Turkey Analyst,
vol. 2 no. 12
19 June 2009

WHAT THE COLUMNISTS SAY


The publication in the pro-government Taraf daily of what was presented as a blueprint for a campaign that the military allegedly prepared to wage against the AKP government and against the Fethullah Gülen movement has dominated the Turkish debate. The reactions in the media once again revealed Turkey as a sharply divided country. Secularist-nationalist commentators denounced the document as a forgery, suggesting that it had been “planted” by the police. Pro-government commentators, on the other hand, concluded that the blueprint is another proof that the military remains uncomfortable with democratic rule and continues to scheme against the AKP government.

ÜlSEVER: A COUP IS UNDOUBTEDLY BEING ATTEMPTED
Cüneyt Ülsever in Hürriyet writes that there is certainly a coup being attempted; what we don’t know yet is whether the attempt is being staged by the military or by civilians. There are in fact three alternatives: Either, the General staff has ordered a blueprint for taking action against “religious reaction”. Or, elements within the armed forces have taken on their own to prepare such a plan without the involvement and knowledge of the high command. Or, the blueprint is a forgery, produced by somebody – most probably within the police – with the intention of smearing the military. However, every one of these alternatives is as frightening, inducing any ordinary citizen to wonder what kind of a country we live in.

AKYOL: THE BLUEPRINT IS AUTHENTIC
Taha Akyol in Milliyet notes that Turkish opinion is once again split into two halves. While one half hold the blueprint to be another proof of the military’s anti-democratic inclinations, the other half dismisses the document in question as a forgery that has allegedly been planted by “Gülenist police officers”. I am inclined to think that the document is authentic – since it was indeed recovered at the offices of an Ergenekon suspect – but that it was produced outside the chain of command, without the knowledge of the high command, possibly with the intention of eventually influencing its actions. It is highly improbable that the document could have been “planted” by the police; to think so is to assume that elements in the police would have produced such a forgery, then signed it with the name of a known military officer who is thus easily investigated, upon which they presumably planted it in the premises where it was recovered before the police undertook the search of them, which was duly recorded.

ÖZKÖK: THE MILITARY MUST URGENTLY PRODUCE SATISFYING ANSWERS
Ertugrul Özkök, editor-in-chief of Hürriyet, finds the statement made by the military prosecutor concerning the alleged blueprint unsatisfying, as it falls short of stating that no such document has been prepared within the military. Why is the military incapable of producing a clear statement that would dispel the suspicions? Özkök poses the question to the Chief of the General staff General Ilker Basbug himself, who answers that the matter is under criminal investigation, and that it would thus be inappropriate by the military prosecutors to make statements that could suggest that the result of the investigation is anticipated. Basbug reassures that the military prosecution will not try to cover up the matter. I believe that Basbug is sincere in his responses, writes Özkök. Still, I would have preferred a clearer language. I hope that the General staff and the military prosecution will handle the issue with the greatest expediency and conclude it in a way that once and for all settles the questions in the minds of the public: Is this a blueprint for a military coup, or is it a blueprint for a civilian coup?

BIRAND: THE MILITARY MUST MAKE CLEAR THAT IT ACCEPTS DEMOCRACY
The Turkish armed forces are unfortunately displaying attitudes that show that they are not in tune with the present level of development of Turkish society, writes Mehmet Ali Birand. The military needs to make up its mind once and for all about democracy. It has to make clear, in unequivocal terms, that it accepts that this country will continue to be ruled by democracy. The era of coups has come to an end. More precisely, it should be clear that trying to make a coup would amount to a suicide attempt for this country, provoking a civil war. Even if there was a big revolt, a threat of a true split, the military should not consider interfering.

BILA: GENERAL BASBUG WILL NOT WAVER IN HIS COMMITMENT TO DEMOCRACY
Fikret Bila in Milliyet notes that the General staff has issued a declaration that strongly reiterates the military’s commitment to democracy. The declaration that the Turkish armed forces, as has been earlier stated, will not keep personal that act or think in ways that are in contravention of the principles of democracy, is a clear referral to what General Basbug  has recently said. The fact that several commentators, despite this recent unequivocal statement by Basbug, have nevertheless been quick to jump to the conclusion that “Basbug has ordered a blueprint for a coup” has distressed the General staff. There is no reason at all to doubt that General Basbug will do what is required if any connection between this blueprint for a coup and military personal is established.

YETKIN:  THE COOPERATION BETWEEN THE AKP GOVERNMENT AND THE GENERAL STAFF THREATENS THE POWER OF CERTAIN GROUPS
Murat Yetkin in Radikal observes that the cooperation that has recently evolved between the AKP government and the General staff has made those circles who define themselves as being close either to the government or to the military prone to take a dim view of their future position. The crisis that erupted after the publication of the blueprint for a coup by the daily Taraf could easily have deteriorated into a much deeper crisis with larger parts of society being affected, had it not been for the regular meeting schedule that has been established between the Prime Minister and the Chief of the General staff. As it were, the concerted efforts of Erdogan and Basbug succeeded in quickly defusing the crisis. That is bad news for those who were hoping that the crisis would have deepened, with mutual accusations being exchanged between Erdogan and Basbug. At this point, one should ask if there are indeed those around who want to send the message to the government and to the military respectively that “they should not be disregarded”. These groups will be tempted to try to provoke the government and the General staff. Prudence is thus called for; we should avoid falling into the traps that are certain to be handed.

The Turkey Analyst
The Turkey Analyst is a publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Joint Center, designed to bring authoritative analysis and news on the rapidly developing domestic and foreign policy issues in Turkey. It is published weekly, and includes a topical analysis, as well as translations and summaries of selected Turkish news reports. It is edited and compiled under the supervision of Svante E. Cornell, Halil M. Karaveli, and M. K. Kaya.

The analyses appearing in the Turkey Analyst are often written by the three Editors. The Turkey Analyst occasionally publishes signed guest analyses.

The Joint Center
The Joint Center was created in 2005 through the merger of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, and the Silk Road Studies Program, at the Stockholm-based Institute for Security and Development Policy.

The Turkey Initiative
The Joint Center launched a Turkey Initiative in 2006 in order to improve understand of Turkish domestic and foreign affairs in Europe and the United States.

To Subscribe:
To subscribe to the Turkey Analyst email announcements, please contact Martina Klimesova with an email containing "subscribe Turkey Analyst" in the subject line.