As readers may remember, a closed-door Hudson meeting, also attended by senior Turkish generals, involved discussions of scenarios such as events that might trigger a Turkish military invasion of northern Iraq, as well as a possible assassination attempt on former head of the Constitutional Court Tülay Tuğcu. Several days after excerpts of this meeting were released in the Turkish dailies the Turkish General Staff released a terse statement.One alleged statement from a participant (or participants) at the meeting hinted that a possible US move to extradite senior Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) leaders to Turkey had been discouraged, since it would play into the hands of Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) before the July 22 general elections. This quotation is critical in that it represents the distaste of the powerful military for the AK Party, re-emphasizing sentiments portrayed with the memorandum released on April 27 in order to deter the election of Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül as president, seen as a threat to the country’s secular character.
At the center of the Hudson controversy has been Milliyet’s Washington correspondent Yasemin Çongar. This is because she has been the only Turkish journalist based in Washington to cover in-depth some excerpts of the Hudson meeting scenarios -- unearthing once again the obvious divisions between the military-led secular elite and the AK Party.
The General Staff’s statement reacted sharply to Yasemin Çongar’s news coverage of the Hudson meeting, but without naming her. Included were accusations toward Çongar in an attempt to discredit her, rather than attempting to deny the allegations, supported by evidence, of what was discussed during the meeting.
At this point I am not going to discuss think tank meetings and what the norms are for Turkish authorities, including military officials, when present at such meetings, particularly when such scenarios are being played. Rather my focus will be the shortcomings in Turkish journalism during the coverage of events, which unfortunately plays a negative role in portraying the true face of Turkey.
Hürriyet Editor in Chief Ertuğrul Özkök, for example, covered the Hudson-related controversy in his column on June 22 with a headline saying, “Difficulties of being a journalist.”
In his column Özkök recalls a scoop run by now-closed political weekly Nokta magazine which unearthed a draft Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) memorandum classifying the local media as “pro-military” and “anti-military.” For those so-called “anti-military” journalists, said Nokta, measures by the TSK included discrediting them in the eyes of the public and not allowing them to enter military headquarters. It is also worth noting that the TSK acknowledged the existence of this memo.
With such an embarrassing memo a case could be made at the relevant courts in most democracies -- but the majority of journalists, including those portrayed as “anti-military,” remained indifferent.
Ironically Çongar was listed among the pro-military media members in the TSK memo that Özkök discussed in his column. Özkök went on to say that not only the leading institutions of the country, but also some segments of the readers, expect an “oath of allegiance” from journalists. In other words, he says, a policy of “either you are on my side or you aren’t” it is expected from journalists.
I will call this phenomenon the “total surrender” attitude. This expectation of total surrender by journalists is not a new phenomenon in Turkey, though it is becoming increasingly paradoxical in a country seeking to enter into the European Union, an organization that sets forth democratic values as a primary objective despite some shortcomings within itself.
This total surrender psychology among many journalists in Turkey has prevented them from covering events in a realistic and true manner. This has been one of the main factors in why the Turkish public in general has long heard the most realistic accounts of Turkey from foreign correspondents, not the local media.
The only solution for overcoming this total surrender atmosphere is for journalists to be united against all sorts of pressures, both from the establishment and political parties, though the former can be very harsh. In this way an attempt can be made to regain the respect of the Turkish public, the majority of which is ready to read reality rather than state-inspired, self-censored stories.
