Turkiye-Syria relations had become increasingly tense, partly due to these and similar statements. There were times when the possibility of war between the two countries was discussed.

Now, thankfully, those times seem to be behind us, and peace efforts are seemingly on the agenda with Syria. However, another potential war has suddenly emerged. Erdoğan did not repeat that song lyric but instead said, "Just as we entered Karabakh and Libya, we will do the same to them" in response to Israel's actions in Gaza. Although the situations in Karabakh and Libya were quite different, this time the words of the AKP chairman were reinforced by MHP chairman Devlet Bahçeli. Bahçeli stated, "Of course, all scenarios should be on the table. Political, strategic, and military preparations should be reinforced to confirm that Turkiye is not a country to be taken lightly."

This statement added fuel to the fire for those who occasionally raise the question of a "third world war" in public opinion.

Of course, the threat of war is something that many countries must consider not only for world wars but also for local conflicts. No country can neglect preparations for such a scenario. However, announcing this task with great fanfare is unnecessary. On the contrary, it would be better to seek solutions to international problems through peaceful means rather than resorting to force and encouraging other countries to do the same.

There is also another important point: In a democratic country, deciding on war is not just up to one or two individuals but is the responsibility of parliaments. This is constitutionally the case in our country as well.

Despite many changes to strengthen the "one-man system," the current text of our constitution remains the same in this regard. The first paragraph of Article 92 states:

"Article 92: The power to declare a state of war, and to permit the deployment of Turkish Armed Forces to foreign countries or the presence of foreign armed forces in Turkiye, except in cases required by international treaties to which Turkiye is a party or by international courtesy rules, belongs to the Grand National Assembly of Turkiye."

However, there is an "exception" in the second paragraph of the article. Let's recall that as well:

"When the Grand National Assembly of Turkiye is in recess or adjournment, and there is an urgent need to decide on the use of armed forces due to a sudden armed attack against the country, the President may decide on the immediate use of the Turkish Armed Forces."

Of course, this "exception" does not change the fact that the matter is primarily the responsibility of the Grand National Assembly of Turkiye. Even if the president must make such a decision in the event of a sudden attack, the Assembly should be convened immediately to discuss the situation.

Now, let's look at the current situation...

Our Parliament went into recess yesterday. Before both Erdoğan and Bahçeli made statements indicating that the Turkish Armed Forces were facing a significant situation, wouldn't it have been more appropriate for the matter to be discussed in Parliament?

Some bills had already been prioritized for discussion and approval in the Parliament's agenda. However, couldn't a "war possibility" topic have been added, or couldn't the start of the recess have been postponed, extending the working days by a few more days?

This is not just talk; we are discussing a constitutional matter regarding the use of armed forces. The coalition partner party is calling for all preparations to be made against the possibility of war. Shouldn't the Parliament at least be somewhat informed about the situation? If it was deemed inappropriate to discuss the matter in an open session, one or more "closed sessions" could have been held.

Recess is, of course, everyone's right, including members of Parliament. Besides, there is a practice of discussing contentious issues late at night, with sessions extending until the morning on some nights. This has left our MPs quite exhausted in recent days. While many members of the ruling party and its supporters prefer to listen to most of the sessions from outside the General Assembly hall, their fatigue is not as severe as their colleagues in the General Assembly. Still, this cannot be a reason to deprive them of recess. However, they could have stayed in Ankara for three or four more days or a week to fulfill their constitutional duties.

This was not possible. Now, if the situation described in the second paragraph of Article 92 arises, the first decision-making authority will be with the president alone.