However, while this intellectual framework underlined the strength of the republic, stressing a strong concept of secularism, it failed to recognize the differences within society, i.e., different ethnicities and religious sentiments, according to Professor Mesut Yeğen from the sociology department of Ankara’s Middle East Technical University (ODTÜ). After the establishment of the Turkish Republic in 1923, the nation’s general characteristics were single-handedly designed by the military until the 1950s. But the military’s influence on politics can be traced back long before 1923, and if 1908 is taken as a phase of the modernization movement under Ottoman rule, Turkey has been governed by politics based on the views of the military for the past 100 years, Yeğen stated.
This concept of military guardianship was sealed with the 1960 military coup, followed by four other military coups until 2007, when the Turkish General Staff released a late night e-memorandum against the government and posted it on its Web site.
The military-oriented mindset has been dictated through the education system, Yeğen said.
The disclosure of several internal military memos aimed at smearing different segments of society, categorizing them as pro and antimilitary over the last few years, has triggered serious polarization in society. Recently, the Turkish Council of Forensic Medicine (ATK) confirmed the authenticity of an action plan allegedly intending to unseat the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party), which was signed by a colonel. The plan is currently the subject of a judicial process. The revelation of the plan’s possible authenticity has revealed once again the deep divisions existing within the state, mainly between military-led bureaucrats and the political authorities.
The ongoing Ergenekon deep state investigation -- under which suspects, including several retired generals and active-duty officers, are being tried on charges of working to foment an armed uprising to unseat the government -- is another incident that has brought to the surface the deep divisions within society.
Politicians, members of the judiciary and certain segments of the public are also divided --some see military interventions into politics as natural while others see them as hazardous to the promotion of democracy and the supremacy of the rule of law.
Yeğen linked this interventionist mindset in Turkey to the military’s abovementioned role in Turkey’s modernization, a perception cemented by the education system.
Due to the Cold War era, the concept of military-dictated modernization was not questioned between 1945 and 1989 -- the year the Berlin Wall fell, followed by the demise of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s -- neither by the Turkish public nor at the international level. But Turkey has changed, and so have international perceptions of Turkey, states Yeğen, adding that neither of them favor Turkey’s poor democracy any longer.
The rise to power of the conservative, Islamically inclined AK Party since the November 2002 elections and the election of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) to Parliament, representing two elements that the TSK disliked and had suppressed for the past 100 years, are evidence of the changes taking place in Turkey, questioning the rationale of military-dictated policies, the professor said. “Isn’t it strange that despite the fight against the PKK [Kurdistan Workers’ Party] for almost 25 years, it could not be finished off but continues to be the center of attention?”
The republic’s narrowly designed policies no longer fit Turkey in the 21st century, and the July 2007 election results can be cited as an example supporting this fact, Yeğen said.
Despite the military’s April 27, 2007 e-memo, the ruling AK Party was re-elected in the July elections that same year, increasing its votes to about 46 percent from 34.29 percent in the November 2002 elections.
The polarization in the face of deep-rooted changes taking place in Turkey has stemmed from a public fear that after almost 100 years of being treated like a child, the public might be left alone in the cold with the end of military guardianship, Yeğen stated. But the public is growing up and awakening, he added.
Some politicians’ thoughts
Sunday’s Zaman interviewed Turkish politicians from different parties to see what they think of military guardianship and this maturation process.
According to AK Party deputy Burhan Kuzu, chairman of the parliamentary Constitutional Commission, a huge share of responsibility lies with politicians. “The primary reason for the unbalanced civilian-military relations is the strong role of the bureaucracy during the foundation of the Turkish Republic. This force has viewed itself as the founder and protector of the republic for the last 86 years. This is actually partly true. Politicians should acknowledge this fact; it will be a daunting task to promote civilianization by setting the army aside in Turkey. But it will have grave consequences for democracy if the military feels that it is the only institution responsible for the protection of the country,” he said.
“Politicians also fail to perform their duties; many never stand against the forces that bring them to powerful positions when these forces take steps that undermine democracy. The gravest mistake civilians make is using the military in order to come to power instead of relying on popular choice. The opposition, which is supposed to assist the government, cooperates with the military to overthrow it. Turkey must address this state of disgrace. The Ergenekon investigation should be concluded in a timely manner.”
Haluk Koç, a deputy from the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), says Turkish society is deeply polarized, which he said does not help democracy at all. He also complained that some politicians and the media also play a significant role in the entrenchment of anti-democratic tendencies. “For instance, when I make a statement as the deputy group leader of the main opposition party, I will attract less attention than a military officer. Above all, the media do not hold civilian thoughts and tendencies,” he said. As for politicians, he said some owed their positions to their relations with the military. “Because they owe their positions to some power circles, they follow the orders of these powerful actors. For this reason, military-civilian relations never improve. There is a long path to cover before we see mature and full democratization in this country and the improvement of civilian-military relations,” he said.
“Every progress report released by the EU until now wants the military and police to be under the command of the civilian authority. Yet we see a strong resistance to this matter,” said Hasip Kaplan, a deputy from the DTP. “There are still illegal formations within the military similar to Ergenekon that are trying to manipulate politics. These formations are allowed to exist,” Kaplan said, calling for the Ergenekon probe to continue. “This investigation is of paramount importance for Turkey’s future. As soon as the formation of dark organizations is prevented, Turkey will no longer debate these issues. For this reason, everyone must be brave.”
Benzer Haberler 
Politics
