Turkish military and the Kurdish question

This is a scene not observed in any mature democracy. But I guess this is the irony of Turkish democracy in the 21st century. While the TSK has come a long way in its troubled history with democracy and civilian government, it continues to see itself as the guardian of the republic. In principle, there is nothing wrong with that except for the fact that the army has a very specific and narrow notion of the founding principles of the republic. Furthermore, it always sees all other actors, including politicians and NGOs, as weak on national security and by extension unreliable for the future of the country. To his credit, Gen. Başbuğ expressed more confidence in civilian politics and the Turkish Parliament than any other chief of general staff on record. Yet the culture of mistrust that exists between the military and the government is no secret.

With this caveat in mind, Başbuğ's speech represents a major change in the way Turkish generals think and speak about the key issues of the country and the region. Unlike the speeches given by most of his predecessors, Başbuğ did not use aggressive and patronizing language to attack the government. To the contrary, he deferred to the government in relation to some burning issues, including the Kurdish question. He repeated the commitment of the TSK to democracy and the rule of law. He used arguments and quotes from social scientists, including Max Weber and Professor Metin Heper, a Turkish political scientist. As a matter of fact, parts of his speech could have been delivered by an academic. I think this was a message, too: The Turkish army holds a certain position on issues because it has arguments to support it, not because it has a gun around its waist. Başbuğ also referred to President Obama's speech in the Turkish Parliament last week, which shows that he and his colleagues have been following the developments closely. Additionally, Başbuğ was clearly impressed by Obama's speech, from which he quoted several times.

The bulk of the speech was devoted to the foundations and future of the Turkish state and its relation with the diverse peoples that make up the modern Turkish Republic. Başbuğ spent a good part of his talk on the Kurdish issue because he seems to believe that the Kurdish issue is not only a matter of national security but also a test for the success or failure of Turkish integration and modernization. He insisted that the Turkish state has never tried to assimilate its citizens and in particular the Kurds or, as he put it, "the citizens of Kurdish origin." He also insisted that we must distinguish between the Kurdish people and the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorism, a point he has made in the past.

What was most unusual was the compassionate language Başbuğ used in reference to the PKK fighters. He said that "even a terrorist is a human being," i.e., a person is not born a terrorist but becomes one. He admitted that both the Turkish military and the government have failed to stop the PKK from recruiting new militants and that everything must be done to address the root causes of PKK terrorism. This suggests that the TSK considers the Kurdish issue as the top national security issue, a position also shared by the government.

Lastly, Başbuğ's message on religion and secularism in Turkey was far from the threatening and condescending language we're used to hearing from Turkish generals. He did not use the word "irtica," which is the buzzword of militant Turkish secularism used to label all public appearances of religion as fundamentalism. Instead, he made a careful distinction between devout citizens and some organizations or "communities" which he said use religion to establish economic, political and media power. Clearly, this was a reference to the Gülen movement. It is no secret that the Turkish army is not happy with the rapid growth of the Gülen movement over the last decade or so. Yet even this attack was nuanced. Instead of charging such organizations with undermining the foundations of the secular republic, Başbuğ referred to what he considered to be the manipulation of religious feelings to gain economic power and social influence.