One of the documents attached to the e-mail in question categorizes and labels certain domestic and international Web sites. The document is signed and initialed by various commanders of varying rank and hierarchy and begs the question, “Who can question who and why about conspiracy plots within the TSK?” Based on information contained in the document, about which Today’s Zaman has been publishing detailed news stories for the last two days, we can safely assert that the action/betrayal plans which have been assumed, until now, to have been prepared by a junta nested within the TSK were actually devised within the confines of the chain of command, and that whatever is being done is done by order or instructions from, and with the knowledge of, commanders in the headquarters, including the chief of general staff.Therefore, it seems to me extremely silly to expect the chief of general staff and other commanding officers in the TSK to conduct an investigation about the betrayal documents which are either signed by them or which, as has been clearly noted, were submitted by a subordinate officer to the chief of general staff. Furthermore, given this piece of information, combined with the fact that none of the junta activities within the army and of the betrayal plans, which we assume to be in abundance, have been brought to the surface or investigated by army management or commanders, it becomes much more meaningful to ask why the commanding generals are attempting to cover up the betrayal documents which have shocked the general public over the last five months. In the end, we have witnessed that the action plan, which suggests several conspiracies be employed against innocent people in order to show them as terrorists -- please remember the action plan in the document published by the Taraf newspaper which specifies how to set up traps for these innocent people by planting weapons and ammunition ahead of police searches, was despised by the chief of general staff and termed a mere “peace of paper.”
However, like any ordinary citizen, I would like to trust the army, which is financed by taxes I pay, like other citizens, in preference to providing for my own children. To be able to trust in the members of the army must be our most natural right. This is because it is an organization that does not produce value added and which must therefore be financed through taxes, which buy the weapons they use and pay the salaries of its members. Yes, but can we trust them? Unfortunately, we cannot. These people, whom we have given the best of the best through taxes we pay and whom we equip with state-of-the-art attack and defense weapons and equipment despite limited means, tend to neglect their primary duties and think about using the resources entrusted to them for the defense of the country against us, the innocent citizens, which is a great betrayal on its own. To go beyond simple thoughts and devise and implement conspiracy plots against the nation is a greater betrayal and should never go unpunished.
What I gather from the disclosed action plans and memorandums of categorization prepared within the TSK -- the likes of which I am sure we will see many times in the future if necessary actions are not taken against them -- is that these betrayals are not restricted to a limited number of military officers. This is because we have a sufficient amount of evidence to think that even top-level commanders are part of these betrayal plans, be it through negligence, failure or involvement. Of course, we are not happy to see that some TSK members are involved in such a scandalous betrayal. However, knowing that during the last five months, even the chief of general staff has attempted to protect those who betrayed us only adds to our unhappiness and increases our suspicions about the TSK.
What does the TSK look like in the current situation? It is akin to security personnel of a company attempting to take control of the company’s management. Everyone employs private security teams in order to ensure the security of their buildings. Furthermore, companies give them weapons to use when needed. The companies want to -- and do -- trust these security personnel, whom they provide with clothes, meals, weapons and even cigarettes so that they maintain a secure working environment for the business. But these security people do not have the right to say, relying on the security training provided to them and weapons given to them: “This company is not being managed well. We will manage it better,” and to then take control of the company’s management, or to say, not going so far: “I don’t like the color of the suit the general manager wears today, and I also don’t like his hairstyle. The guy’s behavior has been bothering me for some time. Let me direct my gun at him and talk to him and tell him that he should dress properly.” The armed forces, which are no different than security personnel in concept, are not entitled to interfere in civilian life, or dominate politics or devise plots to govern the country. Any attempt to do so is an offense, and sooner or later, they will be punished for it.
If the security people undertake such an unusual act, what the general manager will do is quite expected. He will immediately discharge from office those security personnel involved and not allow them to even come close to the company building. As a company does not allow its security personnel to roam freely, the army of a country is to also never be left unfettered. Yet, in our country, the army is free of any inspection or audit by the government, Parliament or the civilian judiciary. For this reason, the prime minister, who is like the general manager in our example, and the government, which is like the board of directors of the above-mentioned company, have failed to take the proper action, considering what a general manager would do. I think the president, the prime minister, Parliament and the government should look at this incident from this perspective and review the scope of their authorities and responsibilities.
