Civilian tutelage arguments found groundless

Yet, this new way of criticizing the actions of elected lawmakers in their attempt to change the status quo has been found unconvincing and groundless by analysts, who evaluate the rise of so-called civilian tutelage concerns as a show of resistance to the country’s changing face.

“The actual problem is that the privileged class does not want to acknowledge the outcomes of democracy. Yet, since representatives of this class cannot express this frankly, they want to block the rule of those elected on absurd grounds such as ‘civilian tutelage’ or ‘civilian coup.’ In fact, they are also aware that what they say is nonsense,” said Berat Özipek, an academic and a member of the Association for Liberal Thinking.

The argument was brought forward by Nuray Mert, a columnist and academic, during an interview with the Vatan daily. Mert’s argument was quickly adopted by anti-government circles who expressed fears about Turkey becoming an authoritarian country. Several columnists who have been writing that they believe that a civilian dictatorship is approaching are of the opinion that at the end of this process Turkey will be a country like Russia and that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will turn into a leader similar to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who is known to have an authoritarian character. In fact, those following Turkey’s political agenda carefully can easily remember that the “civilian coup,” “civilian fascism” or “civilian authoritarianism” arguments were discussed in August of last year but failed to gain much popularity then. Analysts who then voiced their concerns about the possibility of the rhetoric of a “civilian coup” being an instrument in a new psychological operation against the government now say that those who deliberately brought this rhetoric to the agenda to make a fuss out of nothing have been successful this time. Sabah daily columnist Emre Aköz, who was among those who drew attention to the rising popularity of the “civilian coup” discourse in his column in August, says this groundless and absurd discourse should not even be discussed.

“When you discuss this rhetoric, which is invented in accordance with the current agenda and which is purely imaginative, it starts to become real. It should not even be discussed,” stated Aköz in a phone interview with Sunday’s Zaman.

Recent years full of contrived rhetoric

This debate is, in fact, reminiscent of another heated debate that happened before the July 22, 2007 elections, after which the AK Party emerged stronger, receiving 46.6 percent of the vote nationwide. Back then, opponents of the government claimed that Turkey was heading toward an Islamic regime ruled by Shariah. Since this argument did not scare the public or diminish support for the AK Party, “civilian authoritarianism” seems to have been selected as a fresh new argument to oppose the ruling party. “What happened to arguments saying Shariah rule is coming? Even a strong believer of this argument [journalist İlhan Selçuk] has recently said there is no longer such a threat. ‘Civilian coup’ arguments are also like that; they have no basis. This is in fact a trap, and society should not fall in this trap,” Aköz says.

In addition to debates over the fear of Shariah or “Turkey becoming Iran,” Turkey’s past years have been full of discussions based on a certain contrived rhetoric or arguments, which erupt at times of heated debate in the country, come to the forefront of the agenda and then are forgotten.

The best example of such a term is “neighborhood pressure,” a term coined by internationally renowned sociologist Şerif Mardin to describe the pressure exerted by a peer group that encourages a person to change his or her attitude, behavior and/or morals. It was launched during the process of drafting a new constitution and the possibility of a new law abolishing the headscarf ban at Turkish universities, nearly three years ago. Such a possibility sparked an outcry among supporters of the headscarf ban, who claimed that allowing headscarves at universities would be the beginning of a slow but inexorable move toward forcing all women to cover their heads in public -- due to neighborhood pressure. While it was one of the most frequently heard expressions during that time, it has seemingly disappeared. Another “magical” statement for some was that “Turkey is becoming Malaysia,” when, in 2007, some said the government’s efforts to rewrite the Constitution would undermine secularism and turn Turkey into an Islamic country like Malaysia. “The fear of becoming Malaysia” was also forgotten quickly after being a topic of discussion for some time. Aköz says these topics of discussion were used as instruments of a psychological operation, just like civilian fascism. Some recent plots believed to have been prepared by members of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) to destroy the AK Party and documents seized as part of an ongoing investigation into Ergenekon, a clandestine gang accused of plotting to overthrow the government, have also referred to such topics, which were used to back psychological wars against the government and the public.

Democratization or civilian authoritarianism?

According to many, it is questionable that the “civilian dictatorship” arguments come during a time when efforts to balance civilian military relations are gaining support, anti-democratic formations within the military and the bureaucracy are being unearthed and the country is trying to address the problems faced by some groups in the country through democratic improvements.

“Democracy started to improve very rapidly for the first time in Turkish history in the last seven years. Some circles are now trying to kick up a row by making up these concepts. If you do not believe in public will and oppose democracy, you call the political will which came to power through elections tutelage,” Hasan Celal Güzel, a former state minister and Radikal daily columnist, told Sunday’s Zaman.

According to İhsan Dağı, a professor in Middle East Technical University’s (ODTÜ) international relations department, what people imply by civilian tutelage and civilian fascism is in fact democracy. “The fear they have is not the fear of fascism but the fear of democracy. A group of elitist bureaucratic minorities see the democratization process as a threat. Civilian tutelage debates are a sign of improving democracy in Turkey,” Dağı says.

Although the ruling AK Party government has taken up many democratic initiatives to settle Turkey’s long-standing issues, some of which laid the groundwork for “civilian tutelage” arguments, what the party was not able to do in terms of reforms is much more than what it has been able to do. Stating that Turkey has been trying to move from oligarchy toward democracy since the 1950s, Berat Özipek says the sine quo non of democracy, namely respecting the will of the “demos” (people), has yet to be established. “For example, it is just funny to say that a prime minister [Erdoğan], whose many democratization steps have been prevented by bureaucratic forces although his party has enough of a majority in Parliament, whose possible presidential candidacy became an issue of a military memorandum and who even failed to enable his headscarved wife to be an equal citizen is trying to establish a ‘civilian tutelage’,” Özipek says.

Although Dağı stresses that this new rhetoric has not been made up by the opposition to take the country to early elections but was the work of the newspapers of the Doğan Media Group, which has long been at odds with the government over a tax fine against the group, Güzel says the bureaucratic elitist group, including the Republican People’s Party (CHP), has been using this rhetoric to create an artificial agenda against the government.

Danger in ‘civilian dictatorship’ discourse: laying groundwork for a coup

The rising popularity of the civilian authoritarianism label on the government also recalls Turkey’s first major coup d’état in May 27, 1960, remembered as a breaking point in Turkey’s political history and a long-standing determining factor in Turkish politics.

On May 27, 1960 the military overthrew the government of then-Prime Minister Adnan Menderes. Güzel recalls that Menderes was also accused of bringing the country under civilian dictatorship, which was the excuse of the coup leaders.

He recalls that on April 18, 1960, then-CHP leader İsmet İnönü openly threatened Menderes with a coup d’état, accusing his party of censoring the press, being engaged in acts that would harm the republic and the principles of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of modern Turkey, and violating the Constitution. “If you keep going on this path, even I will not be able to save you. When the conditions are right for it, a military coup is a lawful right of the people,” Güzel quotes from İnönü, who was addressing Menderes. Agreeing with Güzel, Özipek also stresses that some feel the need to make up the concept of “civilian tutelage” to prevent Turkey from getting past its military tutelage and thus legitimizing possible military interventions in civilian governments in the future.