This attack also urged many to declare that it is high time to ask for an account of such attacks from the TSK and question the effectiveness of its PKK fight, with many saying that the TSK should engage in self-criticism. “If a border outpost is attacked many times and many soldiers are killed there, certainly a series of questions comes to mind: security shortcomings, deficiency in intelligence and many other suspicions,” says Star’s Nasuhi Güngör, noting that it is quite natural to ask questions about such things. He suggests that all institutions responsible for maintaining security, including the political administration, have to inform the public and give an account of these attacks. Nevertheless, he warns that while trying to uncover whether there has been any negligence allowing such attacks to occur, everyone should avoid exhausting these institutions.
Sabah’s Nazlı Ilıcak says although the Kurdish administration in northern Iraq seems to have been involved in the Aktütün attack at first sight, this does not invalidate the fact that Turkey also has some responsibility for letting such attacks occur. “Is the killing of 15 Turkish soldiers in Aktütün an act of fate? Let’s say the northern Iraqi administration is ill-intentioned and it abets the PKK. It seems to me that we have also done something wrong. Moreover, according to what the General Staff says, the movements of the terrorists had been detected and the necessary measures had been taken beforehand,” Ilıcak writes. From the General Staff’s statement, she understands that the TSK means to deny any responsibility. However, she adds: “Then, where do the security shortcomings come from? The authorities should explain this to us.”
Hürriyet’s Ferai Tınç complains that although military and political authorities claimed that cross-border operations into northern Iraq to hit PKK bases, real-time intelligence from the US and cooperation with Iraq would change the course of the fight against the PKK, nothing has changed so far. “Taking the necessary steps does not make one feel safe. Are these authorities working on a remarkable and radical political project to end PKK terrorism? Do they lay their mistakes down on the table and discuss ways to prevent them from happening again? Do they ask themselves honestly what went wrong in combating the PKK?” Tınç asks.
Milliyet’s Semih İdiz thinks the public has some reservations about asking the TSK whether it had any fault or negligence in such attacks. However, he thinks it is high time for some questions to be posed to the TSK. “Couldn’t this outpost, which has been the target of many bloody attacks in the past, have been protected better? Couldn’t the preparations of the terrorists for such a big attack, in which they used heavy weapons, have been noticed earlier? Why didn’t the TSK use its air forces, which are said to be equipped with high technology, in the wake of the attack? Is the intelligence provided by the US not as effective as it is said to be?” İdiz emphasizes that these questions should not be asked, according to some, because they damage the TSK’s image. “We should not forget that we cannot reach any conclusion by running away from questions. To the contrary, these questions should be asked in order to be more prepared for similar attacks in the future.” İdiz contends.
