Forced to retire from TSK, Tarhan questions military’s role in society

In 1996 Tarhan was forced to retire from the military because he lived as an observant Muslim, a lifestyle that was not approved by the military.

“The TSK collects intelligence on a person based on his routine practices, such as if he wears his ring on left or right hand, if he uses a squat or a European-style toilet and if he wears a gold or silver ring. If you do not have a lifestyle removed from religion, you are considered reactionary,” he told Today’s Zaman for Monday Talk.

Many people were expelled from the military in that period by a Supreme Military Council (YAŞ) decision on the grounds that they were engaged in anti-secular activities. They were neither questioned on the charges nor put on trial. Officers expelled from the military do not have the opportunity to appeal to a judicial body or ask for a review of the dismissal decision. Tarhan now heads an association of former members of the TSK that were expelled from the military.

Answering our questions, he elaborated on his forced resignation during the Feb. 28 period. In a move dubbed the postmodern coup, on Feb. 28, 1997, the military overthrew a coalition government led by a now-defunct conservative party.

Tarhan also evaluated the current polarization in society from a psychological viewpoint as there are hopes that accounts will be settled with pro-coup factions within the military.

Could you talk about the process that led to your retirement from the military?

If I had not resigned, I would have been appointed to a post that would not be commensurate with my professional qualities. My commander told me openly that I would win my case in a court and be appointed back to the Gülhane Military Academy of Medicine [GATA], but then they would banish me and send me all the way to Şırnak!

What was the year?

It was May 1995 when I was first appointed to Çorlu at a veterinary branch even though I was an associate professor at GATA. I found out much later that this was in response to unsigned letters of complaint in 1994 against me claiming that I was involved in reactionaryism.

Did those letters imply anything in regard to your negligence of duties because of being an observant Muslim, and so on?

Participating in acts of worship was enough to be labeled reactionary. They appointed me to Çorlu to insult me. I have been in the military since I was 14 years old. I grew up in the military. My appointment to Çorlu was just plain cruelty.

Do you think the military was monitoring your family’s way of life? Were they interested in your wife’s style of dress?

‘Military’s support for democracy can provide much needed consensus’ You are quite optimistic about the future. There are also people who say that in the end, one system that they don’t like might be replaced by another system that they also might not like. There are even debates on the validity of a civilian dictatorship regime. What do you say about those discussions and fears? In our society, we glorify leaders. It’s also a fact that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan cannot take criticism well. The country’s political structure does not allow pluralism either. So there are fears which should not be disregarded. There is also a debate regarding the need for judicial reforms, but it is not a good time to do that at the moment. Why not? It should have been done before, because there are high-ranking officials being tried, and if you attempt judicial reform at this time, it might not find enough support. It will give the impression that the government is after carrying out judicial reform now for political gain. It would not find much support in Parliament. So you point at a consensus in society for reforms. Yes, there is a dire need for that. And in order for that to happen, people should see that the judicial process works; if there is enough evidence against somebody, they will be punished. If the chief of general staff could make a statement saying that Turkey is in a process of transformation and it is apparent that there is a need for a civilian constitution and that the military is ready to give its support to that process, then society would be relaxed. That would save the military from further decline. That would open the way for a pluralist society in Turkey. Is the opposition able rid itself of the mentality of saying “no” to every reform attempt? Their opposition is based on fears that Turkey will be like Iran if the military does not intervene in politics. If those fears are dispelled, the opposition’s survival would be in danger. Indeed, the opposition’s pro-status quo stance will marginalize it in time. So if they do not adapt to changes soon, they will lose because there will be alternatives emerging. ‘Without military reform, no initiative can survive’ What went through your mind on the anniversary of Feb. 28? I personally was saved because I have had a professional alternative to the military. Most people who were expelled from the military on baseless grounds were not that lucky. There were people who went into deep depressions or whose families were severely affected. Now we are living through times which prove our cases. We have been vindicated in a sense. At ASDER [the Association of Justice Defenders], we will work to open the decisions of the Supreme Military Council to judicial review. We will also continue to press for the restoration of the reputations of those people who were unlawfully and incorrectly expelled from the military. It is understood that the military needs to be reformed. Turkey has been talking about a democratic initiative but without an opening within the military for reform, there is not much opportunity for other reforms.

Yes. They keep track of those details. The TSK collects intelligence on a person based on his routine practices, like if he wears his ring on his left or right hand, if he uses a squat or a European-style toilet and if he wears a gold or silver ring. If you do not live a lifestyle removed from religion, you are considered reactionary. It is hard to understand the mentality that targeted 30-35 faculty members at GATA and dispensed with them so easily even though it is hard to educate people of that caliber; it takes years. What was their crime?

You opened a case following your appointment to Çorlu.

Yes, and I won, and I was appointed back to GATA. But shortly afterward, I was reappointed to Çorlu, not to a veterinary branch, but to a hospital. I found out from my friends in the military in Çorlu that they were instructed by high-level commanders to intimidate me to ensure my departure from the military. I went to Brig. Gen. Çetin Harmankaya to discuss the issue. He openly told me that there is a mechanism outside the chain of command in the military and people involved in that mechanism do not want me because they do not like my lifestyle. This was in the summer of 1996, when there was not much talk about the deep state.

This must have been before the Susurluk affair, which revealed links between the Turkish state, the criminal underworld and Turkish security forces.

Yes, it was before the Susurluk accident. I retired of my own will after hearing those words from the general. Both of my appointments were signed by Gen. Çevik Bir. I filed a court case against him on the grounds that my appointments carried malicious intent. I won compensation as a result, but the decision was overturned by the Supreme Court of Appeals. However, I was able to collect compensation from the Ministry of Defense.

‘Elimination of democrats led to survival of junta supporters in military’

You touched upon an interesting point, that there exists a mechanism in the military outside of the chain of command. Would you elaborate on that idea? How much influence can those people exert on the military?

We found out that the West Working Group [BÇG] was formed during this process. The purpose of this group was to carry out an unofficial struggle against the government, which allegedly aimed to establish a Shariah regime, and prevent Turkey from turning from the West to the East. The group, which was set up illegally, pressured the media to start a campaign against “religious reactionaryism.” Such working groups are frequently established within the military but they are not supposed to deal with politics. The establishment of such a group in the military has been a strategic mistake because it eventually lead to the degradation of the military. The realization has dawned now that such a role was not right for the military. High-ranking military personnel themselves admit that they made mistakes but there are still defenders of that idea, too.

Does it seem possible to eliminate defenders of the idea of the military’s involvement in civilian affairs?

They have to be eliminated, but there are efforts to prevent that. When we look at what happened in the aftermath of the previous coups d’état, we see that supporters of democracy were eliminated from the military in the 1960s. Then democrats from the left were eliminated in the 1970 and 1980 coups. And in the Feb. 28, 1997 process, democrats from the right were eliminated from the military. As a result, to a large extent, supporters of junta regimes survived in the military. And as long as there are believers in the military that laws regarding individual freedoms are not important when the matter is the security of the state, there is always going to be the possibility of a coup. And this mentality, which easily sacrifices individual freedoms, is still alive in the military.

Nevzat Tarhan, a retired colonel victimized by Feb. 28 process A graduate of Kuleli Military Academy and İstanbul Cerrahpaşa Medical School, he became a psychiatrist at the Gülhane Military Academy of Medicine (GATA) in 1982. He became a colonel in 1993 and a professor in 1996 when he was forced to retire from the military because of disapproval of his lifestyle as an observant Muslim. He was recently chosen to head the Association of Justice Defenders (ASDER), which was founded by people who were expelled from the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) without going through any legal trial. Tarhan also heads the board of directors of NPİstanbul, Turkey’s first neuropsychiatry hospital. He has written several books on psychology.

What is your interpretation regarding the mindset of the society, which has become polarized? How come part of society supports one political view and the other part supports the completely opposite view, be it in regard to investigations into the top brass or the Ergenekon investigation?

This is because politicians talk too much. They should talk much less about those judicial cases and leave the issue to the jurists.

‘We are too emotional and do not seek the truth’

But most jurists don’t give the impression that they are neutral. Even recent studies prove that they defend the status quo and the state against the rights of people. Who is left for the public to trust?

This is indeed a traumatic period for society. It is traumatic for the military as well. Computer usage is restricted, and officers are under close scrutiny to prevent documents from being leaked. What is important here is making efforts to seek the truth. But our society, like most Eastern societies, is emotional and people make up their minds based on their emotions rather than on the results of investigations. Traditionally, people in our society are used to choosing the easy way.

Would you elaborate on that?

If somebody that they trust is defending one idea, they believe in that idea without questioning it, without putting any mental effort into entirely understanding that idea. However, as long as the issues which are on the public agenda are being discussed, the truth will become clearer in time. And in that time period, society is maturing as it goes through a democratic transformation. The debates in society will lead to the development of investigative minds. We have partially started to see that. When the Ergenekon investigation started, some people I know personally were saying that this was a fabrication, but then they started to say that at least some things are apparently real.