Calling the document “a piece of paper,” he said the plot, which has been occupying Turkey's agenda for two weeks, was aimed at discrediting the image of the military. Başbuğ received widespread criticism for his comments on the document before a civilian investigation into it has been completed, with many saying that his statements produced more questions than answers regarding the suspected plot. Zaman's Mustafa Ünal says Başbuğ failed to answer many questions regarding the suspected plot during the news conference on Friday saying that his statements led to the emergence of even more questions regarding the issue. Başbuğ termed the document “a piece of paper,” but there is a consensus in society about the need to take this document seriously, and it is not an issue that can be closed by saying that the General Staff was not able to find any evidence regarding the authenticity of the document, says Ünal. “The findings reached by the Military Prosecutor's Office may have satisfied Başbuğ, but they were not convincing for the public. The military prosecutor did not feel the need to investigate why Col. Dursun Çiçek [who signed the document] changed his signature when testifying to the prosecutors. Should Başbuğ have said our prosecutors could not make any progress in the investigation of the document because it was a photocopy, then civilian prosecutors should investigate and find the original,” says Ünal. Indicating that no institution is free of criticism in a democracy, Ünal says the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) is an essential part of this country, but cannot act like a political party and allow some of its officers to make plans for a coup to overthrow a democratically elected government.
Radikal's Oral Çalışlar interprets Başbuğ's latest statements as an indication of the TSK's desire to be at the center of politics and unwillingness to withdraw from that position. He says the language Başbuğ used to defend the status of military courts in the wake of criticism about their lack of neutrality and his interpretation of these courts shows his desire to cling to the past. “Many criticisms could be made about Başbuğ's statements, but I do not think it is beneficial to create polemics over each and every allegation against him. What I can say about the general picture emerging is that the traditional power bloc in Turkey has difficulty retaining its position in the wake of democratization demands and the pressure of a changing Turkey,” comments Çalışlar.
Star's Mehmet Metiner criticizes Başbuğ for referring to the document as “a piece of paper” without waiting for the conclusion of the civilian investigation, interpreting his move as an attempt to influence an ongoing judicial case. “This ‘piece of paper' description is bound to draw more criticism and bring about more polemics. Were not the military memorandums pieces of paper? I wish Başbuğ had not adopted such a meddlesome attitude,” says Metiner.
