The details of the content of the document include toppling the government via illegal means, advocating for an organization currently prosecuted by the judiciary for attempting a coup, trying to ignite a Sunni-Alevi clash and conspiring against innocent people. If the document had not come out, we would have experienced said scenarios as grave pains and developments. For instance, a renowned Alevi opinion leader would have been critical of what is going on instead of making constructive statements and would have provoked his followers had this document remained secret. The government would have been subjected to problematic provocations like the attack against the Council of State.
In such an environment, the stock exchange would have collapsed, foreign investors would have ceased investments, people would have been less confident in the overall state of the economy and banks would have stopped providing loans; in short, everything would have gotten worse. The democratic opening process, which is inherently troublesome, would have been taken to graver points and stages, and the country would have witnessed street demonstrations and a cycle of violence.
The masses advocating peace and harmony in this country would have been declared guilty as traitors. A witch hunt would have been started to go after innocent people via fabricated plans and plots including planting guns and illegal materials in their houses and workplaces.
The reporters and anchormen who try to divert the entire issue would have acted hawkish and relied on a style of reporting we are familiar with from the Feb. 28, 1997 era. Our short past experience with the state, media and society is full of such examples. If a brave team is able to record what is going on today, I am sure the whole recording would make a good film that would attract a great deal of attention. This document, which has a wet signature, destroyed a taboo that some held as a faith. Civilians should take action to rebuild a workable system instead of the destroyed one.
Current stance promotes democracy
This should be done because the whole business is so serious that it should not be left to the military. All circles agree that the untouchables should be held accountable. Regardless of whether further developments will follow, the current reactions seek to protect and promote democracy. Hopefully, this will remain the case. The military should abandon its meaningless stance by which it tries to deliver a message that it is still influential because nobody is trying to destroy or erode its image and prestige.
If there is such an action, it is because of the good guys inside the army who are trying to plot a coup. Some efforts to make sure that the officers assigned to destroy the wet-signature documents are not prosecuted in a civilian court actually mean that the military is trying to protect these attempts as an institution. Some wrongs that could be attributed to personal misconduct may lead to the emergence of a perception suggesting that the military is involved in illegal activities. From a historical perspective, the situation may actually look like this. An intelligence that appreciates that perception comes before reality should be dominant in military officers. Our precious army is moving along the wrong path at the end of which it may suffer from extensive blame and accusations.
Pretty grave developments, which the prime minister said were too grave for the Turkish state to stand, are taking place. There is no chance that this whole row will be resolved via a consensus like the one the prime minister and the former chief of general staff came to in their Dolmabahçe meeting. An illegal group that insists on not recognizing the rule of law and dares to take such actions because of the weakness of the civilians who should normally promote democracy now has to face a wholesale response from the masses. The resistance and reaction is comprehensive and nationwide. The struggle is carried out on the ground of democracy. In a country involved in a European Union membership bid as well as an opening process seeking to resolve the Kurdish problem and improve bilateral relations with Armenia, the recent incidents and grave developments are pretty amazing and extraordinary.
What we are witnessing is the visible insurgence of illegal entities inside the state against the state and its legitimate actors and institutions. For this reason, democracy should be a term that we have to put the greatest emphasis upon these days. The primary reason for frequent references to this term is our shortcomings in this field. The bureaucratic violations of fundamental democratic rules are another reason we have to recall. Nobody is asking for accountability of those responsible for the losses because of a lack of democracy in this country. Our democracy is not promising because of direct or indirect interferences as well as conspiracies plotted to undermine democracy. It is obvious that different circles have different ambitions and aspirations as well as understandings with respect to democracy.
The understanding of civilians with regard to democracy is pretty different from the one held by the military or the bureaucracy; the modern feudal actors have a different understanding of democracy whereas the workers in a factory hold a different one. It should be noted, however, that our democracy has made some progress despite these barriers; this was due to the sacrifices of our people and the blood of our martyrs. Is the current stage indicating that this is the end of the road and that our democracy will take off? Discussion of taboos and the presence of the bravery to deal with criminal enterprises and illegal entities are all good signs. A political understanding may dominate the whole process ahead and promote further democratization, provided that the brave actors do not remain patient for a long time to await the consent of other institutions. The reason for such timidity and caution is due to a number of incidents that have remained unsolved and unaddressed in the recent past.
Our memory and space will not suffice to make a list of these; it is pretty difficult to create a democratic social ground while relying on such an environment of illegal activities. It could be argued that overcoming this difficulty started with the abortion of this complicated, dark, wild and merciless plot. The social ground of the past, a venue of conflicts and disagreements, has now turned into a venue of cooperation and reconciliation between different segments and groups. The basic ground where different groups and communities meet and become aware of their common pains and joys is democracy. Turkey has different contradictions; they emerge so ironically and visibly that it is not actually possible to explain what is happening right now otherwise.
An actor ambitious to become an influential political and economic power in its region and in the world delivers messages trying to look like a country whose democratic and economic standards are advanced. On the other hand, sadly speaking, we are currently discussing an action plan that seeks to undermine the popular choice and democracy; this discussion is actually so grave that the history of civilian-military relations should be revisited and rewritten. It should be noted that the subject of this discussion was a piece of paper up until recently; however, it has become a major source of discussion because of its importance.
Would you tell me how Turkey will look like in a world where the borders and barriers have all been removed in the field of communication and information? Or how would Iran, which some prefer to call a totalitarian country, view these events in our country? Is it not unrealistic to expect that those who hold money and financial resources will make investments in a country that is likely suffering from a lack of democratization at a time when the whole world is occupied with dealing with the consequences of a global financial crisis? Today, the level of democracy is the most determinative factor in the international relations of our current world.
If Turkey has displayed some visible achievements in the field of foreign policy including the zero-problem approach toward neighboring countries, its reliance on zero problems in the field of fundamental rights and freedoms will take it to further stages. When backed by zero problems in the field of democratization and fundamental rights and freedoms, the zero-problem approach in the field of foreign policy will have a different and more significant meaning. Democracy is not far away from us; it is to be found in the back of a document. It is equally that easy and difficult as well.
*Salih Yaylacı is the secretary-general of the Abant Platform.
Benzer Haberler 
