The assassination of Turkey's leading Turkish-Armenian journalist, Hrant Dink, early this month in Istanbul has reportedly prompted Büyükanıt to lodge similar complaints to a group of ambassadors from several countries who visited him recently. It has become a customary practice for Gen. Büyükanıt to invite people who seek individual appointments from him all at the same time when his schedule is busy. In one of those meetings full of ambassadors, Büyükanıt was again critical of some foreign diplomats' decision to attend Dink's funeral but not that of the soldiers.
It is worth mentioning here that Gen. Büyükanıt strongly condemned Dink's slaying and one of his top generals in İstanbul was at the funeral, while a wreath was sent on behalf of the Turkish Armed Forces. I mention this to the readers to prevent a possible misunderstanding that the Turkish military was indifferent to Dink's slaying.
But whether we agree or not, the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have long been uneasy over the absence of foreign diplomats at soldiers' funerals and apparently seek from diplomats the same sensitivity that they show to the slaying of the country's intellectuals and journalists.
Büyükanıt is keen on meeting with foreign diplomats to express the military's views on various foreign policy issues, unlike some of his predecessors such as retired Gen. Hüseyin Kıvrıkoğlu, who imposed a ban during his tenure on such meetings. But during his time no major military reforms were attempted to reduce the still-existing political power of the military.
Nevertheless, while meeting with the foreign diplomats, Gen. Büyükanıt, outspoken by nature, used this opportunity to express military views on several foreign policy issues.
Here are some excerpts from comments made by Büyükanıt during his meeting with the diplomats:
“I want the TSK to become smaller in size, but for this to happen we need modern equipment. Our size is big and people find it difficult to understand”*
“We won't send more soldiers to Afghanistan. Turkey has done its bit in Afghanistan, such as assuming ISAF command twice.”
“NATO needs to do more in Pakistan to solve the situation in Afghanistan.”
“The damage has already been done in Iraq's oil-rich Kirkuk, when records and deeds were destroyed [by the Kurds] soon after the US invasion of Iraq.” Büyükanıt implies, for example, that Turkmens cannot prove that they are from Kirkuk since property records were destroyed.
“If the US leaves Iraq, the country will disintegrate. As part of the disintegration, Sunnis and Shiites may decide to attack the Kurds, who may end up massing on the Turkish border as they did following the 1991 invasion of Iraq. If the US and other coalition troops withdraw from Iraq, it would cause instability in the entire Middle East.”
“The US should increase focus on other parts of Iraq for the possible stability of the country.”
“Iraqi Kurds [the Kurdish regional government under the Iraqi Constitution] should be more cooperative with Turkey, and that will make Ankara more cooperative with them.”
If we put aside the fact that Turkish generals' keenness to speak about internal and external politics causes discontent among foreigners and Turks alike, we have to accept that, paradoxically, it should be someone like Büyükanıt, supported by both junior and senior officers, who can teach the powerful military that they must accept that political authority is higher than military authority if democracy is to mature in Turkey. But for this to happen, we need strong a political leadership with the courage to further democratic reforms.
*I, as a journalist, have heard this argument of the military for many years, but the main reason behind the military's difficulty in downsizing personnel of around 700,000 -- most of whom are conscripts -- is political. Through a big army the military maintains its political power. We all know that ending conscription is the way to reduce its size. 
