Despite this, I must say, I was utterly sorry to see a non-political and disgusting conspiracy in operation to purge this mentality -- which still sticks to the outdated political style of the Cold War era and which cannot comprehend domestic and global conditions, which are becoming more and more civic, pluralist, globalized and dynamic.On the other hand, I believe the masterminds behind this odious conspiracy are overstating Baykal’s position in politics as it consists of sheer ambition and greed. Therefore, my opinion is that treacherous conspirators should be sought, contrary to what Baykal says, in Baykal’s immediate circle or in the environment he frequents rather than turning the spotlight on the government. Indeed, being in an extremely weak position in the competition between political parties and never having had the chance to become prime minister and still lacking the tiniest probability of doing so, Baykal was a favorable main opposition leader for this or any government. Clearly, a main opposition led by Baykal -- who has never been able to get along with the masses and who could not convince even his most hardcore supporters that he could become prime minister and who failed to instill hopes in people that he would solve the country’s biggest problems -- should come every government’s way. Any reasonable government would be content with a main opposition like the Baykal-led CHP that would not pose any threat in the elections. Contrary to what Baykal suggests, there is no reasonable answer to the question of why a ruling party should want to purge a main opposition party leader who is repeatedly beaten in every election.
Also, it should be noted that if this country had a truly functional democratic system and political parties had democratic mechanisms in place, Baykal would have already been dumped into the dustbin of political history. I think our country is one of the rare countries where a political party leader can enjoy the privilege of maintaining his position despite his failure to achieve success in the past and his lack of a chance or hope of doing so today or in the future. Setting aside his past failures galore, his overwhelming defeat in the general elections of July 22, 2007, should have been sufficient for him to end his political career as it was terrible that he could not mingle with people for several days after the results were announced. As you will remember, despite the extremely suitable environment created with the full support of the high judiciary, the military, the media, the bureaucracy and Ergenekon, Baykal suffered a great shock from the historic defeat he suffered in the election and recovered only after confining himself to his house for several days. When he made his first public appearance after so many days, he continued where he had left off as if nothing had happened. Looking at how Baykal had first resigned from his post as chairman of the CHP when his party failed to meet the election threshold in the late 1990s but returned to office after a brief hiatus, as well as the strange process we saw after his defeat on July 22, 2007, we can safely assume that he will return shortly after his resignation armed with heavy and unfair accusations against the government, of course, provided that he can manage to do so and the shadowy force that is attempting to purge him through non-political methods allows him to.
I had noted above that I do not approve of what happened to Baykal although I don’t like him or his political mentality. However, this does not prevent me from recalling a popular Turkish proverb that can be loosely translated as “The pitcher goes so often to the well that it is broken at last.” Who can say that the Baykal-led CHP has recently been waging their political struggle in a politically legitimate sphere? It is an irony of fate that a political leader who has always preferred to conduct its opposition by resorting to non-political means rather than alternative solutions produced in a purely democratic political framework was purged from politics in a non-political conspiracy. Given the fact that his predestined obstinate opposition always hinged on non-political players such as the military, the high judiciary, the bureaucracy, the media and shady Ergenekon-like deep state networks instead of legitimate politics, who can say that this sad end to which he was subjected did not fit his own preferences?
Of course, I also remember the “Anatolian left” discourse that Baykal adopted in the early 2000s and which had aroused great interest in the general public, and this prompts me to different thoughts. I really have great difficulty understanding how the same man can both adopt this extremely reasonable, native and truly leftist style that aimed to save the CHP from its Jacobean/elitist policies and reconcile it with the masses and the strictly Kemalist/militarist system that Baykal has espoused since 2002. I am inevitably inclined to consider the involvement of certain shady deep forces. I do not know how they did it, but someone managed to dissuade Baykal from the correct and democratic route on which he had somehow set out for the first time. They made him the mouthpiece of the status quo and deep gangs instead of the general public and demands for change. They goaded him to become a lawyer for Ergenekon rather than the rule of law and justice and pushed him to a new route that was extremely Kemalist, militaristic and antidemocratic.
It mirrors what happened to Associate Professor Necip Hablemitoğlu, who was assassinated in 2003. As Hablemitoğlu had been first used by shady networks and then slain after he fulfilled his duties, so it seems Baykal had been successfully used by some people or groups in a cause he never truly believed in since 2002. Perhaps he is being purged by these people or groups using nefarious methods today. Hablemitoğlu was probably purged in an assassination by someone to whose dark goals he had served. Isn’t it likely that Baykal was similarly purged in a “personality assassination”? I think Baykal knows best the answer to this question.
