“If Özal were alive, he would not expect the chief of general staff to do what is necessary against an action plan aimed at destroying the Justice and Development Party [AK Party] and the Gülen movement. He would directly remove him from office,” stated Bekir Berat Özipek, an academic at the İstanbul Commerce University and a Star columnist.
Özipek's remarks came during a conference held in İstanbul on Saturday, attended by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. In his speech, the academic challenged the prime minister, who said Özal's views should be defended with courage. “I believe the views Özal envisaged and defended with courage should be defended once again after a long interruption,” Erdoğan noted.
Özipek, in response, said the government should start by raising its voice against the notorious plot if it wishes to pursue the path of the former president. “If Özal were alive, he would immediately sack the army chief. He would either call a press conference to announce that he removed the top commanders from their posts, or those commanders would learn that they were removed from office from TV,” he remarked.
What the academic was referring to was the removal of two army commanders in 1987 by Özal, who was prime minister at the time. Chief of General Staff Gen. Necdet Üruğ and Gen. Necdet Öztorun were removed when the two made a secret plan over who would be the next army chief.
The terms of office of both commanders were to expire in a few months, and Gen. Necip Torumtay was set to become the new chief of general staff. However, Üruğ was hoping Öztorun would take office as the new army chief when he left the position. The two made a plan, and Üruğ petitioned to retire two months before his term in office expired. Frustrated by the move, Özal removed both Üruğ and Öztorun from office and appointed Torumtay as the new chief of general staff. After his appointment as chief of general staff, Gen. Torumtay was forced to resign by Özal in 1990 due to his reluctance to comply with the government’s directives.
Özal’s move was highly applauded at the time and was deemed a historic challenge to the armed forces.
In an interview with Today’s Zaman, Özipek said: “In the event of the emergence of such a scandal [referring to the plot], responsible figures should resign. If they do not, they should be removed from office.”
The academic was pointing to the exposure of a plot, called the Action Plan to Fight Reactionaryism, as the cause of the scandal. The plot was prepared by a colonel on active duty and detailed a plan to damage the image of the AK Party government and the faith-based Gülen movement in the eyes of the public, to play down the Ergenekon investigation and to gather support for members of the military arrested as part of the inquest into Ergenekon.
“This country experienced much bitterness. Powers that wished to extend the scope of their authority fomented ethnic and religious conflicts. Many people became victims of unsolved murders, Kurdish children were forced to burn a Turkish flag in Mersin to spark a clash between Turks and Kurds, and our Christian citizens were killed violently in Malatya. In order to avoid experiencing such tragic incidents in the future, we should discover and get rid of militarist powers, junta formation and illegal groups within the state,” Özipek added.
Since the first discovery of the notorious plot, most observers have called on the AK Party government to take action and remove from office all figures responsible for the plan. Erdoğan, however, has preferred to remain on the sidelines until an ongoing military investigation into the plot is completed.
According to retired Brig. Gen. Adnan Tanrıverdi, head of the Advocates of Justice Association (ASDER), the prime minister should call on Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ to resign or remove him from office if he has suspicions that the army chief may have a hand, even through negligence, in the plot row.
“There is an ongoing judicial process into the action plan. We should wait for its conclusion to have a final idea about the issue, but if the chief of general staff is believed to have a hand in the plot row, then the Prime Ministry should activate its administrative control mechanism,” he added.
Professor Ekrem Pakdemirli, a former economy minister, voiced a call similar to that of Özipek last week. “If the plot document reflects the truth, then everyone who is involved in such a formation should resign. They should do this to avoid more damage to the TSK,” he said, suggesting that the prime minister should act like Özal if the officers fail to leave their positions themselves. “The government, like Özal, should force them out of their positions without any hesitation. If the government fails to do this, then future coup attempts and plans to foment chaos will not be averted,” he noted.
Are circumstances right to remove army chief from office?
Özipek’s call on the prime minister spurred observers to make a comparison between the circumstances in Özal’s and Erdoğan’s positions. Özal’s decision to remove top commanders was approved by then-President Kenan Evren, who appointed himself president after the Sept. 12, 1980 military coup.
Many believe Özal managed a difficult job when he removed generals Üruğ and Öztorun from duty. At the time, the country was still trying to heal from the wounds of the coup, the military was holding the sword of Damocles over the society, the media was rendered voiceless and civil society groups dared voice almost no reaction against the military’s policies.
Erdoğan, on the other hand, is leading a government strongly backed by the public. He was swept to power with around 47 percent of the national vote in 2007. Civil society is raising strong opposition to any anti-democratic initiative, and the society is frustrated by the risk of the military’s interference in politics.
However, Avni Özgürel, a researcher and writer, says all political eras should be evaluated according to their own circumstances. “If Özal had failed to gain the support of Kenan Evren at the time, he would most probably not have removed the generals from office. All developments occurred in accordance with a political balance and compromise of the era,” he said.
Ahmet Taşgetiren, a Bugün daily columnist, agreed, noting that Turkey is going through a democratization process and is fighting to decrease the impact of the military on politics. “Governments rule in accordance with certain balances of power. Özal did not act independent of the balance in his era. He faced similar resistance [from the military], especially on the appointment of ministers. … Erdoğan’s stance against the plot should not been deemed tolerance of anti-democratic initiatives. There may be many things behind the scenes we are unaware of,” the columnist added.
Benzer Haberler 
Politics
