There is now a much stronger likelihood that the role of four-star generals who were on active duty at that time will face legal scrutiny and will eventually be included in the already swollen indictment.My earlier predictions in this column had been that the so-called "coup diaries" of retired Naval Forces Commander Adm. Özden Örnek -- printed by the Nokta newsweekly, which was subsequently closed because of these revelations -- would inevitably come into the spotlight sooner or later.
In two separate interviews with the Milliyet daily on Wednesday, two retired top commanders said they were ready to testify to the court "if called for." One of them, Gen. Hilmi Özkök, who served as chief of general staff in the politically tense period between 2002 and 2006, went even further, saying, "If it will help the cause of justice, I will go [and speak] as a witness or defendant, it does not matter."
These words, coming from two figures who kept a remarkable silence about what really went on during those months, particularly the words from Özkök, who I see as the "key witness," mark a groundbreaking "invitation" to prosecutors to get in touch with them.
Due to the ill-intentioned efforts by the militarist segment of the press, the Ergenekon investigation has progressed to a point in which questions, doubts and ambiguities have come to almost overshadow the true significance of the ongoing trial and new waves of arrests: the role of the military outside its "jurisdiction" and its self-declared right to intervene in civilian politics.
If Özkök and retired Chief of General Staff Gen. Yaşar Büyükanıt speak out, it will without a doubt lead to a new phase in the ongoing confrontation between the powerful hard-line elements within the military and the sphere of civilian politics.
Such a step would pave the way, for the first time in history, for holding the "almighty" and "untouchable" Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) accountable. It will hopefully lead to self criticism on the part of the military and a redefinition of its role, making it the guardian of the country's borders rather than the "superior center of tutelage over civilian society."
Will the prosecutors respond to Özkök and Büyükanıt? Logically speaking, they would. And, absolutely, they should. The Ergenekon trial and the seemingly endless revelations about the intentions and plans by commanders, officers and their civilian puppets require it.
In the so-called "Balbay diaries," which match in content and chronology Örnek's "coup diaries," my perception is rather lucid: There was a serious attempt to establish the infrastructure and mental groundwork for a coup and, had it not been for Özkök as almost the "sole player" (in his capacity as top commander) as an obstacle, the plans would have been set in motion to overthrow the government while it was busy with its talks with the EU. Therefore, if they haven't been already, both "diaries" must be translated into other languages and read carefully, because they will be referred to in the next phases of the trial.
If taken further and argued successfully, the Ergenekon trial will bring a tradition and mindset to an end. Up until very recently, the perception of the TSK was, both domestically and internationally, that it was a "special case," "a security valve for the tenets of the republic," "a guardian of stability," "a force that intervenes in politics only when conditions necessitate it," etc.
Developments over the last decade, peaking in the Ergenekon trial (with the arrests of top generals and high-ranking officers with alleged links to bombings and such murders as the "Malatya case"), produced a different picture: Despite the fact that it is well organized, the army has fallen prey to rogue elements within its ranks, adventurers who would not hesitate to take the country into uncharted waters. This certainly has something to do with the fact that it is the only military structure in NATO to have rejected change after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact ended the Cold War.
The current picture is of an army that is still struggling within to find new ways to relate to politics and carry out a cleansing of these elements of adventurism. It will have to admit the broken myth, since it is has now been widely revealed that it is the military itself that stands as an obstacle to the maturity of democracy in Turkey.
