According to the document, the TSK had a systematic plan to damage the image of the AK Party government and the Gülen movement in the eyes of the public, to play down the Ergenekon investigation and to gather support for members of the military arrested as part of the Ergenekon inquest. In his statement Başbuğ stated that until the original document is found, this [Xeroxed copy of the document] “piece of paper” was aiming to undermine the credibility of the armed forces. In his statement Başbuğ also asked the prosecutors to investigate the source of the authentic version of the document and investigate the people who were targeting the credibility of the TSK. At the time, the majority of the Turkish media, expectedly, jumped on the TSK bandwagon to circulate “smart” questions to create doubt about the authenticity of the document.
As of this week, a military officer has sent the authentic document to the prosecutors along with a long letter sharing his information about the preparation of the plot and the process after the document was published, asking them to investigate the document.
Regarding the document, a report prepared by three experts at the İstanbul Council of Forensic Medicine (ATK) showed that a signature appearing on the original copy of the alleged military plot against the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and the Gülen movement belongs to Col. Dursun Çiçek. The ATK report has come as verification of previous reports from the Gendarmerie General Command's Criminal Investigation Department and the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK). Evaluating a photocopy of the plot revealed earlier, the two institutions had said the signature on the document matched the colonel's.
In response, instead of providing a satisfying answer about the document, the TSK has released a statement questioning why the information about the document was leaked to the media and why the media is questioning the attitude of the TSK.
It seems that the TSK has been pursuing a similar strategy to that implemented when Taraf first published the document back in June. The strategy works by highlighting some questions to create doubt first; the doubts created about the event are then jumped on to deepen them further. The strategists at the TSK, with their long experience of how the media works in this country, know that the mainstream media is ready to join the TSK's strategy that at least postpones the tone of immediate criticism, then cools it down.
Two mainstream newspapers, Akşam and Vatan, have already highlighted the questions that could serve for the interests of those who want to create doubts about the authenticity of the “authentic” document. We do not want to suggest here that the media should not question the authenticity of the document; however, the way that questions were asked in the above-mentioned newspapers indicates that the aim of the questions was not to find the truth about the issue but to create doubts about the document itself. For instance, the Vatan daily asks five questions reflecting how the TSK thinks:
1) It should not be expected for us to believe that the authentic document has not been obtained recently. If so, why wait until now to reveal it?
2) It was decided by the İstanbul Prosecutor's Office that the investigation of Dursun Çiçek should be conducted by the Ankara prosecutors. What has changed? Why didn't the prosecutors in İstanbul send the document to Ankara to conduct the investigation?
3) It is known that recent amendments to legislation relating to the military and civilian judiciary systems have brought about changes as to which court people will be tried in. The amendments would allow the Constitutional Court to decide whether it was constitutional or not. It is expected that the court is going to make its final decision on that issue in November. Why are they in a hurry?
4) If they are so sure about the authenticity of the document in their hands, why do they pursue unlawful practices? Why do they leak it to the media to create public pressure?
5) We still have doubts about the authenticity of the document. It is not logical to expect that a colonel who was an honor student at every school he attended could prepare such an unlawful and illogical document.
Similar to the Vatan daily, Akşam daily also asks five questions. Compared to the questions that appeared in Vatan the questions in Akşam are more logical yet still aim to create doubts about the authenticity of the document itself. For instance, Professor Ülkü Arıboğan from Akşam in her column that the daily ran as a headline story underlines following points: “There is a reason behind preparing a document just as there is for hiding one. The main players of the game are not the ones who prepared the document but those who hid it until now and then revealed it. It is not logical to expect that those who prepared the document were not aware of the fact that it was unlawful to do so. Therefore, when it was published in the media, it was expected that the original document would be destroyed. Whey didn't they destroy the document? Who was hiding the document and what was the purpose behind hiding such a document?” Arıboğan further continues her comments to argue: “It is unthinkable to assume that a process of blackmail had taken place during the time period the document remained hidden, but the revealing of the document indicates that it had and that the blackmail was rejected.”
As we read the letter that the officer sent to the prosecutors (the full version of the letter was published by Taraf on Oct. 26) it became clear that the above-mentioned questions have their answers in the letter itself. For instance, both dailies' question the timing of the letter and why it has been revealed now. To answer that question, the author of the letter says: “While those officers who work hard and do their job according to the law were [as punishment] appointed to different posts outside of TSK headquarters and were removed from the headquarters of the TSK, Dursun Çiçek was appointed to be the head of a unit in the Naval Command. This is not right.” Examining this sentence itself explains that the officer who sent the letter to the prosecutor is among those who were removed from TSK headquarters, or at least an officer who did not like to see that Çiçek was promoted. Given that officers are appointed to their new posts at the beginning of September and begin their new post after a 15-day break, it is logical to expect that an officer who was removed from TSK headquarters at the beginning of September may have sent the original document in the same month of his punishment because the letter arrived with the prosecutors at the beginning of October. Therefore, when we think of the questions why the document was revealed this month it appears that there could be no conspiracy behind sending the document now. It could very well be related to the timing of the appointment that took place at the beginning of September.
Furthermore, it is absurd in a democracy to debate the question of why, by who and when the document was revealed but not to ask the question of why and who prepared the document to target the civilian government. This way of twisting the direction of the questions themselves indicates that the questions debated here are not the questions that were asked for journalistic purposes but to create doubts about the authenticity of the document and to change the direction of people's attention.
Questions 3 and 1 that appeared in the Vatan daily contradict themselves. In the first question it was asked why have they waited until today, however, in the third question they ask why they are in a hurry to reveal this document. To answer the two questions at one time it could easily be argued that because there is no conspiracy behind revealing the document, the sender did not calculate the timing of revealing the document according to events outside his personal interests. There is no need for an answer to the four and fifth questions because in Turkey, similar to elsewhere, documents in the hands of prosecutors attract media attention and documents are published by the media when they obtain them...
