Is it a national struggle again?

The pro-government journalists and commentators encouraged the government in so much that with the idea, which they formed on their own, that the "Armenian genocide" bill will not be on the Senate agenda so that the government thought it would take a few years to relax in this regard. (Indeed, the strongest talent of the "pro-media and pro-commentators" is this: misleading the executives. Of course, the current misleading will not deter Turkey’s executives from the "pro-media and pro-commentator" policy this time.)

Professor Fahrettin Altun, the head of communications for the president, who made the first reaction to the Senate's decision, used strong expressions: "The bill passed poses a threat to our bilateral relations. Sanctions and threats will not stop defending our national interests.” (What does the word "sanction" refer is not quite clear.)

Erdogan's spokesman, Ibrahim Kalin, reacted to the Senate's decision on social media at about the same time: "We reject the US Senate's wrong view of history, a decision which is a tool for small political interests. A decision we ignore will not affect Turkey's position in political, military and economic spheres"

How to read the joint semantics of the words of the two closest people to the Turkish president in ideological and propaganda work: Has Turkey-US relations on the issue of "Armenian genocide" made Ankara again the center of national struggle? If it has made so, it is necessary to congratulate Turkey’s executives. After all, the main purpose of the national struggle of 1919-1922 was to destroy the plan of " acquiring Eastern Anatolian and giving it to Armenians and acquiring Western Anatolia and giving it to the Greeks." The Turkish nation led by Mustafa Kemal Pasha succeeded. If the current leaders of Turkey realize that the "Armenian genocide" plans are a continuation of the hundred years ago project, then they have to explain the truth to the people. And let’s tell you right now that the position that today's executives in Turkey hold in this context will be beneficial to Baku as air and water in the fight against Armenian occupation of Azerbaijan.

So what are the controversies and powerful cards that Ankara has in its hands, pointing to the "national struggle" after the decision of Senate? Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chavushoglu, filled the political and ideological moves of Professor Altun and Associate Professor Kalin: "Incirlik, as well as Kurecik comes to our mind as opposed reactions. Congress's making decision is not enough, a decision that the rulers of the country will make is important."

The AKP (Justice and Development Party) government, which has been keeping a level head against the reactions to these decisions coming from opposition parties and the public over the years in the form of "First of all, shut down Incirlik", this time points to those issues through the Minister of Foreign Affairs which indicates that the relation is awful, and that "if the US president approves of the Senate's decision, the case may even go to litmus and cement bases in relations between the two countries." (Of course, I take seriously the words of Chavushoglu, a close friend of Baku, and write it down.) Therefore, Mevlut Chavushoglu's words should be noted aside from all seriousness.

Apparently, as in all matters, Ankara is confident in the personal relationship between Erdogan and Trump in this matter, and believes that those relations will play the crucial role. But will the military bases really be closed if things go wrong with Ankara?

The only government that has ever done so is the 1975 Demirel-Erbakan coalition. I would like to wait how Chavushoglu's warning of "military base shutdown" will result to write about the causes and effects.