Turkey is not a rebelling country that exports its model to the outside, and Erdogan is not Linen or Castro, where the country is democratic even if it was ruled by a balanced Islamic sector that admits general freedoms and multiplicity, and currently Turkey is away from the ideologies of the Ottoman Empire that we still look negatively to it. The army's power was taken away so that it don't interfere in the political affairs when they were the source of the ultimate authority and the virtue guards in the military standards that dominated for a long period in the third world, and its remains is still existing in many countries. Erdogan's visit to the revolting Arab countries is not originating from from the concept of cutting the relation with the countries that are outside the spectrum of these revolutions, rather he is practicing the role of the country's responsible man, meaning that developing the relations remains a successful diplomatic axis, and the measure of interests and evaluating the roles originate from the method that Turkey use to manage its harmonic policies. Its current movement comes from its economic and strategic weight, where it rejects extremism regardless of its origin, and it acknowledges the national human rights, opposing to those that uses slogans to provoke others, and despite its boycott to Israel, the causes came to save Turkey's dignity. Moreover, the process of it moving with its close Arabic and Islamic horizons that are spread over the continents is to create a support that is based on mutual development, and this aware act increased the Arab tourists significantly, opened the doors for the environmental investments, without differentiating between a kingdom, republic or emirate and it sent the Turkish powers that are contributing in the Arab workshops, and specifically the Gulf ones. Turkey's option of open relations confirms the firm friendship, and not repeating the faults that caused divisions, and if the Syrian government lost this chance then its citizens didn't loose it, and the evidences don't indicate that it has strategic greed, otherwise how would we measure our relation with the East and West and the countries that don't hide this greediness, while we doubt an Islamic country that we have big relations and links with it when it proposed an open contract on all levels? Turkey didn't request to put military bases in the Arab nor Islamic zone, and it doesn't have any groups in the neighbor countries other than its conflict with the Kurds, and it didn't enforce any doctrine, loyalty to a jurist or exporting the revolution instead of the relations that imposes trust. Moreover, look to two position with Israel, the Iranian position that desires to end Israel's dominance verbally only, and the Turkish position that opposed Israel and America despite its membership in the NATO, making a position that saves its dignity although it is the semi economic and military ally. Iran is a country of enclosed tribal sectors, while Turkey is democratic that considers its citizens' desire, and the Arab nation, which turkey is targeting, has to realize this new-old friend that has a regional power with a lot to contribute for us, and we have to draw another line that is different than those historical backgrounds that we always built our policies upon, while they are old remnants. We also should reach with our believes to increase the dealing ceiling to its maximum limits as a mutual partnership, and seeing the future from the open hope doors and not the opposite.
