Laçiner asserted that the military intervention in politics in Turkey was a much more influential dynamic in Turkey-specific dynamics than international conditions, adding that, of course, there were external factors including “the Cold War and American intervention” that made it easier for some things to happen. However, Laçiner was quick to caution that events such as the execution of Adnan Menderes and his colleagues could not so easily be brushed off and blamed wholly on external forces.
Evaluating the recent coup plans that have emerged in Turkey, Laçiner spoke sharply, calling coup staging an old Turkish tradition. “In this country it is customary to overthrow heads of state through your own army, to insult them and to torture them to death,” he said.
This legacy of the Ottoman Empire did not disappear with the establishment of the Turkish Republic, Laçiner said, despite republic founder Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s attempts to establish balance in civilian-military relations. Keeping the military happy and keeping possible competitors away from the military was an important duty through the İnönü period, Laçiner said. “And the Menderes administration, which was unsuccessful in doing this, paid a heavy price for it, and the prime minister and two ministers were insulted and, just like the Ottoman padishahs, slaughtered. After this, this tradition went on unfettered. The government was changed with the March 12, 1971 memorandum, and on Sept. 12, [1980], the military rolled through the country with tanks. Feb. 28, 1997 entered history as the post-modern coup,” Laçiner said.
There has been no development that suggests the period of military coups in Turkey has ended, Laçiner asserted. “The culture of coups is entirely alive and strong in society and in institutions. There are soldiers who want to stage coups, and there are circles that support them. It’s true that conditions have changed, but these changing conditions do not have the power to end the coup period; rather, they only have the influence that could change the manner in which coups are staged. Put differently, the vehicles and methods of coups may change, but their essence will not. Turkey more or less experienced this once more during the Feb. 28 period. In the past governments were destroyed by memorandums or coups. But this time various threats and games were used to overthrow the government, and in place of this government came a new administration that suited the desires of the coup supporters,” he said.
The supporters of coups in Turkey haven’t just been able to cow Parliament into submission, but also the police, the National Intelligence Organization (MİT), the judiciary, the media, universities, the economy, the civilian bureaucracy and much more, Laçiner said, noting the wide-reaching influence that the military exerts on every aspect of life in the country.
“Following each coup, the Constitution and laws were changed, and here and there throughout the law were scattered articles that legitimized and made permanent coups and their influence. In addition, new institutions were formed. Just as it is not possible to try coup plotters, there are also rules and institutions that defend them and their ideas. Following this, it wasn’t coup staging but opposition to coups that constituted treason and rebellion against the regime. … There’s no need to search for evidence of this -- the Constitution we have today as well as much of our law and institutions such as the Constitutional Court are products of May 27 and Sept. 12,” Laçiner said.
