Why would it not exist? It goes back to Ottoman times. It is something that comes with the tradition. It is important to minimize, or if possible, annihilate it.” Three days later, the prime minister elaborated on the issue at hand when he was responding to questions from journalists on his flight to Ethiopia: “We could as well refer to the deep state as the formation of gangs within institutions. Failure to look into these connections to date has cost both the government and the nation. Law enforcement can only help us to a degree. A combination of law enforcement, legislation and justice is necessary to look into those connections.”
What is the deep state? There are two people whose response to this question is very direct. One of them is Kenan Evren, Turkey’s seventh president. The other one is Süleyman Demirel, Turkey’s ninth president.
This is what Mr. Evren said in a March 30, 2005 interview with Sabah: “When the state fails to perform its duties properly, the deep state interferes, and did indeed interfere. Nobody said, ‘My Lord, don’t interfere.’ On the contrary, they said, ‘Do interfere, seize control’.”
This is what Mr. Demirel said on CNN Türk, broadcast on April 17, 2005: “The deep state is the military. Though the military is not a separate state, it becomes the deep state when it seizes government control. The need arises for the deep state when the government fails to perform its tasks.” Around this time, Mr. Demirel was also interviewed by Yavuz Donat:
“The deep state is a condition in which the normal state goes off the rails. The founders of the republic were engrossed with the fear that the state might fall apart, just as it happened with the Ottoman Empire. At the root of the deep state lies this fear: The state is falling apart, so we should save it from demise. … This is what it is.”
Actually the issue is related both to the culture of democracy and the assimilation of democracy. Loving the nation cannot be a quality that belongs exclusively to the military. The basic thing should be to save and to improve the state with adherence to the rule of law. Can it be a solution to discontinue democracy every once in a while on the pretext that the government is not doing its job well in Turkey when in fact democracy could have been improved?
It becomes all the more difficult to work reasonably as long as politicians expect to gain future political prosperity from a possible military intervention and regard themselves as members of the staff of the deep state. The reasonable thing is this: Whether or not Turkey enters the EU, democratization based on the rule of law will strengthen Turkey. We show respect to our country by working hard to keep alive universal humanitarian values, the freedom of thought, expression and religion. Jurisdiction should apply to everybody, and everybody should be accountable for what they have done. For this to happen, state and constitutional organizations need to work in harmony.
The most important criticism that we are facing on our way to the EU relates to the military’s custodial role of Turkey’s democracy. It is not possible to solve any problems in the nation when the advocates of the above argument are called “traitors.” If it were, former military interventions would have worked out well.
As long as civil power is seen as illegal, as long as the elected are not taken seriously and as long as there is constant concession to democracy, Turkey will remain poorly governed. The military is the flower of the nation, so efforts must be made to find a solution without destroying trust in it. Nobody will benefit from sheer obstinacy or trust in one’s own fists. Today, real nationalism means attaching the deep state to the normal state and preserving democracy.
