Since the inception of the Ergenekon case, they have started to make frequent public appearances. Some of these bulls are young, some old. There are those bulls who have no insignia while some of them bear such titles as constitutional law professor, civilian politician, trade union head and bar association president. I gave much thought to how I should refer to them. Should I call them the bulls of the regime or of the status quo? Finally, I found a proper name: pro-guardianship bulls. Now that the republic has for some time turned into a bureaucratic guardianship regime and the military bureaucracy pretends to be within the system but acts independently of any administrative or legal review, I conclude that there must be ostentatious bully subcontractors involved in this business.
There is this “Akıl Defteri,” a TV program aired on Mehtap TV, characterized by the jokes of Şahin Alpay, Mehmet Altan and Eser Karakaş. In one episode, Karakaş turned toward Altan and asked the following question: "During his term as the head of the Constitutional Court, Ahmet Necdet Sezer gave off the image of being a democratic and liberal advocate of human rights. A speech he delivered was even a major factor in his nomination and eventual election as president. However, we saw a completely different Sezer during his presidency. He acted contrary to what he had preached. What happened to Sezer when he was elected president?" Altan snapped, "They recruited him for military service."
Why should some distinguished, socially respected people later develop the ambition of becoming pro-guardianship? Academics, lecturers, heads of the Higher Education Board (YÖK), bar association presidents and, particularly, deputies, ministers, etc.
Retired Gen. Kemal Yamak, who died last Monday, commanded the Special Warfare Department, known to general public as the "counter-guerrilla," during the March 12, 1971 period. In his memoirs, titled "Gölgede Kalan İzler ve Gölgeleşen Bizler" (Traces Left in Shadow and Ourselves Shaded), he made a striking disclosure to the late Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit. During his first term as prime minister, Ecevit wondered why then Chief of General Staff Gen. Semih Sancar requested several million dollars from the secret state fund. "Where would you get this money from in the past?" he asked. "From the US," Sancar replied. Ecevit was surprised. He demanded an immediate briefing, which was given by Yamak.
At that briefing, Ecevit learned that the Special Warfare Department provided life employment to some "patriots" whose names are not disclosed. When he found out that a commander he met in Sarıkamış was working for this department, he felt the urge to ask: "I have no doubts concerning the military, but I am uneasy about those 'civilian' connections. For instance, could it be that the chairman of the district organization of the Nationalist Movement Party [MHP] is one of those civilian connections?" The reply came from Sabri Yirmibeşoğlu: "Yes, he is." He was the close aide of Yamak. In his memoirs, Yamak was sending the following message to Ecevit: "What if someone could tell Ecevit that there are some people from his own party and even from Parliament working for this organization?"
These are hair-raising realities, but some people are trying to make us forget them. As a matter of fact, the greatest uneasiness that the Ergenekon case causes in them is that it helps keep this matter the top agenda item at all times.
It follows that there are also some people who have been trained since their youth. Who suggests these people to the leaders? How are those in bureaucracy promoted? Is there a behind-the-scenes network that affords them protection? According what Yamak divulged, even prime ministers are not informed about their existence. For instance, what would happen if Deniz Baykal knew people his party worked for the department? Or is his advocacy for Ergenekon due to his fear?
