The Plot Reveals, Once More, the Real Problem

Two days ago, commenting on the pressing timeframe for the Justice and Development Party's (AK Party) political agenda, I wrote the following:

"The escape of vote fuels the election mood of the opponents, as well as those dark forces whose hatred for the AK Party is still so alive that a 'regrouping' seems under way to 'revive the past'."

The revelation by the Taraf daily on Friday of a military document containing detailed plans to wage full-scale psychological warfare against the elected, ruling government and the Gülen movement now raises the suspicions to a new level.

I am not surprised at all that the "search" for destabilizing the social balances of the country and eventually unseating the AK Party from power seems to have gained new pace after the local elections.

The reason for this is a postulate that disguises almost all the basic, political troubles of current Turkey. It is about whether or not the military apparatus of the country will be (convinced to agree to be) put under civilian control. This is the key dilemma of the ongoing, utterly painful transition.

If proven to be genuine, the four-page document, signed by a colonel who is the head of the Operations Department of the General Staff, is truly explosive stuff. It promises a scandal that would lead to resignations and huge legal proceedings in any democratic country.

The document is, by established belief among observers, an institutional one, placing all of the responsibility on the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK). It contains material, if proven genuine, that falls under the label of "criminal acts" of high order. By any stretch of reason, it could have been assessed under "crimes against the constitutional order" (which was widely applied in the Ergenekon trial) and the so-called "Internal Service Law," which sets the legal framework for military activities.

The content not only tells us about the political movement against the ruling (and apparently hated) party, but also about mass manipulations aiming to smear the Gülen movement and also ― perhaps more shockingly than these two ― to help sway public opinion in favor of the officers arrested in the context of the Ergenekon case.

From whichever angle one chooses to approach what the document reveals, one enters the area of high-level illegal activity.

One would still ask why. In recent days, I was asked by foreign colleagues and observers about the rationale that seems to have led to such a daring act of abusing a huge state institution for political, anti-democratic ends.

The response is simple. Despite political efforts, the power in Ankara has not been transferred to Parliament. Because of half-hearted efforts by the elected, the military tutelage is untouched, and as long as a state institution whose sole duty is to defend the security of the territory against hostile external powers is not made transparent and fully accountable to Parliament and the "impartial" judiciary, civilian politics will operate under fear, hesitation and threats ― eventually ending up in paralysis.

Take the latest example. Recently, in Washington, D.C., commenting on ways to solve the Kurdish problem, Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ said, "We will not allow minority rights to be granted (to Kurds)." Few people here questioned who the "we" means, although it was apparent the top general was speaking as if he were part of the executive, civilian power.

The question will, therefore, always be there. A sense of final resolve will be acute in any government if Turkey means serious business when it comes to accomplishing full-fledged democracy through necessary reforms. The equation linked with the postulate above is that delaying the confrontation on this level will paralyze any future government, turn any future Parliament into a coffeehouse gathering, as it has the current ones.

Some suspect that the inquiry ― supported by a ridiculous press ban on reporting on the Taraf story any further ― will be, as with past cases, left to rot in a typical labyrinth of investigations. They may be right.

Now the responsibility is two-fold. The government must openly, boldly take up the issue of finding the truth and reaching a democratic settlement with the military to forever stop meddling with civilian politics. The top command, now under suspicion due to the "institutional character" of the document, must go "to the very end" to punish those responsible. It must, once and for all, understand that this is undermining the reputation of a military force that is important for the region and the international democratic community.

Furthermore, much also depends on how devoted to democracy the opposition and the media will prove to be. The cynicism of the opposition and the "politicization" of the media have for too long served the enemies of democracy and stability. Infantile behavior does not become this country.