Enough Is Enough

BY ALI BAYRAMOGLU
YENI SAFAK- Columnist Ali Bayramoglu comments on the role of the military in Turkish politics. A summary of his column is as follows:
A critical National Security Council (MGK) meeting is due to be held today. The government’s self-defensive declarations yesterday and the top generals’ General Staff meeting showed that we are once again being faced by a tense confrontation between our civilian rulers and the military.
Since 1950, Turkey has witnessed two coups [on May 27, 1960 and Sept. 12, 1980], one military memorandum [on March 12, 1971, leading to the government’s resignation], and one semi-coup [the ‘post-modern’ coup of Feb. 28, 1997]. Thirty years of military dominance… That makes two-thirds of Turkey’s last half-century. And the political parties that fell prey to this close military watch… all of them were legitimately elected to rule the country: Adnan Menderes’s Democrat Party (DP), Suleyman Demirel’s Justice Party (AP), Bulent Ecevit’s Republican People’s Party (CHP), Necmettin Erbakan’s Welfare Party (RP), and even Turgut Ozal’s Motherland Party (ANAP), and now the Justice and Development Party (AKP).
The reasons for these military incursions have all been the same: Appointments made, laws passed, activities of Parliament, perceived threats to the regime such as communism or reactionary movements, etc. A very, very odd picture indeed.
The military sings the same tune again and again: Even a single political party will not be able to peacefully rule the country without testing the limits of the regime.
For God’s sake, what a strange mentality! Is it possible to lay the foundations of legitimate rule upon such an odd outlook?
Enough is enough. Isn’t this more than a democracy can stand? Let’s stop fooling ourselves. This country suffers from one chronic problem: the military establishment’s ‘autonomous role’ within the state and its dominance of Turkish politics through its armed forces.
For many years, I have argued that military guardianship has effectively shrunk ‘the political sphere’ in this country. A strange national security ideology has cast a shadow on societal, political and cultural issues, transforming them into security concerns. Rather than political solutions, this ideology, also shared by many civilian rulers, has taken police measures against what it perceives as threats. As the political sphere was narrowed, ethical and moral concerns were also brushed aside by civilian politicians themselves on the political scene.
Without solving this problem we won’t be able to make any progress. We can’t establish a sound and developed political system or have frank and capable politicians. The economy, society and culture cannot be governed through a military mentality.

SOURCE: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PRESS AND INFORMATION