They gave a presentation to the PKK commission, but...

The Mecca agreement, which was enthusiastically welcomed by Trump—who the pro-government Yeni Şafak newspaper deemed a "maniac" and who claimed he would fulfill Erdoğan's request if asked to "retaliate against Yemen"—sailed through the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) last week with ease.

It was as significant as, if not more important than, the motion that paved the way for the invasion of Iraq; yet, only 398 deputies participated in the vote, and it was passed with 279 votes.

Why is it important? Because we face the possibility of entering into conflict with the Houthis in Yemen on behalf of Saudi Arabia, and indirectly, coming face-to-face with Iran.

Let us underline it again; the agreement states: "In the event that one of the parties is subjected to armed attack or military aggression by another country or group of countries, the parties shall immediately assist the party under attack by using all mutual assistance capabilities they can provide to each other."

What could be meant by "group of countries"?.. Not to mention that the agreement is binding for 10 years!..

THE "STATE" DID NOT COME TO PARLIAMENT

Main opposition leader Kılıçdaroğlu, who embraced the Mecca agreement, took refuge in the justification that "We are supporting the state, not the government"; however, one would expect Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan or Defense Minister Yaşar Güler to inform the TBMM General Assembly about such an important agreement, right? Indeed, it was reported before the deliberations that Fidan was expected to provide a briefing. But do you know what the AKP officials said?

They stated that because "there have been many discussions on the subject so far and everything has been spoken about openly," there was "no situation at the moment that would require Fidan to make a presentation"!..

So, were these two ministers out of Ankara on Wednesday and Thursday, when the agreement was being discussed, or did they have much more important business?

No, both were in Ankara, and both had meetings with the Qatari Defense Minister and the Speaker of the Croatian Parliament. Fidan also attended the funeral of the late Ambassador Metin Ergin.

Fidan did not go to Parliament, but he wrote an article for the monthly magazine of the Anadolu Agency, AA Briefing, titled "The role of regional ownership in our foreign policy: The Mecca Defense Alliance," explaining that "the vision of regional solutions for regional problems is shared by Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia," and that the agreement was signed to "strengthen collective security."

THE "RUDE," "HEY," AND "ENTROPY"-FILLED MECCA AGREEMENT

It has been 23 years, and we still remember what happened during the March 1st motion. We will likely be discussing the Mecca agreement for a long time as well. Therefore, let us share some noteworthy notes from the deliberations in the TBMM General Assembly.

Speaking on behalf of the DEM Party group, Diyarbakır deputy Ceylan Akça Cupolo drew attention to the fact that the agreement was not discussed in the National Defense Commission, which is a sub-commission, before the Foreign Affairs Commission, and said:

"Fuat Oktay said in the Commission that he wrote to the National Defense Commission, but that Hulusi Akar sent a letter saying, 'I have nothing to do with this place, there is nothing I can do. As the Chairman of the National Defense Commission, there is no situation that concerns me.'"

Regarding this matter, the minutes of which we will examine shortly, while Foreign Affairs Commission Chairman Oktay responded to Cupolo by saying, "We have no such statement, correct your statement," National Defense Commission Chairman Hulusi Akar said, "Rude!" and "He is lying!"

There was no answer to Cupolo's question: "Then tell us; what exactly does defense have to do with Foreign Affairs? If military training, equipment, arms sales, and arms production are not your field of work, whose field is it? How can the National Defense Commission not take this and evaluate it?"

Who do you think spoke on behalf of the AKP in the General Assembly? It was Hulusi Akar, the former Chief of General Staff and Defense Minister, who did not see the need for the agreement to be discussed in the National Defense Commission, which he chairs. What did he say?

He spoke about the "epistemological chaos" in our region and the world, that is, "disinformation, misinformation, and manipulations." It must be a twist of fate; he gave the example of the invasion of Iraq, which the AKP government supported, and said, "They entered Iraq by mentioning weapons of mass destruction, Iraq was devastated, and then they said, 'It was wrong information,' and corrected it. Therefore, in the words of the ancients, we say 'Bade harabül Basra' (After Basra is ruined)."

He said that a study conducted in a European country concluded that 59-60 percent of young people do not want to go to war even to protect their country if a war breaks out...

He claimed that all developments in and around our region are taking place "in the shadow of China in one way or another" and stated that all countries are "'flirting' with each other in some way, regardless of friend or foe distinction"...

He noted that, "subject to confirmation," Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said, "Maybe we need to establish an organization against NATO as well."...

He pointed out that many international organizations, especially the UN, are seriously exposed to "entropy" and that there is talk of a third world war...

He talked about the agreements and contracts made in the world since 2020, China's Belt and Road initiative, India's IMEC project; and furthermore, the peace between the Vatican and the Anglican Church, which had not spoken for 500 years...

He provided information about the maritime jurisdiction agreement made with Libya and the Badr agreement signed between Turkey, Qatar, Indonesia, and Pakistan...

He did not neglect the "Terror-Free Turkey" process, and while emphasizing that "we are obliged to take precautions today" so as not to fall into situations where "young people in such and such a country do not want war, do not want to protect their country," he said: "Realizing a Terror-Free Turkey is actually very easy for us because we are talking about a nation that has managed to live side by side for centuries without looking at anyone's ethnic, religious, or sectarian identity, and in this way, has galloped horses across 7 climates and 3 continents with science and reason; a nation that has ensured justice, unity, togetherness, peace, and stability. Therefore, we are not colonialists or imperialists. 'Yâ vâliyete külli mazlûmîn' (O Protector of all the oppressed) is written on the gate of our palace; it is the sanctuary of all the oppressed."

On Akar's agenda were many other topics, from the Aegean-Mediterranean-Cyprus-Montreux to Azerbaijan and "Cenap Prezident Aliyev," and from Gaza to Israel's "activities against Iran" together with the US. Of course, he did not forget our successes in the defense industry...

At that point, IYI Party Bursa deputy Selçuk Türkoğlu asked, "Is that why you are moving the baby killer to a villa? Did we lose a war?"

While Akar did not respond to this, AKP deputies reacted by saying, "Listen, don't talk, hey, listen."

If you ask, "Where is the Mecca agreement?"; Akar mentioned the name of the agreement only twice. And that was as follows:

He spoke about the agreements made since the Republican era by saying, "Until we come to the Mecca agreement." In the second instance, he said the following:

"When the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement was made... Well, it was discussed and deliberated in detail a moment ago. This is truly a matter of solidarity and deterrence. We already have military cooperation agreements with both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. With this agreement, these relations are being developed a little further... This agreement is in no way an alternative to NATO or anything like that; this is a complementary union and is not against any country. Just as we do not have any soldiers abroad at the moment, if it becomes necessary for them to be there in any way from now on, this will definitely be subject to the permission of Parliament."

As is known, it turned out that Hulusi Akar was among the 59 AKP deputies who did not participate in the voting for the Mecca agreement. Let us note that, to avoid any misunderstanding, Akar went to Ireland for the "Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP)" immediately after that speech in the General Assembly!..

MINUTES OF THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMISSION

Let us come to the fact that DEM Party's Ceylan Akça Cupolo's remarks in the General Assembly regarding the agreement not being discussed in the TBMM National Defense Commission were denied by both Fuat Oktay and Hulusi Akar.

According to the minutes of the Foreign Affairs Commission meeting on October 27; New Party Eskişehir deputy Utku Çakırözer raised the following objection regarding procedure:

"It would have been necessary for an agreement that could make Turkey a party to regional crises, that could contain risks for the security of the TSK (Turkish Armed Forces) and Turkey, that could make the risks of other countries the risks of our own country, and that could attract threats to us, to go to the National Defense Commission, which is in a secondary position before us, for us to read and evaluate its report, and to direct our discussions accordingly; it can still be done... Because when you look at it, it is a military agreement in all its articles."

Upon this, the following dialogues took place:

Fuat Oktay: A very reasonable request, we already thought similarly and contacted our relevant Commission to receive their opinions and evaluations and to request their reports, and an official letter has arrived from them stating that they will not have any work or reports at this stage. As you know, in accordance with Article 37 of the Rules of Procedure, there is a provision that secondary commissions will conclude the proposals referred to them within ten days. Therefore, the Commission officially notified our Presidency on October 26 that the proposal in question would not be discussed, meaning they have been communicated with on this matter.

Çakırözer: So, they didn't want to discuss it?

Fuat Oktay: I mean, they don't have any reports available at this stage, and they have officially informed us that they will not discuss it.

Utku Çakırözer: Then why is there a need for a secondary commission in Parliament? I mean, the secondary commission exists exactly for this.

Fuat Oktay: Speaking on behalf of the secondary commission, that is, for me to comment here on their behalf would not be elegant, nor would it be correct; but we sought their opinion with a similar justification.

After the rejection of two motions by Çakırözer and Düzce deputy Talih Özcan regarding obtaining an opinion from the National Defense Commission on the agreement or establishing a sub-commission within the Foreign Affairs Commission, the dialogues continued as follows:

Utku Çakırözer: It is truly a misfortune that the National Defense Commission did not feel the need to discuss such an agreement and notified the Parliament Presidency or you of this in writing... We brought this motion to the agenda with the thought that it would provide an opportunity for all of us to listen to the experts of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of National Defense, and the Defense Industry in detail and to be informed about how the risks brought by the agreement will be eliminated. We thought that perhaps we could compensate for this opportunity that the secondary commission missed by evaluating it a little more comprehensively in the sub-commission.

Oğuz Kaan Salıcı: It is a scandal that you sent the joint defense agreement to the National Defense Commission and the commission did not express any opinion, I mean, the beginning of the subject is defense and the end is defense.

Fuat Oktay: Let me make a correction, we do not send it, the Parliament Presidency sends it to the relevant presidencies.

Oğuz Kaan Salıcı: I know, the Parliament Presidency sends it, but you asked for an opinion, as I understand it.

Fuat Oktay: I mean, we shared the letter that came from there.

Oğuz Kaan Salıcı: It only diminishes the scale of the scandal in my opinion, there is no problem with the part where it is a scandal.

In short; there was no need felt for such an important agreement, which is entirely related to security, to be discussed in the TBMM National Defense Commission... The relevant ministers did not inform the General Assembly... And only 398 deputies participated in the voting...

Come and remember that the then Ministers of Justice and Interior, Yılmaz Tunç and Ali Yerlikaya, and the Minister of Family, Mahinur Özdemir Göktaş, as well as MIT President İbrahim Kalın, along with Hakan Fidan and Yaşar Güler, made presentations at the meeting of the "national solidarity, brotherhood, and democracy commission" established in the TBMM for the PKK opening—even if it was a closed session;

And furthermore, that a record number of deputies participated in the voting for the "framework law," which the PKK/DEM calls the "root law"!..