In his latest interview for the Habertürk daily, Başbuğ adopted “threatening” language and warned unspecified “parties” not to try the military’s patience. “If we run out of patience, we will start sharing with the public all we know. We have lots of information. We will have to share it with the public. We will seek legal redress and seek our rights,” he said. While some interpreted Başbuğ’s recent talkativeness as a move to repair the image of the military, others see it in relation to the upcoming general elections.Milliyet’s Taha Akyol admits that Gen. Başbuğ’s statements made to Habertürk were perceived as “threats” by some, while others interpreted them as “the cry of the military,” because he was voicing the complaints of a demoralized military. According to Akyol, it is possible to agree with these two views as he says those who bear the responsibility of occupying important state posts such as Başbuğ should either disclose what they know or, if the environment is not conducive to this, they should never mention them. However, Akyol says he sees the debates on Başbuğ’s statements as conjectural debates and says their most significant aspect was his reflecting the change of mentality and attitude within the military. “No matter the ups and downs that come and go in line with the changing circumstances in the country, the military in Turkey is changing. Since the mid-1920s, it was forbidden to even utter the word ‘Kurdish’ in Turkey. Now Başbuğ talks about Kurds as ‘our citizens of Kurdish origin.’ A republican era without ‘reactionaryism’ was unthinkable, but now Başbuğ does not even make a single utterance of this word. How can the military not change when society is constantly changing?” asks Akyol. Referring to Başbuğ’s emphasis on the need to keep up with change, Akyol says Başbuğ, as the person who heads a historical institution which has strong reflexes and traditions, should manage the change in that institution well.
Bugün’s Adem Yavuz Arslan thinks Başbuğ’s latest statements were deliberately made today and aimed to repair the image of the Turkish military in the eyes of both the public and military staff. Finding Başbuğ saying, “If we run out of patience, we will start sharing with the public all we know,” very problematic, Arslan says if Başbuğ knew about something that can be described as an offense or crime, he must know that concealing such a thing is an offense, so he should have notified the relevant authorities about the things he knew. “In addition to this, the General Staff, as a constitutional institution that is loyal to the law, is not an institution that will win supporters from the public by making public all the things it knows,” explains Arslan. In his view, Başbuğ’s statements and the statements of other generals recently can be interpreted as the signs of a new era. “As you know, we are heading toward elections, and the 2011 general elections are seen as the most significant of any by many circles in society. So every step taken in this period has a meaning,” contends Arslan.
