There are speculations that it is the military which has prompted the chief prosecutor to demand the banning of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), in power since 2002. Two weeks ago a plan devised by the military authorities on how to affect the behavior of the judiciary, the media, civil society and others and a secret meeting between the commander of the army and the vice chairman of the Constitutional Court was leaked to the press. Last week two retired four-star generals were arrested in the latest round of arrests of retired officers, journalists, academics and businessmen for allegedly plotting a military coup. All these are different manifestations of the military's recent involvement in politics.Why is the Turkish military so deeply involved in politics despite nearly 60 years of democratic rule? There are two main theories about this. One theory maintains that the military regards itself as the owner of the Turkish state. Being strongly committed to a very authoritarian form of secular nationalism (i.e., Kemalism) and being intent on preserving the privileges they have in the kind of tutelary democracy existent in Turkey, they are not willing to let elected politicians run the country all on their own. This is why the military is running the country from behind the scenes while outright military rule has become increasingly unlikely.
According to the other theory, the elected politicians' failure to assume their responsibilities, their total disinterest and ignorance of defense and security issues and more importantly the lack of commitment among them to the principles of a democratic regime based on the rule of law are the real reasons why they have not been able to establish democratic control over the military and still want to use the military against each other in political rivalry.
My position on this question is that not only the first but also the second theory helps us understand the civilian-military balance in Turkey. In defense of the latter theory let us examine the behavior of elected politicians since the crisis over the election of the president by Parliament in April 2007.
The main opposition party, the Republican People's Party (CHP), has not only been resisting since 2005 all reforms initiated by the AKP government to broaden basic rights and freedoms, it has been actively inciting the military to intervene in the political process on its behalf. Its aging leader, Deniz Baykal, is suspected of having pinned his hopes for coming to power on an interim military regime.
The other opposition party, the National Movement Party (MHP), not only opposes all reforms toward broader freedoms, it is doing its best to bring about confrontations between the state elite and the AKP government, in hope of electoral gain. MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli has recently displayed his disrespect for democratic principles by calling on Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to resign and the AKP to dissolve itself before the Constitutional Court does so.
Mesut Yılmaz is a former prime minister whose Motherland Party (ANAVATAN) was wiped out of politics in the 2002 elections. He has been tried for high corruption at the Constitutional Court, the case against him being dropped thanks to an amnesty law that came to his rescue. The same Yılmaz recently said the following: "The Turkish Army cannot be expected to return to its barracks. Closing down parties may be a primitive measure, but has to be preserved in Turkey. The AKP has spoiled a golden chance." Politics does not, however, tolerate a vacuum and Yılmaz is therefore getting ready to fill the vacuum.
A seven-time former prime minister and the ninth president of Turkey, Süleyman Demirel, who was twice toppled by military interventions and banned from politics between 1980 and 1987, is in a thinly veiled way supporting the closure of the AKP and the ban from politics of both President Abdullah Gül and Prime Minister Erdoğan, accusing them of confrontations with state institutions and for failing to run the country in harmony. Some observers suspect that Demirel smells of an opportunity to be re-elected as president.
Do I need to provide further evidence for the argument that politicians in Turkey are still far from being committed to the basic principles and values of democracy?
