Uludere’s ghosts

A recent article by the Wall Street Journal, titled “Turkey’s Attack on Civilians Tied to US Military Drone,” only showed how open this wound really is, socially, politically and diplomatically. One can judge it by the fact that it landed like a bomb on the agenda.

For almost five months after the bloody incident, which ended with 34 Kurdish civilians -- a large group of village smugglers -- dying in a bomb attack by Turkish fighter jets that night, the Turkish public has been kept in the dark, the Kurdish public kept in outrage, because of a cover up of who was responsible for the blunder.

The Uludere case was a real test for the rulers of the “new Turkey” and their pledged transparency and accountability, and to this day, it has failed.

The Justice and Development Party (AKP) government was in the initial stages visibly insensitive and in the following stages hesitant and on the defensive. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s attempts to ease the grief of the Kurdish families by paying reparations did not work well. The more the government dragged its feet, the more it paved the way for pro-PKK circles’ propaganda that “the real aim of AKP rule is to destroy the Kurds.”

The main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the ultra-nationalist Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) used the immobility of the AKP for attacks, not that any of those parties genuinely at all cared for Kurdish lives, but as a useful tool and pretext to weaken the government. Their cynicism did not work. Nevertheless, the wound has remained open.

The WSJ story, obviously inspired by a leaked dossier by the American military or diplomatic circles, thankfully has presented some answers, but also added new questions. In many ways, it will echo in Turkey, as well as in Washington, D.C., and at the upcoming NATO Summit.

That the US military has been providing the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) more comprehensive intelligence in its fight against separatist terrorism was already a well-known fact. What is interesting in the article is the picture that shows how “loose” the cooperation is and how arbitrary the TSK may have acted in identifying the targets to be struck. At the so-called “Combined Intelligence Fusion Cell” in the military HQ in Ankara, there appear to be some disagreements, or malfunctions, between Turkish and American officers over how to assess intel efficiently and soundly.

“A former senior U.S. military official, involved in sharing intelligence with Turkey before the December attack, said he and fellow officers were sometimes troubled by Turkish standards for selecting targets. The former official said Turkish officers sometimes picked targets based on a notion of ‘guilt by association’ with the PKK,” reports the WSJ.

Was this a pure, sheer blunder of the TSK? It may very well be, but still we are kept in the dark, by Ankara. All we know is the data presented (rather half-heartedly) to a commission in Parliament; and the indictment by the local prosecutor is under way -- to be made public soon.

We also know that the head of the Command and Control Unit at the General Staff, one-star Gen. Salim Cüneyt Kavuncu, had “resigned” in silence soon after the incident. To find out any link between the sudden resignation and the blunder, we may need to wait for the indictment.

Sources close to the government recently claimed that Prime Minister Erdoğan and Chief of General Staff Gen. Necdet Özel, as well as Interior Minister İdris Naim Şahin, were informed about seven to eight hours after the bombing.

Others doubt that, arguing that such a major decision demands approval at a higher level. I was told on two occasions that at the usual party board meeting of the AKP, the morning after, the issue -- although it was made public through social media -- was never mentioned. Concerns of self-protection could have led to the silence that has lasted for five months.

And it was also remarkable that the chief of General Staff -- otherwise very enthusiastic about issuing “warnings” and “sensitivities” in public communiqué -- declined to respond when the Radical daily repeatedly called and asked for a comment on the story.

But the truth has a habit of slapping back. Erdoğan and Özel raised the stakes by not being transparent, and they will again be targeted for public outrage.

Meanwhile, the details should also alarm Ankara that Washington, D.C., may decide to be more cautious and “sparing” in sharing intelligence and providing drones (with arms). Turkey is powerful and important; it may flex its muscles in NATO, but it must without delay launch a modernization program to update its army. Both the nature of the war on terror and the volatility of the region demand it. Why not begin with more transparency and accountability?