Assessing the civil-military relationship, the Republican People’s Party (CHP) administrator said, “Parliament has not made a law based on the military’s suggestion for eight years.” This drew a reaction from the European Parliament’s Turkey rapporteur, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, who asked, “Should it have?”Both the CHP and Öymen are facing a serious challenge. You can’t describe yourself as a social democrat party, see Turkey’s proper place as being in Europe and reject the basic arguments of Western democracies all at the same time. It is truly difficult to explain this dilemma to the world. If you were someone who was raised in a democracy in the West, and you watched the CHP, what would you think about it? Would you be able to make sense of why the CHP is the party that shows the most opposition in removing Antiterrorist Liberation Groups (GAL) and Gladio-like organizations from within the state? Would it make any sense for a political party to resist elected governments making decisions about the country?
A European social democrat would not be able to understand why the CHP is so disturbed by the crackdown on gangs within the state, why it takes every bill approved by Parliament that intends to expand individual rights to the Constitutional Court and Council of State for annulment and why it always votes in favor of the state. It’s also impossible for anyone to explain why the main opposition feels such a strong need to protect the juntas in the country.
In brief, Western deputies do not understand the CHP and its deputy chairman, Öymen, whose guard was down when he began defending himself and his party at the meeting. Unable to make his point, he started slinging mud at Today’s Zaman. Öymen accused the European Parliament of obtaining information from only some media organizations and requested the European Parliament members learn about the tendency and orientation of such media. Öymen, a diplomat who has seen many different parts of the world, acted according to the CHP’s peculiar understanding of democracy and basically sought to say: “Please put on a mask of prejudice against Today’s Zaman. If you don’t, then you won’t be able to understand the media group the way we want you to.” But it is impossible for European Parliament members to understand this mask of prejudice, and because they didn’t, the co-chairwoman of the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee, Hélène Flautre, said Today’s Zaman was one of the stars of the Turkish press.
Öymen and the CHP are up against a big challenge in the outside world. There’s no problem if you keep the matter within Turkey. You can manage the country with an “I wanted it so it happened” democracy. You can call an administration style in which the military dangles Damocles’ sword over politics a republic or democracy. But the moment you step outside, and especially if you’re in Europe, you will see that none of these can be called a democracy, and you will feel an overwhelming embarrassment for not being able to explain what has happened in your country. You can’t say you aspire to be a part of the Western club whilst being a staunch defender of an oligarchic status quo. You just won’t be able to explain that to Western intellectuals. Maybe 50 years ago, you could have justified your actions every time you faced a challenge by blaming others, especially the Zaman media group, but at a time when everything is broadcast live and when nothing can be covered up, you can’t achieve anything by applying that kind of method. For if you do, they will quickly tell you the story of how the liar’s candle only burns until bedtime.
Frankly, I would not want to be in the place of Öymen, who has to explain democracy from the CHP’s perspective in Europe.
