By Yusuf KANLI
TDN - Labor pains of a woman would be less than a joke compared to the immense excruciating the top commander of the country had to undertake to explain to the media and the nation that the land operation of the Turkish Armed Forces started and finished with the assessments made by the Turkish commanders and that there were no domestic, or foreign (U.S.) inculcation.
However, as explained by retired Ambassador Faruk Lododlu, the president of the Ankara-based Eurasia Strategic Research Center (ASAM), the statements of the U.S. defense secretary, as well as President George Bush - that coincided with the termination of the land operation and Turkish troops returning home, which was not yet unknown to us, and apparently to the Turkish government - might have been a product of an effort by the U.S. to give a message to Iraqi Kurds, the sole U.S. ally in Iraq, it has not abandoned them. That is, the U.S. was with Turkey at the start of the operation, wanted to give an image that it was involved in finishing the operation and thus wanted to give a message to Iraqi Kurds that it was with them.
That is the U.S., with the help of its satellites was well aware of the withdrawal of the Turkish troops when the defense secretary and Bush made those awkward appeals to Turkey to cut the operation short because they wanted to give an image that the operation ended with American initiative. An example of the double talk that the Justice and Development Party (AKP) of Turkey have developed expertise over the past years in its dealings with both the EU, the U.S., Iraq and elsewhere in foreign policy dealings as well as in domestic politics.
The address to the nation by the prime minister, on the other hand, was recorded two days in advance, when the operation was still continuing and there was no decision yet when to finish it. Naturally, if was wrong for the premier to say "operation is continuing" because he was aware that the recording would be aired two days later. However, when it became clear that the operation was winding up, for the security of the withdrawing troops, a correction was withheld until after a statement by the military that withdrawal started. Thus, while the government probably had no information on the exact starting time of the withdrawal but at least a day before news of withdrawal was released to the media by the Iraqi foreign minister, that is on Thursday, Feb. 28 afternoon, there was a "top secret" note on the issue both at the presidency and the prime ministry verbally provided by the Chief of Staff Gen. Ya_ar Büyükanyt. That's what our sources in well-informed places with insight to the developments told us yesterday.
Criticism worse than terrorist attacks?
The blurred atmosphere resulted from the opportunist double talk of the U.S., however, was tried to be exploited by the parliamentary opposition who could not "realize" that they indeed were criticizing more the military than the government. Thus, we landed in a rather strange situation when the traditional allies of the military in politics were criticizing the military and the military and the government, as if they have become allies, were lashing back at the "irresponsible" attitudes of the opposition which they condemned as acts "hurting the (image of the) military more than separatist terrorism..."
Naturally, it is just normal for the military to feel upset that is being criticized. However, we have to realize as well that this is the first time that there s a discussion - even though rather absurd - on what the military did, how it did and what was expected from it. Gen. Büyükanyt was definitely right in his answer to critics that the duration of the operation was decided in accordance with the objective of the incursion and that the critics should better think about the possible "administrative losses" the military might have suffered because of the -15 or even worst weather conditions, as well as the possible high toll had the withdrawal was reported before it was completed.
Still, in democracies criticism is a fundamental right (perhaps the prime minister will understand this one day as well) and no public figure or body can consider himself or itself "beyond criticism." Thus, irrespective whether we agree or not with the current strong criticism of the opposition parties against the government, and thus indirectly against the capabilities and performance of the military, is a rather healthy sign for the future of democracy in this country.
(Yusuf Kanly can be contacted at [email protected] or [email protected])