Fidan’s predecessor Emre Taner and Deputy Undersecretary Afet Güneş were also called to testify. The KCK is an umbrella group that allegedly encompasses the terrorist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its affiliated organizations, listed as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union. Fidan was known for secretly holding talks with PKK representatives in the Norwegian capital of Oslo. With the three MİT officials having been summoned to testify, Turkish columnists shared their views -- mostly conspiracies -- over what the real aim is behind the move.
Describing the situation as “a sign of a crisis within the state,” Radikal’s Cengiz Çandar says that at the end of this crisis, the hierarchy within the state will be shaped for good. Noting that the police and the judiciary have become political actors, Çandar says a country in which the police and the judiciary have become political actors and influence the country’s politics cannot be regarded as a state of law. “Specially authorized prosecutors and intelligence received from the police greatly helped the government in the Ergenekon and Sledgehammer cases, but these two instruments have become bombs that are ready to blow up in the government’s face,” he says.
In a response to comments that have been made suggesting that the prosecutor’s decision to summon the MİT officials over their efforts to negotiate with terrorists indicates that the judiciary is not in favor of solving the issue of terrorism through dialogue, Sabah’s Nazlı Ilıcak says: “Were we not criticizing the government’s decision to continue with the operations against the terrorists in the Southeast. Even after the Uludere incident, in which Turkey was shaken by the deaths of 34 civilians in a mistaken military airstrike, did Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan not reiterate his determination to carry on the military operations against the terrorists? In this regard, it is not true that the conflict between the judiciary and the government we are experiencing today is caused by the conflicting policies on whether Turkey’s terrorism problems should be solved through dialogue or operations.” Ilıcak also notes that debates over whether the prosecutor should first have requested Erdoğan’s permission to summon Fidan lead us to another issue -- namely, why waiting for Erdoğan’s permission was not discussed in former Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ’s case.
On the other hand, Sabah columnist Emre Aköz argues that the two cases -- that of Başbuğ and that of Fidan -- should not be compared as Başbuğ was not arrested for doing his job. “He was not arrested for the way he led the army; his alleged crime is his attempt to interfere in politics, which is not the job of a chief of General Staff. However, Fidan’s case is quite the opposite. He is being summoned for carrying out the orders of the government, which is exactly what his job is.”
Highlighting the lack of a powerful system of law in Turkey, Milliyet’s Hasan Cemal says this is the main reason why we are going through such conflicts. “On the one hand there is a group of military and civilian bureaucrats, while on the other is the law. Turkey has seen many wars between the two sides and many victories of the first group. However, Erdoğan did the right thing by getting rid of the contradiction between these two: He underscored the superiority of the law, launched democratic initiatives and a process of dialogue with the terrorists. If Erdoğan stands behind this policy, he and Fidan will find that there are many people who support them,” says Cemal.
