Turkish Grand National Assembly and Azerbaijani relations in the national struggle period (1920-1923)

. In this study, the political relations between the Atatürk Era, the Turkish Grand National Assembly and Azerbaijan are analyzed. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, the Turkish Grand National Assembly was established under the leadership of Great Leader Mustafa Kemal Pasha Atatürk. Historical developments between Turkey and the historical importance of the study period and brother country Azerbaijan are discussed in depth. Azerbaijan Soviet leader Neriman Nerimanov's rational and logical real politics of the Soviet leader Vladimir Ilyich Lenin Russia Period to persuade him to help Turkey are examined on the basis of the archive records.


Introduction
In 1918, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, and with the effect of this collapse, military civilian intellectuals became desperate. Later, Rafet Pasha, one of the heroes and commanders of the War of Independence, says that the way to get rid of the British threat in those days was mandate [1,2] and a nation with five hundred million debts and fifteen million income could not live without external help.
Before assuming the command of the Western Front, İsmet Pasha's views on the mandate, who considered to build a farm in a village and immersed himself in the general psychological destruction, are as follows. "If the people in Anatolia prefer Americans to everyone, it would be more beneficial to apply to the American nation," it is said, and I am of this opinion. Before this country falls apart. Leaving him in the custody of America is the only way to live [3].
Colonel Kara Vasıf expresses the impossibility of an independence struggle as follows: Hopelessness is common among civilian intellectuals, too, "They are flying in the air with plane, we cannot get rid of the wagon yet". Later, Ahmet Emin Yalman and Halide Edip Adıvar, who participated in the National Struggle, gave a petition to US President Wilson in December 1918, and demanded the establishment of a mandate regime and demanded that the undersecretary should be American in each ministry and that police and gendarmerie affairs should be left to the American administration. Even today America wants to remain as the sole driving force of the international system and be the guarantor of the international order [4]. them to Afghanistan to train the Afghan army. The duty of these officers is to train the Afghan army [1].
These officers will lead the Afghan army to overthrow if a pro-British Order comes to power. In short, while Mustafa Kemal is fighting with the rented army of imperialism in Anatolia on the one hand, he is fighting with British interests in Afghanistan on the other. It should be pointed out immediately that this is a global strategic understanding and is something only an imperial general with a global strategic mind can think of. However, there is no adventure here, weakening the main front by jeopardizing great powers [9].
It was clear that an independent Armenia would be very large. Georgia's demands were also high. As for Azerbaijan, this Turkish government rightly wanted to approach the homeland, some of the fanatics were saying that Azerbaijan and Turkey should be united. But a great fear overshadowed this attempt. Yet, there was no reconciliation in Turkey and the sanctuary of the Ottoman Empire was not appointed [9].
Discussing Azerbaijan with him could also endanger this republic, which was decided to be established. Then, Azerbaijan would now be independent, and in the future would take a new path according to the state of the homeland. But when the truce was signed, the Turkish armies took advantage of the Russian revolution and occupied Kars-Ardahan and Batumi. Nail Bey of Yenibahçeli, one of the men of our Organization, was sent to Batumi, Hilmi of Plovdiv, to Erzurum, one of the Unionists, and Cafer Bey, one of the merchants, to Trabzon before entering into a peaceful practice. They were couriers [10].

Turkish Foreign Policy in Atatürk Period
The state acts within the framework of its internal and foreign policy, in other words, its general policy, which complements each other in coordination with each other while struggling to maintain its existence with its internal and external enemies. The foreign policy of the state should be drawn and carried out in a limited way, especially with the possibilities of the state. It is rational and practical. Policies that do not match the possibilities of the state, although initially appealing to those who identify it and the masses, ultimately fail, and jeopardize the existence of the state. However, we see that politics has been shaped in line with the interests of certain individuals and groups in all societies in the past and today and in a nature that contradicts the general interests of society. As long as this kind of shaping of politics is limited to domestic politics, societies suffer a lot from it, but they do not reach a level of damage that can never be compensated [11] However, the fact that people in foreign policy play with the fate of the country without calculation can change the fate of a country and a nation in a radical and negative way for centuries. Therefore, foreign policy should be shaped by considering the mental principles and balance of power, without jeopardizing the fate of the country and the nation. Foreign policy should never be implemented with an adventurous approach [1].
However, foreign policy should never be shaped by a state philosophy that aims to create a hedonist (It means pleasure. Hedonism is the root of the word) society that does not give the nation a horizon and goal.
Mustafa Kemal has made rationality and composure, on which all his political actions are based, the basic axis of foreign policy understanding. He established a proportional relationship between the opportunities he had and the goals that could be achieved and stopped the army after advancing it to the extreme point where he could advance without turning his head with the euphoria of victory.
Since its arrival in Anatolia plateau in 1071, the Turkish nation has ended its uninterrupted war against all elements of the entire Western and Christian world for 851 years, not only for itself, but on behalf of the Eastern and Islamic civilization it represents and alone, without any help from any element of the Islamic Ummah. More specifically, according to the E3S Web of Conferences 258, 05039 (2021) UESF-2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202125805039 available data, the Ottoman Empire was at war in 61% of the 450-year period between 1450-1900 years. In other words, it had been in war for sixty years of every century.
Mustafa Kemal foresaw an Ergenekon period in mythology for 100 million Turks, a period of healing, resting, self-renewal, development, expressed in the words "Peace at Home, Peace in the World" for the Turkish nation, who has been fighting for 851 years on three continents and forced to return to the Anatolian plateau. We know that this view has been fiercely criticized and accused of passivity by the circles, who have recently seen blood in their lives only during Eid al-Adha or American films. However, Mustafa Kemal, who tells 20-year-olds on the battlefield that I am ordering you to die, not attack; "'I cannot be a warrior. Because I know the sad states of war better than anyone. " War is imperative and must have life. We can go to war because we will not die against those who say we will kill. But war is murder unless people's lives are in danger. The same circles talk about active policy, which is unclear [12].
In order to understand Mustafa Kemal's foreign policy logic, we need to examine Mustafa Kemal's judgments about foreign policy in three historical periods. These periods, the results he reached as an Ottoman officer, the results he reached as a Liberation War leader, the results he reached as the founder and leader of the Republic, and the results he reached as the founder and leader of the Republic. Mustafa Kemal and his generation are an unfortunate generation in a sense. Because the state they own shrinks before their eyes and new lands are lost every day. Afterwards, they will see that despite all the heroism of the Turkish soldier, the soldier they led was defeated. In an environment like this, the officer has only one thought: How can I save my nation and my homeland from defeat? [1].
It is seen that Mustafa Kemal, who deals with this idea intensely, has reached a solution that no officer and statesman has imagined by establishing a connection between the uniformity of the nation and the strength of the state. In other words, Mustafa Kemal has reached the opinion that the only way to get rid of the burden imposed on the nation by the warfare of the Turkish nation undertaken by Eastern and Islamic civilization alone for centuries and to prevent the loss of Anatolia is to voluntarily and consciously liquidate the empire and return to the national state borders.
Mustafa Kemal, who served with the rank of Captain in the third Army in 1907, made the following statement to his friends that the Turkish nation should enter a strategic withdrawal and set new boundaries for him. Turkey should give Albania independence in the Balkans and satisfy and arbitrate the Muslim Albanian nation spiritually (It refers to reinforcing in Ottoman Turkish) and financially and make them natural allies. The Balkan border should be rectified to include Western and Eastern Thrace, which constitutes the main element of the Turks, and today's South Bulgaria (It should be corrected), and the same should be ensured between the border of the nation and the state. Likewise, it should give its independence to the Arab elements detached from Turkishness, and the southern border of Turkishness should pass through Aleppo and Mosul Kirkuk, which are the natural borders. This bold offer, which appeared in 1907, took place at the request of the Turkish state in 1918 and appeared in a great similarity between the lines where they were when the Turkish armies ceased firing and the lines proposed by Mustafa Kemal [13].
However, at this point, it is necessary to reveal another basic evaluation of Mustafa Kemal regarding foreign policy. This is the fact that Mustafa Kemal saw that German power would be defeated against British and French power and opposed to Turkey going to war with Germany. Seeing that the war is a product of the conflicts between the great states, Mustafa Kemal emphasized that Turkey's winner and loser should gather strength by staying out of a war that will result in great wear and suffering [13].
In order to reveal the main framework of this vision, it is necessary to take a brief look at the conditions at the time. In the face of Europe's military superiority based on the industrial revolution and its social structure fed by nationalist movements, it was evident before World War I that the (First World War) Ottoman Empire would not survive for a long time. In the 19th century, the "reformer" movement of some Ottoman Sultans failed to save the empire from becoming "the Sick Man of Europe" [14].
In addition to the false movements of the Young Turks in foreign policy, the connection to unreasonable currents such as Pan Ottoman, Pan Turk and Pan Islam led the Ottoman Empire to various adventures. They made the biggest miscalculation by dragging the Ottoman Empire to World War I on the German side. In fact, this situation has only shortened the length of the Empire's agony and it has given a dramatic result to be on the side of the war loser by not being able to predict the strong. The country of the Ottoman Empire, which came out of the war with defeat, was completely occupied and divided, except for a very small part of the Turkish people [15].
The Atatürk period was between 1919 and 10 November 1938, when the National Struggle began. The period between 1919 and 1923, when the Republic was founded, witnessed the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of a new Turkish State instead. The characteristic of this period is that war, nationalization, and diplomacy were carried out together. It should be remembered that Atatürk's efforts to establish the Nation-State, which is the most important element of his vision, faced many obstacles during this extraordinary difficult period. Another fact that should be remembered is that even in the Misaki National Document, the Ottoman Islamic peoples were mentioned instead of the Turkish expression [1].
Mustafa Kemal stated in many speeches that he did not intend to go on an adventure outside the national borders for neither racial nor religious reasons. Although the understanding of the Nation-State was immediately spread among intellectuals in particular, the rescue of sacred cities within the Empire was met with a reaction in the caliphatistreligious environments, as they considered it more important than the rescue of Turkey. Atatürk's understanding of nationalism has not been destructive, overbearing, and aggressive. Mosul has always demonstrated negotiating and peaceful attitudes on Hatay issues. Between 1923 and 38, the young Turkish State, under the leadership of Atatürk, gave the best example of peaceful foreign policies that he put into practice reforms aimed at the transformation of society in line with Western civilization. Atatürk determined the main principles of Turkey's foreign policy in line with the concept of national interest; he did this by considering the formations with the principles affecting international [16].
In this context: x He evaluated the limits of Turkey's power very well and avoided imagination in this regard.
Considering Turkey's strategic position, he adjusted Turkish foreign policy according to the development of international relations Since Turkey could not protect its security against the possible rape of a great State, it was aware that it could only protect it with the cooperation of the great State or group of States and developed policies accordingly [17].
Mustafa Kemal believed that Westernization, which constituted the antithesis of the reasons that prepared the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, was necessary for Turkey to take its real place in the civilized world. The westward orientation had a very important social and cultural dimension. The sense of self-confidence developed by winning the War of Independence and the willingness to quickly Westernize the society paved the way for Turkey to orient itself towards the West without any complex. Another axis of Atatürk's foreign policy is the importance given to the membership of the League of Nations. Thus, Turkey has become a respected member of the international community and played an active role in this organization, which is the first forum for multilateral relations [17].
Statement by Mustafa Kemal stating the importance he attaches to relations with the West: "The end of the Ottoman Empire began on the day when he cut off the relations that connected him to the European nations, very proud of his victories against the West. This was a mistake, and we are not going to do it again. From these purposes, what will be very much appreciated is that our politics, our grandmothers, our interests will make us inclined to desire a European Turkey, or rather a Turkey that has turned to the West. " The framework I briefly summarized gives us the parameters of Mustafa Kemal's foreign policy vision. The main objective is to raise Turkey above the level of contemporary civilization. In fact, there are all the elements in this key sentence. To structure the Westerntype contemporary and secular state based on rationalism, to develop the nation's level of development within democracy and to ensure national security. Foreign policy is emerging as the most important tool in achieving this goal [18].
Principles of foreign policy: x To rationally define the national interest and exclude it from any meta-political (religion, belief, ethnic) influence.
x Complying with realistic political rules. Making good use of his/her own strength and balance of existing powers, always taking sides with the strong.
x Being an active member of the international community.
x Producing stability and peace in the world and especially in the region.
x Predicting tomorrow by reading yesterday and today well and directing the interests of the country according to these possible developments.
This brand-new world, which will be shaped by its own rules in the coming decades when young people will take responsibility for the fate of this country, will not be the world of the 1919s, 1938s, 1960-80-90s. The vital point for our country and our future generations is that the mistakes made by the Ottoman Empire and Mustafa Kemal, whom I constantly emphasized in this speech, were not repeated by clinging to the universal rational approach and principles that Atatürk followed in the elections and decisions that Turkey would make during this new formation of the world.
As a statesman and leader, in order to understand Atatürk's foreign policy, it is necessary to address it in three parts. These chapters, each of which also refers to a historical period, are as follows. His conclusions as an Ottoman officer, his conclusions as a Liberation War Leader, and finally his conclusions as the Founder and leader of the Republic [12].
When these three periods are examined, it is seen that Atatürk pursues a foreign policy that is sensitive to serious, rational, peaceful, and national issues. The state is the largest political unit, except for international organizations, which is the result of a combination of three elements, leaving aside various assumptions about it. These elements of the state that are "absolute and absolute" are the geographical area where it spreads, the people living on this area and the high authority, in other words, sovereignty [16].
The absence of one of these three elements eliminates the state if the coercive formulas of state law are ignored. No matter what form of government the state adopts, no matter what economic political system it adopts, the main purpose of the state remains unchanged. This main purpose can be explained as protecting, maintaining, and improving the existence of the state. Within this framework, the state acts on the basis of protecting itself against its internal and external enemies. We can define the foreign enemy as states that often mean and may mean the existence and interests of the state [19].
What were the main objectives of Turkish foreign policy during the Atatürk period? What were the main objectives of the foreign policy for which Atatürk was the main architect? In order to answer these questions, it is useful to take a look at the main objectives of Atatürk's foreign policy. As stated earlier, and as the National Pact found its expression, establishing a national state constituted Atatürk's main foreign policy objective. Atatürk saw that the Ottoman Empire was doomed to disintegration with its multinational structure and therefore acted with the belief that the Turks, who were dragged towards extinction, should now establish their own national states, even though they constituted the basic element of the Ottoman Empire. The understanding of the national state was, in fact, an expression of rebellion against the de facto collapsed sultanate administration inside as well as outside. Mustafa Kemal tried to spread this idea inside and fought for it [18].
As the National Pact found its expression, the main objective was to achieve and protect independence in each area. Atatürk opposed the idea of mandate during the War of Independence. Atatürk stated that he chose the path of independence as follows: "Gentlemen, there was only one decision in the face of this situation. It is also essential to establish a new Turkish state independent of the sovereignty. " [9] After the War of Independence, Atatürk pursued a policy aimed at protecting Turkey's independence. In preserving the country's independence, Lausanne paid close attention to maintaining its balance. His achievements at the end of a very difficult diplomatic war were set out in the Treaty of Lausanne [9] Maintaining the balance provided by this treaty has been one of the main foreign policy objectives of the new Turkey's independence. As mentioned before, Atatürk had a personality that preferred peace to war in achieving foreign policy goals. He was a soldier trying to keep the peace carefully. Atatürk's principle of "Peace at home, Peace in the World" is an expression of the value he gives to peace. Atatürk had taken the main aim of maintaining peace both inside and outside. He was on the side of establishing true peace in the world. By focusing on the causes of wars, he was aware that real peace could not be achieved without eliminating them. In Atatürk's understanding, law had a higher place than power. Commitment to law has constituted the basic principle of Turkish foreign policy. Looking at the developments leading to the Montreux Convention on the Straits, Turkey's legal commitment can be seen more clearly [20].
It was stated that Atatürk attempted reforms to give a modern structure to the new Turkey. He thought that in order to modernize, one had to turn to the West. Among the reasons for the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, he emphasized the disconnection from the West. To him, westernization was a necessity of the age. In this way, Turkey could prove its own strength against the outside. For this reason, modernization was a basic foreign policy objective of Atatürk Turkey. Since democracy is also the basic form of governance of the modern world, Turkey had to turn to it as well. Atatürk considered democracy necessary in the consciousness that Turkish people had a democratic personality [21].
In 1919, Atatürk started to form the Turkish Liberation War, while the World War II was entering the next period. In this new period, while the role of Europe in international relations was diminishing, it still constituted the center of gravity. World War II led to great destruction, especially in Europe. One of the victors of the war, England, and France, faced great problems. The defeated states, especially Germany, were in even greater trouble. Russia was experiencing the social turmoil of the civil war and the bitter days of the civil war. Despite the victory, Italy was in a very bad mood. The Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires were torn apart. The main foreign issue in this picture for Britain and especially for France was to get the defeated states to sign a heavy peace treaty. Thus, the war period could be ended legally, and a period of peace could be started, and many issues could be dealt with. It was believed that these peace treaties had to be harsh in order for the defeated states not to dare to fight again [22].
On the other hand, the League of Nations, which was established with great hopes and with the aim of removing the war from being a tool of international relations, was doomed to fail because the United States, which played an important role in winning the World War, did not enter this organization and returned to the "loneliness policy" (According to this view, which is based on the fact that the United States is a Continental State, the United States should not interfere in Europe's dirty games and should not directly or indirectly interfere in the wars of any European state. This policy is called the policy of loneliness). New and new states were established in the world geography, and the conflicts of these states such as various borders, minorities, etc. were the source of new problems. In this table, the international political outlook revealed that the elements of conflict potentially outweighed. The political structure of the world was confused. Democratic states on the one hand, Communism, Fascism, Nazism, and other totalitarian regimes on the other [23].
Its economic outlook was more depressing. While the masses entered the war to "live better", they were confronted with a worse policy at the end of the war. This is why the period between the two wars is a period in which the seeds of a new war are planted, rather than a period of peace. Revisionist states on the one hand, and anti-revisionist states on the other. In this environment, the Turks will sign Treaty of Sèvres, and Anatolia will be occupied. Most of the people responsible for bringing the Turks to this environment had fled abroad. There was only one thing the rest of us could do: Whose servant shall we be? England? the United States? Mustafa Kemal, who emerged in this foggy weather, started the War of Independence by sending the masses after him, finally threw Treaty of Sèvres into the garbage basket of history and dictated Lausanne. Against the threat posed by totalitarian regimes around the world, Turkey signed the Montreux Convention for the Straits in order to further ensure its security [12].
The characteristic of Turkish foreign policy implemented between 1923-1938 stems from its formulation by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and its implementation under his supervision. The initiative initiated by Atatürk to cooperate with Western countries in social, cultural, and political fields continued after Atatürk. Indeed, entering various organizations established by Western states after the Second World War has been one of the main objectives of Turkish foreign policy. Between 1923 and 1938, Turkey gave the best example of peaceful foreign policy.
Honesty in our foreign policy, attention to the security and development of our country guide our course of action. There is no quality that can be explained more easily than a country in substantial regulation and development seriously desires peace and tranquillity both in itself and around it. In our foreign policy inspired by this sincere desire, the power to defend the immunity of the country, its security, and the rights of the citizens against any violation is also a point that we especially cherish. We attach great importance to maintaining our land and sea and air armies in a force that will keep peace and security in this country untouchable..." [11] An important aspect of Turkish foreign policy in the 1923-1938 period is that it was foreign policy in the Atatürk period. In Turkish foreign policy, this period has a separate place and some unique qualities. Foreign policy in this period was formulated by Atatürk and implemented under his supervision. The first goal of Turkish foreign policy pursued during the Atatürk period is to establish a national state that dominates its own destiny. The main purpose of Mustafa Kemal, who led the National Struggle, was to establish a Turkish state within the national borders covering the Turkish element. The idea of "National Turkish State" was first conscious during this struggle. When evaluating the foreign policy of 1923-1938 period, it is necessary to consider the major changes that emerged in the international system in the early 20th century. The initiation of the National Struggle by Atatürk in Anatolia corresponds to this time period.
It is possible to say that the principles of "freedom, equality, fraternity", the product of the French Revolution, were scattered throughout Europe by Napoleon, and the nationalist movement that ravaged Europe in the 19th century naturally moved towards the National Struggle. President of Republic of Turkey, Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the undisputed leader of the new Turkish state who won the War of Independence, and the CHP (the Republican People's Party until 1935), the only party he founded, dominated the fate of the nation and the state and Atatürk's opinion, influence and weight were clearly felt in foreign policy. In this period, foreign policy priorities can be summarized as the consolidation of the new international identities and rights provided by the Treaty of Lausanne (1923) to the young Turkish state, the development and diversification of foreign relations, the opening of a friendly relationship page with the old enemies, international multilateral political activities, the development of economic relations and the development of studies and connections aimed at modernizing the armed forces [24].
Removing the problems with Greece in this period, reaching a solution to the suspended Mosul issue, continuing and strengthening relations with the Soviets, establishing cooperation and political solidarity systems in border regions, (Balkan Pact and Saadabat Pact) Providing full control and control over the Straits (Montreux Convention) Hatay's independence from the French administration, (after Atatürk's death, the decision to join Turkey was applied) and seeking diplomatic support and solidarity against the threat that Mussolini Italy started to create in the Mediterranean basin, which touched Turkey, should be mentioned as important activities and events [25].
Meanwhile, the official visits and contacts of foreign statesmen (such as king, president, prime minister, commander) and Deputy Prime Minister İsmet Pasha to some foreign countries (Greece, Italy, Soviet Union) who visited Atatürk during the decade between 1928 and 38 can be considered as important steps in foreign relations. It should also be noted that Atatürk did not visit a foreign country as a feature of this period. During the 15-year presidency of Atatürk, except for a few years (1923-24 İsmet Pasha and then shortly after Şükrü Kaya), 13 years continuously from 1925 to his death Dr. Tevfik Rüştü kept Aras in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and greatly influenced foreign relations [26].
Mustafa Kemal, who received the greatest support from Russia during the War of Independence, continued his relations at a certain level after the war. This is because Stalin, who took power after Lenin, ruled Russia arbitrarily. In 1936, while Atatürk was talking about the problems of the country at dinners in Çankaya as usual, the people at the table often said that Pasha and the Russians were taking steps forward and succeeding in the economy, industry and military field as follows. Atatürk then leaves the food and takes the plate with fruits on the table and pretends to throw it on the floor. To those on the table: "If I put this on the floor, how many pieces would it be?" he asks. They say it would be 40 pieces, Pasha. "No..." Atatürk says, repeating the question again, getting the same answer. Thereupon: "You didn't know..." he says. And so it goes: "Have patience... Embrace the philosophy of "Peace at home, Peace in the world." Because in 60 years, Russia will be 60 pieces. This generation created the Bolshevik Revolution. He would never reveal its problems to the others but keep them inside. Their son goes in the direction of his father. But the next generation divides Russia into 60 parts..." Now let us remember the 1936 years when Atatürk said these words... While the Second World War has not yet begun and Russia has not become a great power, these words have been spoken. I mean, it is unbelievable, but in 1936, he was talking about the 1990s. There is only one explanation. This is not normally an explainable issue. It would not have been possible for Atatürk to make such a prediction if he did not have the "Supreme Sense Power" that could see the future. Indeed, the disintegration in Russia occurred in the third generation, as Atatürk said. While Atatürk said that Russia would be torn apart in 1936, he also made detailed statements: "Today the Soviet Union is our friend, our neighbour, our ally. We need this friendship. But no one can predict what will happen tomorrow. Like the Ottoman Empire, it can be broken down, crumbled, just like the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Today, the nations that Russia holds tightly in its hands can escape from their hands. The world can reach a new balance, then Turkey should know what to do. We have brothers and sisters with one language, one belief and one essence in the administration of this friend. We have to be ready to take care of them. Being ready is not just waiting for that day. Get to get ready. How do nations prepare for this? Keeping the spiritual bridges intact. Language is a bridge. Faith is a bridge. History is a bridge. We must go down to our roots and integrate into the history that has been divided by events. We cannot expect them to approach us, we need to approach them. " [11].
"Russia will be dissolved one day. Then, Turkey will be an exemplary country for them ", Atatürk continues his prophecies as follows: "Turkey is a key country for Eurasia, which shapes the 21st century. They will follow our example. " Approving Atatürk's prophecies for the Turkish Republics, the Second Chief of Staff, General Çevik Bir, said the following in his statement published in Sabah Newspaper dated 4 May 1998 with the title of "Atatürk Saw the Truth 65 Years Ago": "Speaking at the New Atlantic Initiative meeting, General Bir explained Turkey's foreign policy goals and the impact of NATO enlargement on regional balances. Noting the increasing importance of Turkey, Bir said, "Turkey is a key country for Eurasia shaping the 21st century. What is interesting is that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk saw this fact 65 years ago '. Recalling Ataturk's remarks that the USSR will one day dissolve, General Agile Bir said Turkey is a good model for other Eurasian countries. " [27].

Turkey-Soviet Union Relations
How did Turkish-Soviet relations start and on what principles did they develop? The conditions of the emergence of Turkish-Soviet relations followed an anti-imperialist attitude towards Soviet Russia after the (It is also known as October 1917 revolution) great change that started in Russia after the overthrow of the Tsarist regime after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917. As a result, Turkish-Russian relations, which had always developed hostility until that day, met on the same common ground against Westerners. In addition, Turkish-Soviet relations are one of the most important pillars of foreign policy carried out during the years of national struggle. After the revolution, the government withdrew from the war and issued similar secret agreements with the Sykes-Picot Agreement, annulling the parts of them that bind Russia (Sykes-Picot Agreement: 1. A secret agreement between Britain and France (9 May 1916) that envisaged the division of the Ottoman Empire with the approval of Russia during World War II).
According to the agreement: x Russia's share is Erzurum, Trabzon, Van and Bitlis provinces and some lands in Southeastern Anatolia.
x Lebanon and Syria and Adana, the Eastern Mediterranean Region (Cilicia), Antep, Urfa, Mardin, Diyarbakır and Mosul to France's share.
x South Mesopotamia, including Baghdad, and the ports of Khalifa and Akka will be the UK's share.
x A confederation of Arab states or a single independent Arab state divided into French and British spheres of influence shall be established between the territories left for France and England; x Iskenderun will be a free port.
x An international regime would be established in Palestine because of the sacred places here [31] Developing relations have raised concerns in the West that Turkey will be able to act with the Soviets if necessary and adopt a pro-Soviet stance. Although their expectations of these developments were quite different on both sides, they saw each other as a trump card against the west in the two states. Turkey's expectation was to receive material and spiritual support from Russia within the framework of cooperation during the war (With weapons-money and this unity of power, Soviet Russia could be used as a constant leverage against the West). Soviet Russia's expectation was that the policy they followed againstAE Turkey was one of the requirements of their foreign policy. They supported the establishment of a system similar to the Soviet system in Turkey, and even the establishment of its own red army.
During the years of the War of Independence, an organization (The Green Army was established in May 1920 immediately after the opening of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TGNA)) called the Green Army was also established with the indirect support of official authorities, which included semi-secret, Islamist and socialist elements in its approach. Thus, it was thought that this would affect other Muslim peoples as well and that the uprisings that may arise from this could disturb and harm the great Western powers.
March 1917 YelizavetpolAE YUSİFBEYOV, N., says the Equality movement [15] in Azerbaijan has strengthened [28]. On 30 September 1920, an agreement was reached between the RSFSR and the Azerbaijani SSC on a military and economic alliance. All administrations have become partially dependent on Moscow. 12 generals, 27 colonels, 6 major, 48 lieutenants from the Azerbaijani army were identified and killed by the Russians as traitors. Everything was nationalized in accordance with the politics of Military Communism. Azerbaijan had the right to save only 15% of the oil it produced [29] The Marauders started a Citizens' War in Baku [28].
On 29 March 1917, Baku Muslims Council decided to include Mehmet Emin RESULZADE, Ali Merdan Bey TOPÇUBAŞOV, rich Feteli Han HOYSKİ, merchant ESADULLAYEV, M, one of the representatives of the bourgeoisie-nationalist intellectuals and others to the composition of the interim executive committee [28].
Azerbaijan joined the TransCaucasus Socialist Federal Soviet Republic in 1922 and was renamed Azerbaijan SSC after 1936. Having an area of 86,600 km2 today, Azerbaijan lost land continuously after joining the Soviet Union. With the arrangements made during the Stalin period, Armenia was extended between Turkey, the Autonomous Republic of Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan, thus trying to cut contact between Anatolian Turks and Turkistan Turks [11] While preparing the National Struggle movement, on the one hand, trying to save the country from enemy occupation, on the other hand, they also attached importance to the diplomatic front of the National Struggle in order to achieve success on the military fronts. In this context, the Ankara government, which believes that the necessary military aid and diplomatic support will come from the Soviets in order to achieve the success of the National Struggle movement, has sought to establish relations with the Soviets. The establishment of Turkish-Soviet relations will only be through the Caucasus Republics [30].
Especially after the Bolshevification of Azerbaijan on April 28, 1920, Armenia on December 2, 1920 and Georgia on March 19, 1921, the nature of relations with these Republics will transform into Turkish-Soviet relations. Immediately after the armistice, some national organizations were established in Azerbaijan Dagestan regions with the help and encouragement of the Turkish Army, which started to raise awareness against Armenian gangs and Russians. As a matter of fact, in the last quarter of 1918, Meskhetian Government, Aras Turkish Government and Kars Islamic Council Government were established and they merged on November 30 under the name of National Council Government.
Although this government was changed to the Provisional Government of the Southwest Caucasus on 17-18 January 1919, it was forced to disintegrate by the British in April 1919. After that, the Armenian and Georgian attacks gained momentum again in the region. The disintegration of the Caucasus also benefited the imperialists. If their wishes were fulfilled, they could easily rule here (Hüseynov ve Sumbatzate, 1964:124 of Tsar Russia to the 1920s.) cotton, large amounts of silk and gold-silver were plundered from Azerbaijan and taken to Russia for free [28] In order to remove Nerimanov from Azerbaijan, they appointed him one of the heads of the Alliance of the Federative Alliance of the Caucasus Republics (ZRFİ) on 12 March 1922. Nerimanov's sensible and useful work for the Turkish world, of course, disturbed the center. Therefore, Nerimanov was reinstated as one of the heads of the Executive Committee (MIC) of the USSR on January 2, 1923. Around 35,000 Nerimanov supporters were expelled from the Communist Party in 1921 [29]. On March 19, 1925, Nerimanov passed away suspiciously. In 1927-1929, 9 villages of Zengezur and Nakhichevan were separated from Azerbaijan by Mikoyan and his supporters and gifted to the Armenians [29].
However, the formation of the Eastern Front under the command of Kazim Karabekir within the framework of the opening of the Grand National Assembly and the commencement of official contacts with the Soviets immediately afterwards and the decision of the Parliament to establish regular armies, and the military operation of this front against the Armenians and finally the eastern wing of the National Struggle with the Moscow Agreement of 16 March 1921 successfully ended its military activity, and this military victory was transformed into diplomatic success with the Kars Treaty [31] On May 25, Nuri Pasha entered Yevlah through Iran-Karabakh and then Ganja [32]. He had 40 guns and an army of 7,000 men [33].
There are other studies similar to the subject we are working on. For example, Elnur Ağayev's thesis study covers only the years 1920-23. In the first part of this study, which deals with the relations between the TGNA Government and the Socialist Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan in the period of1920-1923 and consists of two parts, issues such as the Anatolian movement after the Armistice of Mudros and [34] the relations of the Azerbaijani Equality Supporter Government, Moscow and Kars Treaties were emphasized [12]. In the second part, diplomatic relations between the TGNA Government and the Socialist Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan are examined [24].
Equality Supporters also made a treaty with the rebels against Dagestan. Mr. Iman Qotsinski N.; Hacı Xynal Abidin Tağıyev, Ş. Asedullayev and M. Nağıyev was also protecting the wealthy Equality Supporters. Equality Supporters also secured themselves by executing agreements with the Georgian Originals and Caucasus Commissariat. At the same time, they have been making treaties with Armenian Revolutionary Federation. (Taşnak). Tasnak Syutun and the Equality Supporters had several meetings in this context. The Muslim National Council was convened under the chairmanship of Ali Merdan Bey TOPÇUBAŞEV [28]. In July, Karabekir Pasha occupied Nahçıvan, Culfa and Ordubad districts [28].
Halil Pasha and K. Karabekir Pasha comes to Baku. The commanders of Russian armies are Turkish officers. On June 24, Nakhichevan was invaded. The extraordinary Temporary Revolution Committee was executed on the island of Nargin near Baku by the head of the Political Supreme Revolution Court, Pankratov, making a list of suspects [29]. As a result of Neriman Nerimanov's efforts and efforts, Aliağa Şıhlinski and S. Mehmandarov escaped death. Meanwhile, the Armenians took advantage and massacred thousands of Azerbaijanis. The Turkish army disbanded its Armenian allies [35].  When it was first established, the Commissars in the above formation changed the Soviet Union many times later.

Treaty of Moscow (16 March 1921)
With the revolution in Russia, the changing administration and the policies pursued by the Allied States brought Soviet Russia and the Turkish Grand National Assembly closer together.
With this rapprochement, Soviet Russia wanted to establish a buffer zone and secure itself in terms of the Straits. The Turkish Grand National Assembly asked the Soviets for war vehicles and military support. The successes of the Grand National Assembly eliminated the hesitations of the Soviet Russia and the treaty was signed. According to the agreement: x Neither would the other accept an agreement that one of the parties did not sign. In other words, Soviet Russia has officially declared that it does not accept Treaty of Sèvres.
x The old treaties between the Ottoman Empire and Russia would be invalid.
x Soviet Russia would accept the National Pact and invalidate the Capitulations [31] With this treaty, a Western state accepted the National Pact for the first time. After this agreement, a friendship agreement was made with Afghanistan, which first accepted the National Pact, the National Anthem of Independence and the first Turkish Grand National Assembly Constitution were adopted.  [36].

About TKP Leader Mustafa Suphi
He became the president of the TKP in the elections held at the First and Public Turkish Communists Congress held in Baku on September 10, 1920. Between 1933-1938 H. P. Rehmanov [12] chaired the Azerbaijani SSC HKS. After many correspondences with Mustafa Kemal, he left for Ankara with a group of friends, including TKP Secretary General Ethem Nejat and members of the Central Committee. Two people from the group were arrested in Kars. They met with the demonstrations of the members of the Preservation Society in Erzurum. Mustafa Suphi met Kazim Karabekir. Mustafa Suphi, who came to Trabzon from here and was greeted with similar demonstrations, was killed off the coast of Sürmene with his wife and fourteen friends by gunmen on the motorcycle sent behind them after sailing with an engine given by Yahya, the steward of boaters .
After graduating from Istanbul Law School, one of the well-educated intellectuals in the last period of the disintegrating Ottoman Empire, Mustafa Suphi went to Paris and studied at the School of Political Sciences in 1910. Mustafa Suphi, who was influenced by nationalist movements during his stay in Paris, defended Turkist ideas and at the same time worked as a reporter for Tanin newspaper of Union and Progress, first supported the Unionists when he returned to Istanbul. But Mustafa Suphi, who later took a stand against the repressive policies of the Unionists, joined the opposition, and joined the National Constitutional Party founded by Ferit Tek and Yusuf Akçura. Ferit Tek, the owner of İfham newspaper, supported this party, and Mustafa Suphi, the managing editor [30] In June 1913, following the assassination of Grand Vizier Mahmud Şevket Pasha, the Unionists, who took action to get rid of almost everyone who opposed them, made widespread arrests in Istanbul [36] Meanwhile, an investigation was launched into Mustafa Suphi over an article in the newspaper Ifham, but no evidence was found, but he was arrested along with other dissidents and later exiled to Sinop. In 1914, Mustafa Suphi, who fled Sinop with a few friends, settled in Baku. Mustafa Suphi, who drew the lightning from the Tsarist administration upon writing articles opposing the outbreak of the First World War, would first be deported to the prison camp in Kaluga and then to the Urals, and thus his life would move in a different direction [37].
Mustafa Suphi, who established relations with the Bolsheviks in the Urals, was now a communist and began to work politically among the Turkish soldiers captured by the Russians during the war. Mustafa Suphi, who went to Moscow after the October 1917 Revolution, published a newspaper called "The New World" here with the Tatar-Başkurt revolutionaries. He was now a prominent communist when he tried to organize Turkish communists in Russia. He would assume important responsibilities in opening up the Bolsheviks to the East and Muslim peoples and establishing relations [38].
He Meanwhile, Mustafa Suphi, who established relations with the communists in Istanbul and Anatolia and tried to improve his ties, organized the founding congress of the Turkish Communist Party (TKP) with the Turkish communists who came to Baku on the occasion of the Eastern Peoples' Assembly on September 10, 1920 and was brought to the chairmanship of the party. Thus, while Turkey was one of the first Muslim countries where a communist party was organized, it was also deemed appropriate to shift the work of the party to Anatolia with a decision taken in this congress. About five months ago, the Grand National Assembly and its government, which started working in Ankara on April 23, 1920, were trying to organize a national struggle in Anatolia and opposed the invasion of the country by imperialist states [39].
TKP would also take its place in this fight. It was hoped that the Ankara government would also adopt a positive approach to the TKP, as it needed to establish good relations with and get their support from the Bolsheviks who hold power in Russia. The forces that opposed the Ankara government, especially the British, and the forces that intervened in the civil war in Russia and supported White movement against the Red Army were the same. Therefore, a natural rapprochement brought about by the international circumstances of that day could have developed even further in circumstances where the TKP was also a direct part of the struggle being developed from Ankara. Various effects of the October Revolution were observed in various cities of Istanbul and Anatolia, and people and environments who looked at the Bolsheviks with sympathy were spreading [36].
It was important that all these forces take part in an organized way in the side of the Ankara government. As a matter of fact, direct relations, and some negotiations with Ankara through some people and letters did not indicate that there would be any problems. With such evaluations and predictions, preparations for crossing to Anatolia and going to Ankara and meeting with Mustafa Kemal Pasha and his government were quickly completed. Mustafa Suphi left Baku for Kars on December 28, 1920, with his wife and 13 friends as party manager. The Communists, who did not want to linger in Kars, were the 15th most organized and equipped military unit at the time. They set out for Erzurum, where the corps was located. In the meantime, however, problems had begun to arise. The TKP delegation, which faced various difficulties on the way, faced protests and attacks by a number of provoked and organized communities, rather than being accepted by Kazım Karabekir in Erzurum. They were not able to establish relations with the city's military and military officials and were not allowed to enter the city. Under the conditions of that day, it was not possible for them to establish a relationship with Ankara and understand the situation or ask for help.
Any attempt was fruitless. When they saw that their safety was in danger, they decided to return to Baku. However, it did not seem possible to make the turn through Kars. Then they decided to go to Trabzon and return to Baku by sea. As a matter of fact, they managed to pass from Erzurum to Trabzon. It was enough for them to get on a ship and sail back to Baku. On the night of January 28, 1921, they sailed to the Black Sea, but John the Butler of Trabzon Boatmen, known as Enver Pasha's man in Batumi at the time, and his men had no intention of letting Mustafa Suphi and his friends return to Baku. All TKP members who were taken from the ship departing from Trabzon to a motor off Sürmene were stabbed to death and their bodies were thrown into the sea [36].
It was alleged that Mustafa Suphi's Russian-born wife was not murdered and was seized as some kind of trophy. Residents, including this claim, have discussed many of the hidden aspects of this tragedy and are still discussing it. Did Yahya, the housekeeper of the boaters, organize this attack on his own initiative or with the knowledge and approval of Ankara and Mustafa Kemal Pasha? While there are still advocates for both views, it is unlikely that such an action, which could have international consequences, could be carried out without Ankara's knowledge, given that it would jeopardize relations with Soviet Russia [36] E3S Web of Conferences 258, 05039 (2021) UESF-2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202125805039 If Mustafa Suphi and his friends could come to Ankara, Mustafa Kemal, and his friends, who already have a strong opposition against him in the Parliament, would be in a very difficult situation and a serious communist focus could emerge in Ankara considering the relations with Soviet Russia [36] After reaching Ankara, it was no longer possible to eliminate the TKP members. As a matter of fact, some developments that took place later reinforce the suspicion that the incident had links to Ankara. Because Yahya Kaptan, who was responsible for the massacre, was killed on July 3, 1922 by two men of General İsmail Hakkı Tekçe and Topal Osman, who served as Mustafa Kemal's guard regiment commanders [34] Trabzon MP Ali Şükrü Bey, one of the leading figures of the Second Group in the Assembly who learned about this situation, will be killed by Topal Osman, Mustafa Kemal's guard, on March 27, 1922. When the murder was uncovered, Osman the Cripple would refuse to surrender and would be caught wounded as a result of the clash in the vineyard where he was hiding. He would die shortly, and a decision would be taken in the Grand National Assembly to have his body hanged and displayed at the door of the Assembly. Thus, the view that the massacre is related to the official environment is naturally strengthened in the face of the successive elimination of the people connected to the event. Experience has shown that, however, in murders related to official circles, perpetrators are eliminated in similar ways and care is taken not to leave witnesses [36].
The murders of Mustafa Suphi and his friends did not break relations between Soviet Russia and the Ankara government. The Ankara government claimed it was unaware of the massacre, and Russia, where the civil war is taking place, has not been tackled. Obviously, the international situation at the time did not allow the expulsion of Ankara [38].
Seeming to believe Ankara's "we are unaware" statement was accepted as a requirement of real politics. It happened to Turkey's first communists and snowed on the mountains they trusted. In the following years, apart from the "mountains" in Moscow, the "mountains" in Ankara will always be covered with snow, a "freezing cold" will always prevail, the approach of the established regime to the communists will almost never change, it will continue as it started! [12]

Turkey's Azerbaijani Relations in Atatürk's Period and Today
Benefiting from the power vacuum in the Caucasus at the end of World War I, the people of Azerbaijan were vulnerable to the persecution of Muslims and Turks in the region under the name of Bolshevik, and they needed a force to protect themselves from these invaders. For this reason, Azerbaijanis sought help from the Ottoman Empire, which had deep-rooted ties with the people of the region [14].
The Ottoman Empire aimed to create a great buffer state that would include the Caucasian Muslims against a new Russian threat and invasion that could lead from the Caucasus to the Ottoman lands by taking advantage of the environment created in the region after the Brest-Litovsk agreement. The Turkish Army came to Azerbaijan within the framework of a number of signed agreements and at the invitation of the Azerbaijani people, helping to preserve Azerbaijan's independence and territorial integrity [12].
Turkey has various stages of Azerbaijani relations and dimensions such as diplomacy, energy, trade, education, culture, communication. In terms of narrowing this area and concentrating at some point, when we do not deal with them separately and place ethno-social structure in the center, we will mention such topics when necessary [40].
When the issue is addressed in terms of social structure and the developments in the last year will be prioritized, it is not possible to address Azerbaijan Turkey relations independently of Azerbaijan-Iran and Turkey-Iran relations. The demographic structure of Turkey, Azerbaijan and Iran highlights the ethno-social feature. The dominant ethnic element in these three countries is largely the determinant factor in solving the problems of the Caucasus, especially the South Caucasus. In this sense, Turkey is as Caucasus as Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan is as Middle Eastern as Iran and Turkey. It is as demographic as the political borders in the emergence and resolution of problems [41].
"While the ethnic identities of nations and their distribution over the world give them superiority even under the name of different administrative structures, other nations that are uncomfortable with this feature can establish protective or aggressive alliances among themselves." The historical Armenian issue of the region, which has been re-staged in the last 10 years, has again been on the agenda of these three countries depending on the energy factor. While addressing Turkey-Azerbaijan relations, the center of gravity of our topic will be the nearby countries in connection with the social structures of these three regions [42].
Societies, meanwhile, nations -human potentials are a criterion in measuring the total national potential. The society, which has a high population, gains superiority with this feature. Homogeneous masses provide them with an advantage over heterogeneous masses in terms of this power. Undoubtedly, population superiority alone is not enough for the strength of a society. While this difference is often disadvantageous in societies with different ethnic characteristics, the ethnic extension of a country in another country is an advantage for it and a disadvantage for its counterpart. Some nations have had imperial interests in such demographic distribution. Armenian lobbies set an example. The Armenian diaspora successfully celebrated the Armenian ethnic identity in the name of Armenian interests. Although some nations live under whatever state name in the geography of the world, the nationality they belong to is sufficient for them to be considered as targets. This is the situation of Turkishness in terms of Armenians [43].
While the ethnic identities of nations and their distribution over the world give them superiority even under the name of different administrative structures, other nations that are uncomfortable with this feature can establish protective or aggressive alliances among themselves. Such configurations can now combine them in their interests. The solidarity between Iran and Armenia is such solidarity. We do not want to go into detail because this issue has been examined in detail by us before. We would like to briefly refer to Azerbaijan-Iranian relations and return to Azerbaijan-Turkey relations. When Iran was added to the Minsk group as an extension, it implied that it could use this position as an element of pressure against Azerbaijan-Armenian relations [21].
This event was the first stage of development. According to the commercial, political, and cultural agreements previously concluded between Azerbaijan and Iran, Iran would open a consulate in Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan would open a consulate in Tabriz. This right would also be granted to Azerbaijan when Iran broadcasts TV with defined borders. While Iran did not stop its promises, it pursued new sanctions based on Minsk prestige. In the second stage, Azerbaijan, in the interviews with Iran, convinced the potential of the cognate society within Iran and implied that it should be fair in the arbitration role between Azerbaijan-Armenia. In the following days, Azerbaijan intervened in oil exploration activities in the Caspian Sea of Iran with a military demonstration. That was phase three [34].
However, while Iran claimed that this region belonged to it, it accepted that Azerbaijan could search for oil in a region much south of this region, much closer to the Iranian geography, and Azerbaijan initiated oil exploration activities in this region (These are "Talesh Sea" and "Lenkeran Sea" beds).
Iran granted an oil exploration license to Azerbaijan further south of Caspian, while Iran granted an oil exploration license to Azerbaijan further south of Caspian, and Iran took a stance against Azerbaijan further north of Caspian because it showed that Iranian Turkishness could be included in the ranks of Azerbaijani Turkishness. In the fourth round, Iranian fighter planes violated Azerbaijani borders. With this attitude, Iran sent the message to Azerbaijan that it has military superiority. This development was followed by statements explaining that Azerbaijan was not in favor of ethnic provocation. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan has received messages from Turkey that it is not alone in Iran. This very important issue has continued to be won by the Persian nationality with cultural genes in the face of the Turkish nobility holding the demographic initiative with racial genes. Essentially, throughout history, Persians take care of the developing civilization in the Iranian geography consisting of tribes consisting of mostly Turks on behalf of their nationalities. In what has historically been known as the Setterhan uprising, Setterhan fought against the Persians in Iran between 1917 and 1920, fighting for Azerbaijan's independence in southern Azerbaijan [44].
At this stage of the explanation, we should emphasize that cultural competition is as important as racial competition, and that Iran is the founder, leader, and owner of the Iranian civilization cradle. In his studies on the construction of Persian language initiated with the Iranian Firm, he united the archaic languages of the region under the roof of Persian and reflected this search to his literature and architecture. This very important issue has continued to be triumphant with the cultural genes of the Persian nationality in the face of the Turkish nobility holding the demographic initiative with racial genes. In fact, throughout history, the Persians protect the civilization that has developed in the Iranian geography, consisting of tribes mostly of Turks, on behalf of their nationalities. This thesis included the Iranian Turkish administrations, the Ghaznavids of Iranian civilization identified with Persianism, Mughal, Khwarazmian, Hazara, Seljuk and Ottoman Turkish societies [43].
In fact, the diagnosis of Kasravi school for Iranian Turkishness is in the form of Turkishspeaking Farsiar. While this cultural imperialism of the Persians was stopped by Atatürk in the Republic of Turkey, nowadays the proclamation of Iran's cultural policy is Karakalpakstan. Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan. He is aware of intellectuals in Afghanistan and Azerbaijan [12].
To sum up, Persian nobles use the cultural trump card against the racial trump card of Turkish nobles. Going into too much detail can lead to going out of context. To go back to our knowledge and make the connection: Political, economic, and other relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey are based on cultural initiatives that will include the Turkish world. The leverage of Azerbaijan and Turkey against Iran is in the denominator of kinship. Iran's thesis against both countries stems from culture. In this sense, cultural relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey have followed positive and negative trends [45].
The fact that the articles related to the name and language of the nation have been changed in the Azerbaijani constitution. Student exchange and the fact that Azerbaijani youth who have studied higher in Turkey have worries about the future. Issues such as the abolition of the right of guarantor in Turkey with the amendment made in the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Nakhichevan are factors that cannot be considered positive. On the other hand, ensuring alphabet unity with Turkey by taking the Latin letters of Azerbaijan with a law adopted in 1991. Issues such as the initially broadcasting of three and increasingly two Turkish TV channels in Azerbaijan and the monitoring of this development by a TV channel in Azerbaijan in Turkey should be accepted as positive developments [46]. However, all this does not mean that the common Turkish cultural strategy to be followed in the face of Persian cultural imperialism has been determined. The Georgian dimension of the relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey is as important as the Iranian dimension. As in the Azerbaijan-Turkey-Iranian triangle, the Armenian factor is at the center of the Azerbaijan-Turkey-Georgia triangle. In this respect, it will be necessary to look at Georgia's ethno-social structure. In Georgia, Ossetians, Abkhazians, Adjaras and Armenians as well as Turks live. Establishing a Turkist front against the Persian-Armenian Alliance between Azerbaijan and Turkey will affect Georgia closely [17].
In Georgia, Ossetians and Abkhazians are fighting a Russian-backed armed struggle. Although both communities and Acaras have administrative status, Georgian Turks, who are more numerous than these, do not have a special status. As in the Ossetians and Abkhazians, the rights granted to the Georgian Turks during the Soviet Union began to be taken back and unrest began in the Turks of the country. Georgia's Javakheti region is an Armeniandominated region adjacent to Armenia from the north. If there is a purification based on Caucasus ethnic separation, the Answer will be included in Iran-Armenia's ranks. This development will intensify Turkey-Azerbaijan relations. The answer is the Meskhetian of recent history. Turks expelled from this region have the right to return to their homes within 10 years according to the decision of the European Security Council. While Georgia does not want the Turkish population to concentrate in its country, Armenians who do not want to evacuate the answer for the Turks can establish an anti-Turkish Armenian-Georgian alliance in this regard.
An Armenian-Georgian-Persian solidarity may emerge, and this situation requires the intensification of Turkish-Azerbaijani relations. Armenia and Iran pursue an anti-Western, pro-Russian policy, while Georgia pursues. It follows an anti-Russian, pro-Western policy such as Turkey and Azerbaijan. The Autonomous Republic of Acara, however, is bound by Georgia, but is not pro-Western.
Armenia and its Answer follow a pro-Russian policy. Despite the Treaty of Kars, Turkey does not exercise its guarantor's right over Acara. If Azerbaijan-Turkey and Iranian Turkishness form a line in the Caucasus, Georgian Turkishness will not be excluded from this development. Such a development may lead to the Georgian-Armenian-Persian Alliance. Not only that, but it also includes Derbent, which is still within the scope of RF, which improves the already existing Armenian, Persian and Russian solidarity. Armenia and Iran follow an anti-Western, pro-Russian policy, while Georgia, Turkey and Azerbaijan follow an anti-Russian, pro-Western policy [22].

Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits
The issue of the Bosphorus is based on the statement that "the decision of all other states to open the Mediterranean and Black Sea Straits to world trade and transportation is valid with us, provided that the security of the city of Istanbul and the Marmara Sea is away from all kinds of dangers". In Lausanne negotiations, a Convention on the Straits signed by England, France, Italy, Japan, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, Yugoslavia, Soviet Union, and Turkey was prepared. Although the principles related to the transitions in this contract are generally in accordance with the National Pact, the imposition of provisions related to the purification of the Straits from weapons has created a situation that endangers the security of Turkey [30].
In Lausanne, the Convention of the Straits laid down three principles: 1. The straits are free of soldiers and weapons. 2. A Bosphorus Commission has been established to control the passage through the Straits and to provide information on the passage to the League of Nations. 3. By clearing the straits of soldiers and weapons, the League of Nations, especially Britain, France, Italy, and Japan, has been guaranteed against any future danger to Turkey.
However, the League of Nations security system has not been successfully implemented. Italy, one of the revisionist states, occupied Ethiopia, a member of the Society, Germany armed the Color region in violation of the Treaty of Versailles, and Japan left the Society of Nations. These developments, which have led to the deterioration of international relations, have led Turkey to worry about the Armed Straits. Turkey first requested the amendment of the Convention of the Straits on 23 May 1923 but was not welcomed by other western states outside the Soviet Union. With the establishment of the Balkan Pact in 1934, the Turkish demand for the Straits was approved by the Pact members. After Germany weaponized the Rhine region in 1936, Britain will also respond positively to the request of the Turkish government. On 11 April 1936, the Turkish government sent a note to the states parties to the Lausanne (Lausanne) Convention of the Straits and repeated its proposal to amend the Convention, and a conference was held in Montreux, Switzerland on 22 June 1936. The Montreux Convention was signed on 20 July 1936 between Turkey, England, France, Soviet Union, Japan, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, and Yugoslavia. Italy later signed the contract on 2 May 1938. With the Montreux Convention, the Straits Commission has been abolished. The measures related to the decommissioning of the soldiers were also abolished and it was decided that they could become military. Thus, the safety of the straits was left to Turkey and it was ensured that it maintained its dominance over the region [43].
In addition, the passage and course of the expedition through the Straits is arranged in such a way as to ensure the security of Turkey and the states coasting to the Black Sea. Full freedom of passage has been granted for merchant ships. For warships, if Turkey was not at war in case of any war, the warships of the warring states would not pass through the Straits. If Turkey was in war or saw itself in danger of war, the transition decision was left to it. The type, size and tonnage of warships that may cross to the Black Sea of states that do not have a coast to the Black Sea are limited. There is also a wide freedom for the passage of warships of the Black Sea states through the Straits. Although the duration of the contract is limited to 20 years, the contract is still in force since none of the contracting states have requested the termination of the contract at the end of the period. Turkey's establishment of sovereignty over the Straits with the Montreux Convention has increased its prestige in international relations. The contract is a turning point in Turkish-British and Turkish-Soviet relations. The Turkish-British rapprochement formed by the contract disturbed the Soviets and the Turkish-Soviet relations became colder [18].