I was among the columnists who watched and listened to Başbuğ's more than two-hour-long lecture on television, broadcast in its entirety on all news channels. I am honestly not sure if I would have decided to attend the event had I been invited, but since the Zaman group is among the media organizations "non-accredited" by the military, I did not have to make that difficult decision. I did, however, write a column strongly protesting the military's policy of discriminating against certain media groups on entirely arbitrary grounds. In that column I reminded the military that, as acknowledged in Gen. Başbuğ's lecture, the TSK is financed by taxes paid by citizens, including millions of those who read and watch the outlets of media groups not allowed to attend military events. This discriminative practice has to be lifted immediately, as demanded by the vast majority of the journalistic corps. This is truly a test for the TSK's commitment to the democratic principles declared in Başbuğ's lecture.
Listening to Başbuğ on television, I first felt deeply distressed. The whole scene of the military commander lecturing the whole nation and the entirely political content of the talk reminded me of how far Turkey is from establishing democratic norms whereby the military minds its own business and keeps out of politics. The lecture was of the kind that could only be given by the leader in any normal democracy. Reminding myself that this was not a normal democracy, I soon managed to recover, however, and started asking myself whether Başbuğ was saying things that may be regarded as modest steps towards Turkey achieving democratic normalcy.
I recalled what President Obama had said in his meeting with students in İstanbul: "States are like big tankers, they're not like speedboats. You can't just whip them around and go in a new direction. Instead you've got to slowly move it and then eventually you end up in a very different place." I recalled also the revelations about recent military coup attempts and the chief of general staff's e-memorandum just two years ago which threatened the Parliament with military intervention. After that I was able to make a sober assessment of what Başbuğ was saying.
Soberly assessed, Başbuğ's lecture may be seen as an attempt at redefining the political role of the military in Turkey. He may be saying the following: We are not inching away from our self-appointed political role of defending the unitary nature of the state and preserving the secular nature of the law. But from now on we intend to play this role within the larger constraints of democracy and the rule of law. Members of the TSK will not be allowed to try to conspire to overthrow democratically elected governments and will not in any way be involved in extrajudicial killings. Başbuğ may also be saying that the TSK will from now on respect citizens' ethnic identities and not favor their suppression.
I am not sure whether the above is the way Başbuğ's lecture needs to be assessed or whether this is the way I would like to read it with my usual cautious optimism. But still the message I get from his talk is that the TSK from now on will not only have an attentive ear to the public debate but will also listen to what intellectuals and academics have to say about the burning questions of the country.
There were other positive elements in Başbuğ's talk. One of those was his emphasis that the "Ataturkist system of thought," that is, Kemalism, "is not an ideology that says what has to be done, but a world view that indicates how one should decide on the basis of reason and science." That the chief of general staff proclaims he does not regard Kemalism as a body of rigid political directives is certainly a welcome change of mind.
Another positive element in the talk was that Başbuğ did not only point out the fact that the TSK is financed by taxpayers, but also went on to stress the need for the TSK to be "transparent" in the way it uses the financial resources it is allocated by Parliament. This should be read as a call to members of Parliament to properly fulfill their duty of establishing full control over military spending.
In the context of the military's fight against Kurdistan Workers' Party's (PKK) terrorism, the most noteworthy remarks by Başbuğ were not only his emphasis on "even terrorists are, after all, human beings …" but also his call for legislation to help "bring down from the mountains" PKK militants. This raises the hope that there may be a consensus between civilian and military authorities to work for an amnesty for rank-and-file PKK militants, which is surely a necessary measure to take the violence out of Turkey's politics.
In a future column I hope to deal with some of my objections to Başbuğ's remarks, which are, of course, manifold.
