The civilian coup against the CHP
by
MÜMTAZ’ER TÜRKÖNE

CHP leader Deniz Baykal says nothing but “There are accusations that proved to be groundless.” MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli has a more clear-cut attitude, stressing that the General Staff’s explanations are “not satisfactory.” His is a clear and open anti-coup, liberal and democratic attitude. I guess the CHP and the MHP will change places in the political spectrum.

Constitutional solution

Parliament passed a bill allowing military personnel to be tried in civilian courts, thereby taking offenses committed with a view to laying the groundwork for a military takeover, such as massacres or assassinations, outside the jurisdiction of the military judiciary. Even with this small legal change, there was a boom in the trying of crimes by members of the military. The CHP referred the issue to the Constitutional Court, which canceled it in line with the CHP’s demand. Thus, the obstacle to legally prosecuting offenses committed by military personnel was reintroduced. However, in spite of this obstacle, the civilian courts are willing to try such offenses with the support of the general public. Concerning the Poyrazköy investigation relating to 14 striking assassination and sabotage plans, the civilian court did not send the case file to the military court, which exemplifies this point.

Still, constitutional amendments are needed to abolish military tutelage in Turkey. The government has prepared a package of constitutional amendments and shortened the waiting time for subsequent referendums. The CHP is ready to take action to prevent this legislation and to extend the life of military tutelage.

On the other hand, the MHP has revolted against the subversive plots and raised its voice to protect democracy. As a result of this attitude, it is expected to support the constitutional amendments that will reinforce democracy. The ongoing crisis is at the same time a deep-running constitutional crisis. The Constitution, which makes up the skeleton of military tutelage, and the laws concerning the basic structure of the state and the legal system must be democratized. Then, we can conclude that the right fight will be with respect to the amendment of the Constitution. The new identities the political parties will take on after the settlement of this crisis will be determined by their respective attitudes toward amending the Constitution.

It is still possible to recover from military tutelage and establish a new order under the effective protection of law. The first and foremost prerequisite for this is to make a new social contract, i.e., a new constitution. Anyone who opposes the drafting of a new constitution is knowingly or unknowingly lending support to the continuation of this system of armed violence. This is particularly so for those who lament the weakening and diminishing military tutelary system with references to “civilian coups.”

Personal interests of Baykal

In his speeches, infused with gossip and rumors, Baykal is giving targeted messages to carefully selected audiences. Given that he called on the prime minister to “depose the chief of General Staff,” he is trying to achieve a delicate balance in his plans. On the other hand, despite the fact that Çetin Doğan’s plan, called the Balyoz (Sledgehammer) plan, hit the agenda like a thunderbolt, he dared voice the claim that “nothing concrete has come out of it,” lacking persuasiveness. Baykal knows everything, including that this plan was a “state plan.” He opts for elaborating on the question asked by the chief of General Staff: “Who will benefit from them [the plans]?” Really, who will benefit from covering up an offense and the offenders?

The chief of General Staff is obviously distressed. While he is not charged personally, he has to defend his institution, which is being accused. It’s not only the subversive generals and illegal networks; every member of the military, from the sentry to the highest-ranking officer, is in dire straits.

The resulting tension is inevitably pitting the ruling AK Party and the military against each other. The government is responsible for investigating these plots and introducing a certain order to the military. Otherwise, it cannot continue to hold office as the government. Moreover, it has to keep the gigantic mechanism called the state, which also includes the military, going and govern the country. The military will change and give up its old habits. This will be perceived by the soldiers as retreat. This is the reason why the current crisis is portrayed as a conflict between state institutions.

In this process, it is not only the seized weapons which were buried underground that will be exhibited, but also the archaic political attitudes. The CHP has its last chance to rid itself of its chronic disease of maintaining the status quo. As it raises objections to the constitutional amendments, it has to explain to the people why it is resisting. A new 80-article bill on the functioning of the Supreme Court of Accounts -- which is as important as the drafting of a new constitution -- has recently been introduced to Parliament. What will the CHP say about this bill, which grants the Supreme Court of Accounts the right to conduct financial audits, not only in public institutions, but also in military institutions?

Opportunities arising from the crisis

For Turkey to solve this crisis, a player that can eliminate this polarization between the military and the government in a fair and politically correct way should step in. This crisis offers a great opportunity for the opposition because a balance will be established thanks to the agency of the opposition. Democracy has created not only the government, but also the opposition. The opposition has to claim the very ground they stand on at least as strongly as the government does. However, while there are promising signs inside the CHP, Baykal is squandering the opportunity for the sake of small calculations. On the other hand, Bahçeli has correctly assessed the situation and is making public appearances with a well-designed strategy. This is seen in the MHP’s unwavering and strong support of democracy and its advocating transparency as a cure against subversive plots.

In the coup debates, the MHP has performed quite well compared to the CHP. This scene has boundaries which are so clear cut that the CHP and the MHP should exchange places in terms of leftist values. In this setting, the MHP has come to occupy the most delicate balance between the government and the military. Thus, Baykal is cornered between Mustafa Sarıgül and Bahçeli.