Everything is fine up to a point, but everything gets turned upside down when the question is asked, “What is an NGO, who are they comprised of and which organizations can be considered as NGOs?” Because in general the system gives this name to those groups that are under its own control and it assigns them a mission. It is a well-known fact that organizations established under the control of public authority and used for various operations are called NGOs. However, some seem to be mixed up with TAFs (Turkish Armed Forces). In this country, there are some people wearing NGO rosettes who stay at the military barracks and participate in programs handed to them at military headquarters, but don’t hesitate to introduce themselves as NGOs. In the business world and media sector as well, there are semi-official NGOs. They are responsible for playing the role they have been given. In this situation these authorized NGOs and those independent groups who derive their strength from the society’s internal dynamics and express social demands go different ways.
Non-governmental organizations are products of a non-governmental mentality; nothing else. NGOs that are not based on the individual’s free choice and freedom to organize are either a hoax or an empty facade. A civilian mentality puts freedoms pertaining to the individual and society at the center of its attention. Whereas, the priority of non-civilian organizations is security, as it should be. The problem is that the security borders drawn surround the most basic issues, and expand to the point of drowning the most essential solutions. For this reason, it can’t be thought that democratic and civilian breakthroughs will be made by a security sensitive organization that instills fears in the people and implies an internal threat syndrome.
In countries like Turkey it’s not possible to define society with a clear-cut civilian or military indicator. Just as soldiers can be a part of the active factors of the civilian society model, the opposite is true as well. In this country there are many men with a civilian appearance that actually have a military shirt on their backs. These often prevent the military from making sound decisions. A professor saluting and saying, “I’m at your command,” would not be found odd in Turkey. Managing a newspaper in Ankara and shuttling back and forth everyday between the newspaper and military General Staff headquarters is not unusual. History is full of stories of those who are “more royal than the King;” with us there are stories of those who are “more military than the General.”
Empowering civilian groups is not just a process that occurs with greater responsibility for civilians; the military has to contribute to it as well. Shaking up the democratic hierarchy will not strengthen the military hierarchy. Not even if it is thought that it will. To the contrary, those who caused the reproach that daunted society will get their own share. The people sent the bill for February 28th to politics, because they didn’t see the courage they expected. Not seeing the will to resolve mistakes in the ball of relations, the people fell into doubt and, liquidating them, pushed all the political parties out of parliament. At the same time this was an answer to the February 28th military officers. The result from the polls said, “I don’t want this much pressure on free will.” All the military staff officers from February 28th are full of regret. General Cevik Bir doesn’t answer his telephone and General Karaday is not to be seen, because regardless of whatever kind of atmosphere was created by the psychological war tactics of that time, as society normalizes, the meaninglessness of the interventions emerges.
Empowering civilian groups begins with fully accepting a multi-colored structure, even with facets opposite to one another, or at least tolerating it. The mentality, “Some NGOs are good because they are under our control,” will only trap society in a new captivity. Just as this situation will awaken in the people the feeling that division and discrimination are being perpetrated, it will also distance the people from government organizations. It is not possible to accept this distinction from the angle of democratic rights and freedoms either, because there is no middle-ground here. In other words, when talking about civilian organizations, referring to groups that are under the guidance and control of another means the people will not accept them. Turkey doesn’t deserve this mistake...
