I know the usual Iranian nationalist narrative but it's weird to see it here.
Especially considering that the Ottoman Turkish alphabet based on the Persian variant of the Arabic script also didn't map all the sounds that are required in Turkish. They also probably didn't pick the arabo-persian script because of those commonly found sounds in Indo-Aryan(European?) languages considering that Turkish isn't an indo-european language and is in a family of its own... So there's a very loose link here.
And while I'm not sure about the circumstances of the adoption of the Arabic script in Iran, the Turks were conquerors basically from the beginning and chose the Arabic script entirely willingly. There's no colonial or imperialist implications to calling Turkish arabic script... arabic.
(Not that it wouldn't even really matter, the letters in question are unquestionably arabic script anyways. The Romans sure did subjugate Britain and france, and brutally repressed them, but that doesn't make the script they use any less Latin!)
Especially considering that the Ottoman Turkish alphabet based on the Persian variant of the Arabic script also didn't map all the sounds that are required in Turkish. They also probably didn't pick the arabo-persian script because of those commonly found sounds in Indo-Aryan(European?) languages considering that Turkish isn't an indo-european language and is in a family of its own... So there's a very loose link here.
And while I'm not sure about the circumstances of the adoption of the Arabic script in Iran, the Turks were conquerors basically from the beginning and chose the Arabic script entirely willingly. There's no colonial or imperialist implications to calling Turkish arabic script... arabic.
(Not that it wouldn't even really matter, the letters in question are unquestionably arabic script anyways. The Romans sure did subjugate Britain and france, and brutally repressed them, but that doesn't make the script they use any less Latin!)