Who is 'surrendering' to whom in the AKP-MHP alliance?!

This is the most current debate of the recent period. However, we will not touch upon the domestic aspect of the issue, but rather the foreign policy part, which is described in the vein of “challenging the seven climes.”

Last week, there were some new developments that both remain a historical threat to our country—or rather, have been revived under the AKP government—and will cause us headaches in terms of global balances.

The institution at the center of these events was the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople in Istanbul and Patriarch Bartholomew, which almost no party, except for a handful of people and the media, even cares about.

The Patriarchate is a Turkish institution affiliated with the Fatih District Governorate, which was allowed to remain in our country under the Treaty of Lausanne on the condition that it only deals with the religious affairs of our Greek citizens in Istanbul, Bozcaada, and Gökçeada. Patriarch Bartholomew is also a Turkish citizen.

However, especially during the AKP government, significant progress has been made in violating the Treaty of Lausanne under the impositions of the US and the EU to turn this place into a “state within a state.” The “Ecumenical” title, which the Patriarch uses with the claim that he is the leader of 300 million Orthodox Christians, has also been accepted by Erdoğan’s palace. Finally, the Patriarchate and the Patriarch have also become deeply involved in the Russia-Ukraine war.

A Puppet of Imperialism, Claiming to Take Atatürk as an Example

We said “Russia-Ukraine war,” let’s start from there.

A few days ago was Ukraine’s Independence Day. Making a statement on this occasion, Ukraine’s Ambassador to Ankara, Vasyl Bodnar, said, “The struggle for independence and success that Atatürk and his comrades-in-arms waged 100 years ago against enemies that were numerically far superior serves as a source of inspiration for us as a historical example of success,” how about that?

Atatürk and his comrades-in-arms waged a war of independence against imperialists... While they themselves are openly acting as puppets of the US-EU-NATO... But the man is not only mocking our intelligence like this, but as a spokesperson for the imperialists, he is practically mocking our own struggle for independence!..

And what should we say about the fact that the Fener Greek Patriarchate, which Atatürk described as a “nest of sedition and treason,” is at the center of the religious dimension of this so-called struggle for independence of Ukraine?!

Even the Pope Reacted, Ankara Remained Silent

Another event from last week; the Ukrainian Parliament banned the activities of the church affiliated with Moscow, and President Zelensky approved it.

The first person Zelensky called and thanked after the decision was Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople. Because he was the architect of the Ukrainian Church’s separation from Moscow.

The only part of this meeting that circles sensitive to the issue in our country focused on was Zelensky addressing Bartholomew for the umpteenth time with the title “Ecumenical Patriarch.” Yet, not only Zelensky but almost all world leaders use this title; moreover, as we mentioned above, Bartholomew is now invited to Erdoğan’s palace even as “Ecumenical.”

Naturally, Ankara could not be expected to react to this address by Zelensky; but it also did not care about the church ban, to which not only Russia but even the World Council of Churches and Pope Francis reacted. Is this their understanding of “religious freedom” that they boast about, and the sensitivities they observe for the Russia-Ukraine balance?!

The Great Gökçeada Conference

Another scene centered on the Patriarchate; Patriarch Bartholomew went to Gökçeada for his summer vacation.

In the services he attended there; while speaking about the “anniversary of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary,” which has been organized at the Sümela Monastery on August 15—the date Fatih Sultan Mehmet conquered Trabzon—and which Greece has been celebrating as the “Pontus holiday” since 2010, Bartholomew not only called the Monastery the “protector of Pontus,” but also called on the “new generation” in Gökçeada and Gökçeada natives from all over the world to attend the “Great Gökçeada Conference” to be held in Athens in September.

Bartholomew also emphasized, “Our conference will be an important event in terms of the struggles waged for our presence and future in our small homeland.”

Who is Bartholomew to Accept Davutoğlu?

The most notable event of Bartholomew in Gökçeada was his meeting with former Prime Minister and Future Party Chairman Ahmet Davutoğlu.

While it was reported that “issues concerning the ‘Ecumenical Patriarchate,’ especially the reopening of the Halki Seminary and Greek-Turkish relations were discussed,” this meeting was again reacted to only by circles sensitive to the issue, and questions were asked such as, “In what capacity is Ahmet Davutoğlu holding these meetings?.. Is it a coincidence that the US Consul General in Istanbul was in Gökçeada on the same days?.. Although both sides are Turkish citizens, which side spoke representing Greece?”

Another point as important as these was that the meeting was reported on the Fener Greek Patriarchate’s website as: “He accepted Mr. Ahmet Davutoğlu, former Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey, founder and Chairman of the Future Party.”

Is Not Going to Sümela a Success or a Show of Power?

The most discussed of the Patriarchate-centered events last week was the service at Sümela Monastery.

First, a small reminder; last year, somehow, the government did not initially allow this service. The Patriarchate stirred up the Greek-Greek front. The “World Pontian Hellenism Council” sent a letter to Erdoğan full of delusions of “genocide and occupation” and requested that the service be allowed, and three days after that letter, the service was permitted. The Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs also welcomed this decision with “satisfaction.”

As for this year; when circles with sensitivities raised their voices saying, “This is a move to revive the Pontus dream” and demanded that the service not be allowed, the government decided to hold the service on August 23 instead of August 15. The Patriarchate also decided that the service would be managed not by Bartholomew, but by the so-called “Metropolitan of Gallipoli and Eceabat,” Stefan.

The World Pontian Hellenism Council reacted again. In the letter sent to the Greek Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, as well as Erdoğan, it was requested that the Greek government contact Turkish officials, while Turkey was again accused of committing “genocide and ethnic cleansing.”

Ultimately, the service was held on August 23 amidst the reactions. Beforehand, the Trabzon Governorate announced, as if it were a success, that the service would be managed not by Bartholomew, but by his deputy!..

However, it was obvious that by not attending the service, Bartholomew was sending a message that he did not recognize the government’s decision to change the date. Sending the so-called “Metropolitan of Gallipoli and Eceabat” in his place was again a violation of Lausanne. And no one asked, “What is the relevance of a metropolitanate here, by what authority were these established?”

MHP’s Patriarchate Policy

We know that the AKP has no issue with the Patriarchate, ecumenism, or the violation of Lausanne. What about the MHP?

There are dozens of statements Devlet Bahçeli has made on these issues since 2004. What didn’t he say about both the ambitions of the Patriarchate and the AKP’s turning a blind eye to them!..

Such as the expressions: “We are of the opinion that one must be blind not to see that the goal of seizing Istanbul by turning it into a miniature or city-state similar to the Vatican is being persistently pursued... We do not know ‘Ecumenical,’ we do not understand the Priest school, and we will never fall into the trap of missionaries, dialogue-seekers, and invisible church apostles who find the field empty in our last homeland.”

It has been on Bahçeli’s agenda not only when he was in the opposition but also after joining the People’s Alliance. For example, when he went to Trabzon to manage the service at Sümela in 2022, he described the gifting of a jersey with “Ecumenical” written on it to Bartholomew as a “scandal” and a “challenge,” and reminded that “there is no institution or job description called ecumenical in Turkey.”

Again, two months ago, he reacted to Bartholomew being invited to the Ukraine Peace Summit in Switzerland with the title of so-called “Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople” with the expressions: “There is no city called Constantinople within the borders of the Republic of Turkey, the Ecumenical title has no legality or legitimacy, on the contrary, those who claim otherwise are all Byzantium lovers, rabid enemies of the Muslim Turkish nation. No one has the power to turn Istanbul into a second Vatican.”

Can MHP Members Talk But Not Take Action?

So, what did the same MHP do in the face of the events we described above? As in the case of the appointment of an illegal governor to Kirkuk, it remained institutionally silent.

The only person who spoke out was Arzu Erdem, who served as a member of parliament for three terms in the MHP.

Arzu Erdem first criticized Ahmet Davutoğlu, who met with Bartholomew, in harsh language and asked striking questions.

Then, she opposed the service at Sümela by saying, “We will not allow separatist activities disguised as services carried out under the name of Ecumenism and Pontusism.” Not content with opposing it, she went to Trabzon and met with the Mufti and the Governor to “stand tall against those who want to harm the unity and solidarity of these lands.”

Following all this, MHP Secretary General İsmet Büyükataman announced that Arzu Erdem’s activities were without the knowledge and permission of the party.

Arzu Erdem, after stating that she carried out all her work with the permission and knowledge of MHP Leader Bahçeli and noting that she could not understand why Büyükataman was uncomfortable, announced 24 hours later that she had resigned from the MHP “without any pressure, of her own free will.”

The MHP immediately accepted Erdem’s resignation.

Since the village in sight needs no guide, let us ask:

What exactly did the MHP find uncomfortable about Arzu Erdem’s words regarding Ahmet Davutoğlu or the Patriarchate, and why?

Is it free to talk in the MHP, but is taking action a crime?

Or has the MHP also started to align with AKP policies regarding the Patriarchate?