There is no institution or job description called ecumenical in Turkey. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, while it is stipulated that the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople should not engage in political and administrative affairs and should provide spiritual service to our Greek-Orthodox citizens in our country, he cannot have any status other than being a religious official affiliated with the Fatih District Governorship. The fact that Turkey is being lured into a trap from all sides and its national and spiritual sensitivities are being irritated reveals the true face of a conspiracy that is being advanced in stages. The goal is to create chaos and an environment of crisis... Opportunists are in action, nests of sedition are on alert."

Thanks to this reaction from Bahçeli, the Fatih District Governorship, to which the Patriarchate is affiliated, also remembered the Treaty of Lausanne and emphasized that the "ecumenical" claim of the Patriarchate, which is allowed to remain in Istanbul on the condition that it "does not engage in political activities," does not align with legal realities.

But not a peep was heard from the AKP members. Naturally, in the past 2 years, the "ecumenical" issue has spiraled out of control both domestically and abroad.

Just like the international peace conference on Ukraine in Switzerland that we wrote about the other day. Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan was there, and so was "Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew," by the official invitation of the Presidents of Switzerland and Ukraine... Both of them gave speeches!..

Naturally, we asked whom or what the Patriarch was representing at this conference. It was another absurdity that Foreign Minister Fidan was among the leaders whom Bartholomew, a citizen of the Republic of Turkey, announced he had met at the meeting.

The greatest absurdity concerned the signatories of the declaration published after the conference. The Swiss administration announced the list of states and international organizations that signed the declaration.

Those referred to as "international organizations" were the Council of Europe, the EU Commission, the EU Council, the European Parliament, and the Organization of American States, which is composed of 35 states in the Americas.

And among these, the "Ecumenical Patriarchate" was also included!..

Look at the situation; both Turkey and the "Ecumenical Patriarchate" had signed the declaration.

Thank goodness there were those who calculated the meaning, importance, and consequences of the Patriarchate, which is a Turkish institution according to Lausanne, becoming/being made into a full-fledged "international organization".

First, journalist Ardan Zentürk drew attention to these absurdities in Switzerland and called on state officials, saying, "Have we recognized the Fener Patriarchate as the Ecumenical Patriarch or not? If we have recognized it, please say so."

Then, IYI Party Ankara Deputy Kürşad Zorlu emphasized that it was a "grave mistake" for the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew, to attend that conference with the title of sole religious leader and "Ecumenical," that the Patriarch cannot use a title not granted to him by current laws, and that "wrong steps or diplomatic acceptances here will cause irreparable damage to Turkey's historical gains and sovereign rights," and demanded that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs make an immediate statement.

Ultimately, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Öncü Keçeli made a statement, first reporting that the news that "Minister Hakan Fidan held an official bilateral meeting with Bartholomew on the sidelines of the summit" did not reflect the truth.

Regarding the inclusion of the Patriarchate's name among the signatories of the joint declaration, Keçeli noted that "an explanation was requested from the organizers of the summit, Switzerland and Ukraine."

Finally, Keçeli used the expression, "It is self-evident that there is no change in our state policy regarding the status of the Fener Greek Patriarchate." In other words, he meant to say, "We do not recognize any ecumenicity or whatever."

LET US ANSWER POINT BY POINT

Let us answer these statements by the Foreign Ministry Spokesperson point by point.

Yes, Minister Hakan Fidan and Patriarch Bartholomew did not hold an "official bilateral meeting"; but according to the Patriarchate's statement, they did meet. Just like the meetings Bartholomew held with the Presidents of Ukraine, France, and Georgia, as well as Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis and Vatican Secretary of State Parolin.

Here is the Greek and English version of that statement from the Patriarchate; Fidan's name is also on the meeting list. If no meeting took place, it means the Patriarchate is lying.

Let's assume they met in passing; isn't there a very deep meaning and message in Patriarch Bartholomew mentioning the name of the Foreign Minister of his own country alongside other foreign statesmen?

As for the Patriarchate signing the declaration; an explanation was requested from the organizers of the summit, Switzerland and Ukraine. First; was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs aware of the official invitation extended to Patriarch Bartholomew by the Presidents of Switzerland and Ukraine? If they did not provide information, did Bartholomew inform the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Fatih District Governorship to which he is affiliated?.. Second; what was the response to the "explanation" requested after everything was over?.. Third; did Ankara ask for the name "Ecumenical Patriarchate" on the list to be removed or not? It must not have asked, or Ankara's request for an "explanation" was not taken seriously, because the "Ecumenical Patriarchate" remains on the list!..

If "it is self-evident that there is no change in our state policy regarding the status of the Fener Greek Patriarchate"; are Erdoğan, İbrahim Kalın, and Hakan Fidan aware of this?

Namely;

Didn't Erdoğan say during his visit to Athens in 2010, regarding the use of the "ecumenical" title for Patriarch Bartholomew, "It did not disturb our ancestors, and it does not disturb me"?

In 2017, didn't he boast, "If the Patriarch wanted to go abroad, according to Lausanne, he could have gone with the permission of the Fatih District Governorship. But we even put that aside and said, 'The Patriarchate office is different,' and paved the way for him"?

Exactly 2 years ago, didn't AKP founder and former minister Hüseyin Çelik claim, "In the letters currently written from the Presidency, letters are written to Mr. Bartholomew with the title 'Ecumenical Patriarch,' do you know this? As a state, we already accept this as ecumenical"?

And furthermore, didn't Bartholomew himself, while stating in 2020 that he was addressed as "His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome" in an invitation letter sent from the Palace, and that the expression "Ecumenical Patriarch" was also on the name card on the table at that invitation, explain the following?

"Ankara is not obliged to use this title, but it should not prevent its use. Perhaps thanks to educated people like İbrahim Kalın, this matured under its influence. Indeed, President Erdoğan said; 'This ecumenical issue is a matter that concerns Christians.' After saying this, it became apparent that Ankara's reaction was ending. Perhaps due to the influence of the Venice Commission, perhaps thanks to more enlightened ideas, a letter of invitation addressing me as 'ecumenical' finally came to me last year. At a dinner given by İbrahim Kalın to religious leaders at Dolmabahçe, a note saying 'Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew' was placed in front of me, that was the first time. Then this letter I have in my hand came. I was in Ankara for a few weeks. We talked with İbrahim Kalın. I thanked him for this issue. He said, 'It was even late. It should have been earlier.'"

Leaving all that aside; did Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan not show any reaction because he did not see the "Ecumenical Patriarchate" sign and the Patriarchate flag in front of Patriarch Bartholomew, with whom he sat at the same table at the summit in Switzerland, or because he thinks differently from the Ministry?!