There is a minister for foreign affairs

What Turkey gains with each passing day by daring to do real politics in foreign policy evidently still seems like a joke to some. It is supposed that Turkey cannot enter into any relationship in its own favor with the US, with the EU, or with any global actor stronger than itself. That is why any agreement made with these global actors is regarded with certainty as being definitely against Turkey and, "of course," in favor of the others. It would be one thing if it were only regarded with certainty; in these relationships Turkey is held to have surely been naive and deceived, taken for a sucker, and those who enter into the relationship are held to be in negligence, error, and even treason.

Yet for at least 8 years Turkey's foreign policy has been run with an entirely different understanding, and this management is determined by an approach that makes the most efficient use of all of Turkey's material and spiritual resources. Indeed, the more one grasps the essence of this management, the better one understands, day by day, the question of what Turkey has been lacking until now. Turkey is a country that has always had all the instruments for doing politics, but it supposedly lacked the mentality, courage and will to do it.

Ever since the days when America occupied Iraq, there has been a BOP myth that some never let drop from their tongues. According to this myth, if a bird flies in the Middle East, it is possible with the knowledge, permission and even will of the US, which requires viewing everything that happens with suspicion. If this is your conception of the US, then the US has no need to make a special agreement with you or to plant its spies among you. It means the US has buried its CIA deep inside you. With this understanding, you are ontologically annihilating any possibility of independence.

If by some chance you come to power tomorrow, you are in fact already giving, today, the message or signs of how you will behave. Since nothing can happen without the permission of the US, it means you will seek the possibilities of politics today only within the areas the US licenses. That is why it was understandable that the Ergenekon supporters, after criticizing the AK Parti so much with the same logic, showed their quest for power by sending representatives across the ocean (the letters İlhan Selçuk wrote to the US and the representatives he sent). Setting aside the excessive criticism that contains the extraordinary evil attributed to the US, it logically rules out the possibility of politics against that power and, strangely, after a while suggests surrendering to that evil. It would not be at all surprising for the BOP criticisms, after a while, to turn into a "price-cutting" tender discourse with the US over the Turkish government.

Listening to Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu as he answered criticisms directed at him in the Plan and Budget Committee of the Parliament, I feel the whole weight of a vision of history and political philosophy of extraordinary breadth and depth. I do not know what his opposition interlocutors, who were trying to corner him, felt, but I feel the tremendous self-confidence of a self-assured politician who has claims and has things to say to the world. A politician who knows his own possibilities and limits in relations with the US or the EU, but who can also use his trump cards against others to the end...

Even without his statements in the Committee, you always feel that in the BOP process Turkey, under his management (and of course Prime Minister Erdoğan's), would never agree to a dishonorable relationship, but the truth about the "BOP co-chairmanship," which is cited as if cursing, is this: after the Iraq occupation, Bush came with a project under this heading in order to repair the flattened image of the US in the region, but upon reactions he turned it into a more widespread project, one leg of which was the 'Democracy Assistance Group,' and Turkey, Yemen and Italy undertook this project.

This group met once or twice, 'Otherwise there is no term like ''BOP Co-chairmanship'' in that sense. There is only a group that Italy, Turkey and Yemen undertook in the sense of ''Democracy Support Co-chairmanship,'' and which in the end did not work out much anyway.

Davutoğlu, noting in the Committee that since the unilateral policy of the US collapsed the concept has become unusable in the US as well, also stated that, on top of that, "if a reason is sought for the collapse of both this concept and the general formation," it can be found in "the policies Turkey conducts on a region-centered basis showing how meaningless it is." So truly it is as dear Hakan Albayrak said in the headline he gave his article: "What BOP, brother! Turkey calls the shots"

Now I personally do not expect the situation to be different on the missile shield issue either, but it seems that the same circles have already bought into this expectation. It is expected that NATO will command and Turkey will do what is asked without showing any resistance. In fact this is desired, because the performance in politics so far has disturbingly defied predictions. Yet from the performance so far they should by now have understood more than enough that Turkey's foreign relations have a minister who looks after the interests of the country and of all oppressed nations.

Note: I congratulate you on your bayram, wishing that the Kurban Bayramı will show, with its blessing, its wisdom that brings us closer to one another and to the absolute Being.