Mehmet Ali Birand - English

Some who will read this article might get upset with me. They will accuse me of trying to split Turkey or promote a Kurdish campaign. But what I’m about to tell you has nothing to do with separatism or Kurdishness. I’d like to draw attention to a natural development.

Ahmet Türk’s speech in Kurdish in the parliamentary group meeting got everybody in an uproar. A storm broke out in Ankara.

Let’s first start with Ahmet Türk.

Why? Why did he feel like he had to take this step now?

As far as I can tell, Ahmet Türk wanted to spoil the Justice and Development Party, or AKP’s, showy approach to the Kurdish issue before local elections.

The AKP for some time now has created such an atmosphere in public as if it has solved the Kurdish issue and especially with the start of TRT-6 it gained much prestige.

To tell the truth, Ahmet Türk has caused provocation to some extent. He has taken this step knowing it is illegal in Parliament to speak in Kurdish despite assurance and pushing as was the case with Leyla Zana in the past. Thus he had leaked to the press that he was going to make a part of his speech in Kurdish.

The expected happened.

Immediately, the TRT channel broadcasting parliamentary meetings was cut off.

Ahmet Türk’s eyes were filled with tears. Hearing Kurdish made millions of Kurds very happy. All eyes focused on the DTP.

In the end Türk had achieved what he wanted. It showed that the Kurdish issue was far from a solution and the DTP was not contending with what it obtained.

Besides, the AKP’s charisma in the Kurdish issue was hurt. Erdoğan’s increasing prestige in the Southeast received inroads to some extent.

In summary, he adopted the atmosphere of local elections.

I have followed the Kurdish issue very closely for years and write about it. The most striking part here is that the Turkish government could never calculate the "timing" of steps to be taken. Decisions that need to be taken today state authorities would postpone until tomorrow and come tomorrow they would again postpone them to the next day; they’d always fall of the agenda.

Would this split the country?

Ahmet Türk’s speech in Parliament reminded me of the question, will the same timing mistake be made again?

The Turkish Republic does not deny the Kurdish issue anymore. It gave up old nonsensical theories. Old times in which the Kurdish words were not even pronounced are long past.

The Republic of Turkey has gone even further and lifted the Kurdish ban. Informal places and writings are allowed to use the Kurdish language. The state’s channel TRT-6 started Kurdish broadcasting and this meant "Turkey was determined to lift all bans on the Kurdish language, which was the natural right of citizens of Kurdish origin."

If this step would have been taken 40 years ago maybe the Kurdish issue would not have come this far and the PKK would not be able to take advantage of this swamp so easily.

Today due to laws in the Turkish state it is allowed to sing and speak in Kurdish. Civilians are used to hearing Kurdish for a long time but the state just now is starting getting used to it.

Now let’s discuss Ahmet Türk’s speech during the parliamentary group meeting.

The Constitution and the Political Party Law forbid deputies to speak Kurdish during political meetings. These articles are leftover from laws based on old perceptions. It’s a reflection of the perception, "If deputies speak Kurdish at rallies or party meetings, the use of Kurdish spreads and it will be easier to split Turkey."

But reality today is very different É

Deputies speak Kurdish among themselves. And so do hundreds of thousands of people who fill the rallies. They open their TVs and listen to Kurdish news and comments.

Their own deputies on the podium are forced to listen to Turkish.

Isn’t that weird? Of course it is.

After so many steps taken what sense does it make to tie us down with old laws? Isn’t it time for fine tuning? But whatever happens, a Turkish condition should persist under the roof of the Parliament. The same situation persists in Europe where, for example, in the French and Spanish parliaments no other language is allowed other than French or Spanish. And this is a symbol of unity and integrity.

At this point in time we should lift bans except symbolic precautions that protect the unity of our country, instead of creating problems with the Kurdish language. For as long as these limitations persist the judiciary mechanism has problems implementing laws. It paves the way for regression of society.

I don’t recognize Erdoğan anymore. I don’t consider myself a real "Erdoğan expert." He was never a person I knew well in the past. But as a political observer I encountered a totally different Erdoğan during the first term of the administration. He used to be a leader who listened to people and looked them in the eye when they said something different or took notes when he heard something interesting. For example, he used to pay attention to Abdullah Gül’s warnings and critiques. When he got upset Gül would calm him down and even hold his hand.

Now we bewail Gül’s absence. You’ll remember, during the dispute about presidential candidates the possibility of Erdoğan becoming the president of Turkey would create reaction and people would say, "We don’t care who will move in as long as it’s not Erdoğen." Today I’m sure the same people would say, "If only Erdoğan would have become president and Gül the leader of the AKP." Nowadays there is no one around the prime minister, not even Gül. To be more correct, there are many people around him but no one that could say something different or make him listen. He is surrounded by people who butter him up and say, "You, our esteemed prime minister, know best." I was talking to an authorized AKP member who considered himself close to Erdoğan. I said, "What’s with his anger? What does the prime minister want to achieve by declaring war on our group (Doğan Media Group)? This approach will hurt everyone." He said I was right and continued, "The prime minister is a good person but he won’t listen to anyone anymore. I’m one of the few people who can object to him without any fear. However, he also does not listen to us anymore." If the situation has come this far, it means that the course of things is worsening.

You might say, "Are you looking for a fool?" But no, on the contrary, I’m looking for someone to be friends with the prime minister. I’m talking about friends who could tell him about the bad course of things.

Let me give you another example.

We all read about journalists who normally support some of his politics and continue with their opinions despite all reactions and are now drawing attention to his intolerance. The prime minister has really gotten himself into a mood of intolerance. He becomes angry the minute he is criticized. Then he deletes this person from his address book. This does not suffice. He is having a temper tantrum. Actually, I fear something else. What would you say if Erdoğan’s votes during the next regional elections throughout Turkey were raised to 50 percent?

Then he will be unstoppable and his intolerance unlimited. History books are full of pages with examples of administrations confusing/dizzying people and elusive leaders that were unstoppable. Nowadays we are witnessing the writing of such a page.

I wonder if Erdoğan can be warned. He doesn’t listen to us anymore anyway. As a matter of fact he hates us and does not feel any sympathy for our suggestions.

Don’t you think we could find a hero?

Isn’t there one single man whose mind the prime minister believes or trusts?

Lighthouse case and AKP’s votes

The Lighthouse e.V. file has finally arrived. The file includes allegations against AKP bureaucrats, Kanal 7 and the Deniz Feneri Foundation. The base for allegations comprises the perception that money collected by the Lighthouse e.V. was transferred to Kanal 7 and used for "political" financing. The judiciary will make the decision. But the public conscience will impact elections. The Web site www.32gunhaber.com is conducting a survey in this matter. The survey asks, "Will the Lighthouse case affect votes of the AKP in a negative way?" There were 6,864 people who participated in this survey and 60 percent said "yes" while 40 percent said "no."

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has a very interesting communication strategy. If studied carefully you’ll notice almost always the same picture. What would a leader of an administration normally do? Constantly talk about what they’re doing. They would mention numbers and stress what is being done to better the country, even if it is troublesome. They would always be in defense against the opposition and always stress that they are right and the opposition wrong. What would opposition leaders do? They would always complain. They would talk about what they would do or change if they became the administration. They would view the administration as an enemy, always attack and give them the stick. They would apply tactics of revolting, rebellious leaders. They would make up targets for themselves. They would search for their rights with a crowd of people supporting them. Watch closely, Prime Minister Erdoğan has the same attitude.

Erdoğan plays the role of a leader of the oppressed
He is in a position of a rebellious leader searching for his right. He makes a point of a "rebellious" profile. If looked upon from the outside, he seems like a leader without any defense, struggling to survive. You’d think he is not the leader of the administration using the state’s power and leaning his back against an army of media but a leader who behaves like the representative of the oppressed and aggrieved. During the 2007 general elections Erdoğan screamed the place down. He used the 367 Decision during the presidential elections and TSK’s announcement on April 27 very well and achieved an important part of votes due to this approach. Now he pursues almost the same politics.

Like an opposition leader he blames the CHP. He criticizes briskly whenever he gets the opportunity. He slams them down. Nowadays he selected a new target: Doğan Yayın Holding (Doğan Media Group). With an attitude of a rebellious leader who experienced injustice he complains about papers that criticize him and journalists who act in the natural course of their occupation. He does this so naturally that people who don’t know what’s going on get the impression of a "Poor AKP leader who cannot free himself from injustice and thus rebels." Also 40 percent of his supporters are comprised of the press that he calls "party media" and support the AKP unconditionally.

Besides, I have never seen an administration before that could with this tactic increase its votes. Moreover, our society seems to like it. Rallies exult and the rebelling leader is applauded. The prime minister by drawing a portrait of an innocent, ill-treated leader presents a successful campaign.

Opposition and media perform their natural duties
Now you could say, "Isn’t it true that the opposition and the media ill-treat the AKP?" This would be my answer: The opposition’s duty is to criticize the administration and voice wrongdoings. Everywhere in the world this game is played this way. Their reason for being is to oppose and criticize. The media is read or watched because of its opposition. Those who caress the administration won’t have readers or people watching them.

If I was to summarize, everything that the prime minister shows reaction to is the duty of the media and the opposition. They are formed for this purpose and function. The reason for their existence is not barbarity but to criticize and report in the name of the people. And that is the same as everywhere in the world. I wonder if this attitude of the prime minister will continue. And I wonder if he will even go further. Who will he appoint an enemy in the general elections two years from now? Whom will he fight? I’m sure he’ll make up another subject or entity and come before us as the oppressed leader. He will again play the role of a rebellious leader and shout from the rallies.

Only if anybody believes him...

For some time now I’ve been asking myself the same questions, "Are we really doing Erdoğan wrong? We were more flexible with prime ministers before him and we pat them on the back, but are we doing injustice to the current prime minister? Or is the prime minister exaggerating and trying to scare us away?" I get terrified when listening to Erdoğan at rallies; he slams us using each opportunity. If you listen to him it sounds like thousands of campaigns have been started against him, not done to anyone before, and like the prime minister and his Justice and Development Party, or AKP, are worn out by totally false news.

Erdoğan points and reacts to news and comments in such a way that when I reread them I can’t find any exaggeration in them.

Aren’t there any erroneous news or comments? Of course there are. But apologies and necessary corrections have always been made.

But this does not satisfy the prime minister.

He calls for a boycott. He says, "Don’t buy these papers."

I went back and researched but got totally confused. I wasn’t content with this and talked to people who lead the media or who observed over the past 50 years. I made a list of what has been done to former prime ministers. I encountered a completely different picture.

İnönü was a single party chief and was the one who complained the most in his leadership right after the democratic system was introduced. He showed brisk reaction to allegations regarding his brother Ömer İnönü.

Menderes, we all know that criticism from the press directed toward him ended with the military coup on May 27. Compared to present practices, even DP’s weak politics would create enormous reaction in today’s media and Adnan Menderes would be slammed. He wouldn’t hide his anger toward the press instead openly show it but would never have gone as far as calling for a boycott.

Demirel is on the top of the list of those prime ministers who got their share from the media. His taking his wife’s hairdresser, Nur, with them on international visits turned into a scandal. Demirel was probably a prime minister whose caricature was drawn the most among others and who was accused of illegal deeds the most. But despite all that he never attacked the media. He never called for a boycott. He comprehended criticism. He was never angry at reporters and thus stayed friends with them.

Özal. I’m not sure if we can tell all about what he went through with the media. His drummer sun-in-law, Jaguar Zeki, allegations directed toward Ahmet and Efe Özal, Semra Özal’s daisiesÉ Rather than criticize his politics the media shredded Turgut Özal’s family to pieces. Çiller. After her first honeymoon phase was over she was subjected to immense criticism. Most of the campaign against her consisted of her partnership with Erbakan. Turkey had for the first time carried a pious party to power and Çiller was the one to pay the bill.

Yılmaz received his share mostly based on fraud. It was ANAP’s last term and fraud rumors hit the fan. Yılmaz and his party ANAP were buried after this media campaign.

It’s always the same scenario
Further more, these prime ministers did not have any partisan press or TV channels. Poor Demirel was only supported by a translator; all the rest opposed him. There was TRT as a weapon on hand but that did not provide an effective advantage either. Besides, the same scenarios are played in the Turkish political scene over and over again including recent events.

Parties and their leaders while in opposition are carried on shoulders and applauded by the media. The situation continues, especially during the first term, when they become the administration. But in the second term the relationship turns into a blood bath.

Hasn’t it been the same scenario with Erdoğan? Hasn’t the AKP been carried on shoulders by the same media which Erdoğan slams nowadays? Didn’t this honeymoon end with the headscarf issue during the second term?

You see, if I draw up such a balance sheet then I can’t acknowledge him to be right. However the media treated former politicians or whichever relation was persistent it treats Erdoğan the same way and continues the same relationship. It’s Erdoğan himself who is cranky and intolerant to criticism. It is openly understood that he tries to silence and scare us by coming at us. On top of it he is doing this together with a huge partisan press and TV channel. But let’s not forget, similar to the host-traveler relationship, prime ministers come and go but the media always remains.

Kurdish names are allowed. The TRT broadcasts in Kurdish. Formal politics for the past 20 years started to change. But those steps are so untimely that haven’t achieved the expected effect In my article yesterday I wrote about the seven years after Öcalan was caught during which Ankara did not take any steps to ease the Kurdish issue or meet at least some of the expectations of Kurdish citizens, and missed out on the big opportunity. In the 1980s the Kurdish identity was not recognized. Turkish Kurds were claimed not to exist. Especially the military claimed that the Kurds were Turks living in the mountains. Books and essays called scientific research were published. Of course, no one accepted it. The military coup on Sept. 12 is mainly responsible for the deepening of the Kurdish issue. The military government prohibited everything.

It prohibited speaking in the Kurdish language, singing in the Kurdish language, naming a newborn in Kurdish and even villages formerly named in the Kurdish language were renamed in Turkish. If we add to this the torture exercised at the Diyarbakır jail then we will understand how easily the PKK developed. Let me give you an example of what I did.

I wrote a book about the Sept. 12 military coup. President Kenan Evren had accepted a chat with me on the condition he’d receive a copy of my book. Thus, as I finished my book, I sent a copy to the presidential palace. While talking about reasons for the coup, he told me that the spreading of the Kurdish issue was among them and I had taken it up in my book. After a while I received a phone call from Çankaya saying that Evren wanted to see me.

His first words when I met him were, "I told you about it but you need to take out the part dealing with the Kurdish issue then I will allow you to publish it." Evren was objecting to the presence of the word "Kurdish" in the book. I accepted it against my will and the book was published. This incidence taught me how sensitive the military was and how wrongly it perceived the Kurdish issue. Do you see where this has taken us? Nowadays the Kurdish language is spoken. Nobody questions it.

Kurdish names are allowed. The possibility has been granted to villages to regain their former Kurdish names. It is possible to learn Kurdish. The most important thing is that the government’s formal TV channel broadcasts in Kurdish. Even if we only consider the broadcasting, it means that the Turkish Republic has accepted the Kurdish presence. In other words, formal politics that said for the past 20 years, "There is no race called Kurds," has come to a point of "Embracing the Kurds."

But those steps are so untimely that have not achieved the expected effect. If they had been taken in time, the swamp created by this issue would have been cleared more easily. I don’t know whether to call it incompetence or political cowardliness. The scariest truth I know or learned from conversations in this matter with the state’s upper-level leaders for years is that institutions in Ankara could not agree in matters regarding Kurdish politics.

In Ankara the military and National Intelligence Organization, or MİT, think differently, formerly the presidential palace and administrations would come out with different views and no mutual politics would result from this cacophony. Ok the situation might be a little different these days. At least the palace and administration looks out the same window but still there is no harmony with security forces.

Despite all provocation, no Turkish-Kurdish fights
We should nevertheless be content that within this chaos, despite provocation of the Turkish and Kurdish society, they do not become agitated. For the past 20 to 25 years we have been several times very close to an internal fight. We have witnessed horrible assassinations and funerals that tore apart hearts. But at any rate it never went beyond the particular and known fights of Turkish and Kurdish groups. Most of society was discrete about it.

I don’t believe that from now on the old fear of an internal fight will come true. As long as the political authority decides on what to do. It is almost obvious what needs to be done from now on. Turkey must simultaneously take brave precaution in the general Kurdish issue and against the PKK. There is no other way out of this hole. Even if I said Turkish and Kurdish societies are discrete about it we need not to play around with our patience.

I’m sure you’ll remember. 10 years ago, we woke up and saw Prime Minister Ecevit announcing "Abdullah Öcalan has been caught and brought to Turkey." This news was extremely hard to believe. Can you imagine, in the proceeding 10 years 30,000 Kurdish and Turkish people died and thousands were wounded or crippled?

The PKK had forced its way especially into rural areas of the Southeast enabling it to take control over it during the night and almost issued a visa for anybody coming to the area. Events and bloody incursions took place everyday.

Turkey was shattered into pieces.

The worst part was that the PKK was not perceived as a terror organization by some parts of society. It was perceived as a stand by the Kurdish community whose basic rights were taken away and externally it was treated as an "Armed Civil Community Organization" that struggles for human rights.

Politicians leading the country were cutting corners by labeling the PKK a complete terror organization, forgetting the Kurdish issue and delegating all events to the military.

The military does not comprehend politics. The military is trained for armed intervention. Thus the Turkish Armed Forces, or TSK, declared war against the PKK at the cost of its blood and life. Politicians began to watch this fight from a tribune.

This horrible scene went on until 1999.

Until that famous announcement was made by Ecevit.

Öcalan was a gift presented to Turkey by former U.S. President Clinton.

Washington in return had three wishes from Ankara:

No killing on the street.A fair trial. Steps to be taken for the solution of the Kurdish issue.

Turkey abided by two of the three expectations. But it did not do anything to dry out the swamp (Kurdish issue) on which the PKK feeds.

Öcalan’s trial was fair. And the capital punishment was conforming to existing laws at that time.

The coalition administration took an extremely brave step according to current conditions at that time and found a suitable opportunity for not executing Öcalan by hanging. It postponed his punishment.

Hanging Öcalan would have meant a blood bath in the Southeast worse than before and provoke at least some part of citizens of Kurdish origin.

Most interestingly, this decision was taken with the vote of the majority of society and the National Movement Party, or MHP, in coalition with the military, shutting its eyes.

The Turkish people neither went on the streets nor protested. It showed incredible common sense.

And Öcalan in return asked the PKK to cease fire, put down its arms and abandon Turkey.

And the organization really obeyed his orders, retreated into the Qandil Mountains in northern Iraq and started to wait.

We also started to wait. Years passed.

No shots were to be heard, investment increased and people started to become rich.

What was expected was action by Turkish politicians to help Kurdish citizens to meet their needs. Conditions from a political point of view were good. The PKK retreated, Turkey won the war, terror subsided and the leader of the organization was jailed. An action could have been very easily taken.

Now such an opportunity was openly missed in this convenient environment that will not arise again anytime soon.

Despite new laws that passed in view of reforms for the European Union, not enough care was taken in respect to the Kurdish issue as a result of the 2001 economic crisis, internal political fights, the scattering of the coalition, the coming to power of the AKP administration in general elections in 2003 followed by an U.S. invasion of Iraq. This issue has simply been forgotten.

Isn’t it always like this with us?

We start something with enthusiasm. But this enthusiasm ends and we forget about our goals.

This was the case with the Kurdish issue. We thought that with Öcalan in jail and PKK’s retreat into Qandil we got rid of the Kurdish issue.

If we could only have reached the point we are at today back in 1999-2006, if we could only have taken those steps on the Kurdish issue back then, we would have been able to still keep the PKK in Qandil. For during that period PKK leaders were trying to save their own heads.

You’ll also remember that during that period a plan was suggested that originated from the United States. According to this plan Turkey would partly discharge PKK militants who did not commit murder, and even more importantly, allow PKK leaders to leave for various capital cities in Europe. This was a plan to dissolve the PKK.

Ankara could not make up its mind.

First coalition partners could not agree and later when the military objected the plan also failed.

The Turkish government which in the 1990s said, "If we take a step in the Kurdish issue before the terror ends they will say we were forced to submit, we should not make any concessions," brought about the revival of the PKK with its carefree attitude since the conviction of Öcalan.

When we reached 2006 the PKK had two choices. Either it was to dissolve in the mountains of Qandil or take up arms again and start terror again. They started to lose people while remaining in Qandil.

In 2006 first bullets were fired.

Since 2007 we have slowly returned to old times.

Today, if we draw a balance sheet of the distance we’ve moved forward since the 1980s in respect to steps taken in the Kurdish issue what kind of picture do we face? Does the danger of the much feared "split" or "internal war" still persist?

I will look for answers to these issues in my article tomorrow.

I’m not sure if you noticed. On Friday, Feb. 13, I touched on the subject that the Turkish Armed Forces, or TSK, have moved proactively against a campaign directed toward the TSK and the spreading of the image that some retired and active duty officers trying to wear out the political administration and create the impression of being involved in illegal operations in the name of the state. The TSK has begun extensive investigation to find the truth of the matters on its own. I know about the TSK’s sensitivity. It expends huge efforts not to bring discredit to its name and cleanses itself from time to time by conducting an investigation of even the highest ranks.

But nowadays the situation is different.

There is so much gossip and disinformation spreading about the TSK that the man on the street slowly starts saying, "If 80 percent of what’s being said is false, the remaining 20 percent needs to be investigated and the responsible people punished."

I too drew attention to this development and said, "The General Staff needs to come before the public and say a serious investigation will be started and those involved in these matters be punished."

The General Staff is acting

Not much time had passed after I wrote my article, when I talked to a retired general who is closely acquainted with developments in the TSK, who keeps the TSK advised and who is trusted by the General Staff. He read my article. Within the context of our relationship based on mutual respect he told me one very important thing:

"Birand, I’m sure that the General Staff has started the investigation you were talking about in your article four months ago. No one should doubt it. The armed forces know very well how to be proactive. It does not fear punishing those who act outside the law and regulations, no matter what their rank or competency might be. It does it with great secrecy."

As you might guess, I was astonished.

Afterward I called other resources. I went to the bottom of this development.

The General Staff really has silently started a big investigation that only a few people know about. It includes examination of:

w Which officer on active duty has a relationship with which association and type of activity is going on in this association.

w Which retired upper level general has a relationship with which association, who writes for which paper or appears on which TV channel. (According to information I obtained, an important part of retired military personnel have received warnings due to their speeches, statements and unnecessary actions and have been told to stay away from such actions. Most of them have obeyed these warnings. The other part did not stick to the warning.)

w Tendencies and relationships of those who know intelligence information of military movements and those who are allowed to read the TSK’s intelligence information.

w Allegations regarding tenders and purchase and sale.

w Tendencies in party or ideology of active duty personnel as much as the civilians in staff

Other news that also stunned me was the research conducted regarding the famous diaries found on former CNO Adm. Özden Örnek’s computer known as the "military coup diaries" of the TSK.

Also present investigations of military coup diaries

I also learned that an investigation has been started for military coup attempts under the code name of "Sarıkız" (Golden Maiden) and "Ayışı" (Moonlight) planned during the period of 2003 to 2005 against a political reaction, but due to lack of support by the Chief of Staff and military forces they were abandoned. I heard that the respective report was the size of a large book.

I have never heard of such an investigation before and don’t know the outcome either. I never read about it in the media. In fact, I couldn’t prove all you read in this article. Despite of all that, the reason I do not hesitate to write about these developments is that I trust this source of mine.

Of course now with good reason you might ask, "Why does the General Staff not explain this? Wouldn’t the public be happy if shared with them?" As I said before, despite TSK’s new Chief of General Staff Başbuğ being more accessible than former chiefs he is still reluctant in the relationship with the people. Old customs are still in progress. He prefers to be introverted.

He expects to solve internal problems without branching out. Despite their ability to use information power very well and effectively from time to time, when it comes to internal affairs they become silent. But on the contrary, their trustworthiness and respect in the public’s eye will increase as their transparency increases.

If, in the briefing this Friday, questions are asked regarding the above written matters, we’ll find out how true or far-fetched they are.

The Turkish Armed Forces, or TSK, has been in distress for a long time now. In former years this distress could be felt but this distress has increased with what we have experienced since the AKP came to power. Especially the Ergenekon investigation and detention of retired generals in this frame have paved the way for a proliferation of distress. The TSK has been identified with the Deep State concept, which is accused of illegal deeds. The TSK in return showed brisk reaction to the press in favor of the administration and broad criticism from press members defending adverse views in respect of the Kurdish issue. The public saw some moves by the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, administration as a campaign basically to show the armed forces "interfere in politics" if necessary, that changes its traditional function and subjugates the country’s political authority. Thus each criticism directed toward the TSK was perceived as an "attempt to erode their power."

This distress has constantly escalated in a mutual way. Some circles of society have deliberately fanned the flames of these tense politics. An Islamic administration has been confronted with a TSK defending secularism. Within time the gap between the AKP and the TSK drifted further. Confrontation has continuously deepened. The public couldn’t know which of the freestanding allegations are true and which are false. They would make up their minds according to their own viewpoint. Those who view the TSK as the insurance for the country’s secular-democratic system will applaud each of their word but those who have a different opinion will look at them critically.

There have been such allegations since 2003 that in general people’s minds got confused. Nobody knows for sure which ones are right and which ones are wrong. Despite the fact it is not known, rumors have shaken TSK’s traditional position to a certain extent... 

* Names of some military personnel being involved in thousands of unsolved murders in the 1990sÉ 

* TSK not sending any of its generals to the parliamentary committee during the Susurluk investigationÉ completely closing the doors to this investigationÉ 

* Preparations for a military coup in the period of 2003 to 2004 and the publication of diaries that allegedly belonged to a retired CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) in the Nokta magazineÉ 

* An attitude that gave the impression of an external intervention in the presidential elections in 2007É 

* The protection of generals and officers taken into custody within the frame of the Ergenekon investigationÉ 

* Expressions used among generals in some telephone conversationsÉ

All these (I repeat, without knowing how much of it is true or false) have created a public perception of the "TSK, including some retired and some personnel on active duty, interfering in politics and treating the administration badly." But we also need to accept that some circles in society have taken action in order to destroy the armed forces’ social and political weight in life. They anticipated a destabilization by discrediting the TSK. In fact for the first time in the Republic’s history a never before seen amount of telephone conversations and cosmic information is posted on YouTube.

In the end suspicion has grown. No matter how much the TSK says, "There is a campaign to erode the power of the armed forces," this image could not be erased. You might have frequently read in my articles about unfavorable law enforcement and mistakes in conducting the investigation during the trial. We exercised the hardest criticism. But whatever might happen these criticisms do not eliminate the existence of the organization called Ergenekon.

The Ergenekon investigation has deepened the impression of "certain things have been done in Turkey in the name of the state, in the name of protecting the secular state, and in the name of preventing a split of the country. Laws have been broken."

This is exactly how an important part of the public perceives it. The other part might applaud this action by saying, "Good thing they did it. It was necessary for protecting our homeland." But eventually there is an illegality present. Now there is a public that values the TSK and does not want it to wear out. They are waiting for the TSK to take a step. They are awaiting the TSK to form a research commission that takes a proactive approach and conducts broad research instead of being uneasy about criticism and showing reaction to smear campaigns. This is an extremely difficult step that needs much courage.

But this step cannot be taken by any general other than Gen. Başbuğ and it is difficult for him to take this step from now on. Başbuğ has never participated in any illegal activity and he is a Chief of General Staff of whom there has never been the slightest rumor in this matter. He behaves according to democratic practices and prefers to share his annoyance and approaches face to face instead of fighting in front of the public.

Be assured that a step taken in this manner by the General Staff will increase TSK’s already strong prestige immensely. Instead of appearing like an institution that suffers from injustice, trying to remove suspicion from the minds of people and showing reaction, choosing transparency and a "We dare you" attitude will further magnify the TSK. I know that some will feel uncomfortable about this.

Some parts of society will show reaction and attempt to derange their headquarters. The other part will show reaction by saying, "No way. They will fake an investigation, say nothing was found and escape." But we are living in such a period of time where this one and only institution that we entrust with the country and our own security is worn out by news, telephone conversations posted in the Internet and documents reflected in papers. The TSK’s dignity is our country’s dignity. Therefore, it is foremost the duty of the command hierarchy and then our, the citizen’s, duty to protect this dignity. Now it’s the TSK’s turn to make a leap forward.