While being the only Muslim member of NATO, Turkey is also the sole member of this 28-nation bloc whose military, the politically powerful Turkish Armed Forces (TSK), does not have civilian democratic oversight. It is not affiliated with the Defense Ministry and is directly under the responsibility of the prime minister. But in practice, the TSK doesn't necessarily take orders from the prime minister either.
The comments of Gen. Metin Gürak, spokesperson of the General Staff, during his weekly press conference last Friday about the gains made by the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) in the March 29 local elections are the latest example of the TSK's continued involvement in politics.
Though the DTP won only 5.5 percent of the vote at a national level, it now controls eight provincial municipalities in the East and in the Kurdish-dominated Southeast, doubling the number of municipalities it won in 2004.
Gen. Gürak noted that the election results in the Southeast need to be reflected on.
In fully functioning democracies, of course, it is not a general's duty to make comments on a political issue that politicians should handle.
The military's involvement in politics has long hindered Turkey from fully taking advantage of its soft power, though it has increasingly been using this as an instrument in solving its domestic and foreign policy issues. Still, the existence of a dual power -- the military and the political authorities -- running state affairs prevents Turkey's efforts to display an image that employs diplomatic methods rather than military solutions in resolving disputes.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who himself has initiated several openings in easing the Kurdish problem, such as around-the-clock Kurdish-language broadcasting, increased his hawkishness long before the local elections and continues to do so. The latest example of this attitude took place during Erdoğan's address at the Chatham House in London, where he partially put the blame for the DTP's gains in the Kurdish-dominated Southeast on threats made by the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK).
Erdoğan's hawkish stance has surfaced in parallel with his increased appeasement of the TSK on critical issues such as the Kurdish problem and the methods to be pursued in ending the PKK's violent attacks.
Erdoğan's latest standoff with NATO and the European Union over his objections to Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen's election as the new NATO secretary-general, which was later resolved when US President Barack Obama intervened and gave Ankara some assurances, has come as further proof of how Ankara handles the country's affairs.
This policy is described as nuisance value in diplomacy, giving the relevant country an advantage resulting from its capacity to harass, frustrate or cause difficulties. But nuisance value has its limits, and it also has a boomerang effect on a country resorting to such a method continuously.
In Rasmussen's case, Turkey allegedly received a pledge, among others, that Denmark would put an end to the activities of Roj TV, which is based in Denmark and which Ankara accuses of supporting the PKK, in return for the Danish prime minister becoming the new secretary-general of NATO.
Roj TV is primarily a case for Danish prosecutors to handle if they have enough evidence to prove that this TV channel has actually been promoting PKK violence. On this point, there is a clear divergence of opinion between Turkey and Denmark over the limits of freedom of expression and what is and is not a crime.
Turks using their right to freedom of expression have faced prison sentences under the Turkish Penal Code's (TCK) infamous Article 301. The existence of such laws in Turkey and the interpretation of new laws expanding freedom of expression in an old mindset have resulted in many cases in Turkey in which individuals are penalized unnecessarily.
In the midst of Turkey imposing pressure prior to opening the way for Rasmussen to take up NATO's top post, a Danish team composed of prosecutors and police officers traveled to Ankara to see if they were going to be given evidence from the Turkish side proving Roj TV's support of the PKK.
But due to the differing interpretation of freedom of expression in the two countries, the Danish side was purportedly not satisfied with the legal documents given to them by the Turkish side, which was demanding they shut down Roj TV. Thus the Roj TV issue has already become a political matter.
If Turkey had solved its Kurdish problem through democratic means, Ankara's bargaining over Rasmussen would not have necessitated using the Roj TV card, a reflection of an old mindset.
Being known for nuisance value backfires in the long term.
