The Coming Coup d'Etat?

[Lazy Lob]

Good article by Zeyno Baran:


Sunday, November 26, 2006
Opinion: Turkey's Coming Coup by Zeyno Baran

Opinion: Turkey's Coming Coup by Zeyno Baran

Once again, the generals are muttering angrily about how the government is undermining the secular state—and Turkey.

Newsweek International

Dec. 4, 2006 issue - Turkey is a haunted land. too often in its history, the past has been prologue. It may be so again. Almost 10 years ago, the Turkish military ousted a popularly elected Islamist prime minister. The circumstances that produced that coup are re-emerging today. Once again, an Islamist is in power. Once again, the generals are muttering angrily about how his government is undermining the secular state—the foundation of modern Turkey. As I rate it, the chances of a military coup in Turkey occurring in 2007 are roughly 50-50.

I saw the last one coming, thanks to a conversation with a senior military officer not long before the events of February 1997. "I asked the Iranian generals after the 1979 revolution why they had done nothing to stop it. By the time they realized how far the Islamists had come, they replied, it was too late," he told me. "We will never let that happen in Turkey." Indeed, this very principle is enshrined in the bylaws of the Turkish General Staff, which declare that the military is "the sole protector" of Turkish secular democracy and of the "principles of Ataturk."

And so it is now. Though most Turks agree that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is more moderate than his ousted predecessor, Necmettin Erbakan, he is nonetheless an Islamist. The outgoing president Ahmet Necdet Sezer publicly warns that Erdogan's government is broadening its fundamentalist platform day by day, and challenging the basic principles of secularism as defined in the Turkish constitution. Pointedly, Sezer reminds the Turkish armed forces of their pledge to serve as its guardians.

The hawkish new chief of the General Staff, Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, echoes that theme. In a speech at the opening of the academic year at the Turkish War Academy on Oct. 2, he asked: "Are there not people in Turkey saying that secularism should be redefined? Aren't those people occupying the highest seats of the state? Isn't the ideology of Ataturk under attack?" Buyukanit went on to declare that an affirmative answer to any of these questions would confirm that Turkey is threatened with "Islamist fundamentalism."

In recent weeks I have spoken with Turkey's most senior officers. All made clear that, while they would not want to see an interruption in democracy, the military may soon have to step in to protect secularism, without which there cannot be democracy in a majority Muslim country. These are no-nonsense people who mean what they say.

Why is this happening? Chiefly because of the European Union. Never mind Cyprus, or the new human-rights laws Turkey has willingly passed under European pressure. The real problem is the EU's core demand: more civilian control over the military. That, senior officers say, would inevitably produce an Islamic Turkey. As they see it, the nation simply cannot afford to follow the EU on issues that would theoretically ensure, but in reality endanger, its future as a secular democracy—that is, a country in which state and mosque are separated and in which freedom of (as well as freedom from) religion is guaranteed for all.

The Turkish military is especially wary of how the EU is coping with its own Islamic problem. European governments are reaching out to Islamists, ostensibly in order to transform them into allies against domestic terrorism. That may work in the short-run, Turkish critics say. But a similar strategy would be intolerable to a majority of Turks, who fear that once the gates open to "moderate" Islamists, more radical forces will enter and take over.

With Turkey and the EU so sharply diverging, the danger is that the Turkish military, supported as in 1997 by other secularist groups, will no longer feel bound by the need to keep Turkey on its European path. And this time, unlike the past, the United States is in no position to restrain them. That's partly because of Iraq, and Turkey's unhappiness with what it sees as Washington's kid-glove treatment of Kurdish terrorists operating out of northern Kurdistan, and partly because of its embrace of Erdogan, most literally when he met George W. Bush the same day that Buyukanit made his remarks in Turkey. The United States opposed the 1997 coup, and it will do so again. But as one senior Turkish official recently put it: "If there were a coup, what would the U.S. do—enact sanctions against Turkey?"

To be sure, the military may exert its influence without resorting to force. And if a coup were to happen, it would not necessarily translate to a nondemocratic Turkey. More likely, it would simply mean the end of Turkey's current "Islamist experiment" and a return to a more conservative government—stalwartly secular, yes, but a democracy nonetheless. Ironically, this Turkey might ultimately be seen to be a better member of Europe than today's.

Baran is a Senior Fellow at Hudson Institute

http://mbarchives.blogspot.com/2006/11/opinion-turkeys-coming-coup-by-zeyno.html

[Freedom06]

I really can't help but admire Turkey's determination to keep mosque and state separated (or at least the military's determination..) and also their view that appeasement is not the way -how ironic that the pressures eminating from the EU might force a coup.

[cx2115]

I'd really like to learn more about how Turkey operates - a military backed democracy seems pretty counter-intutive, yet it seems to have worked for the Turks

[Beykoz]

A very well written article that explains a lot. Only mistake is in the first paragraph where it says “popularly elected Islamist prime minister”. That prime minister was in a three way coalition and was not the clear choice of the public as the writer suggests.

Current government was elected in 11/2002 and Erdogan has been the PM since 03/2003. A lot has happened since, if it keeps going the way it has been, we will be welcoming the army’s interference. However, I am confident that, the Turkish public will oust the government in the elections of next year.

We get criticised for a lot of things quite often, one of them being the %10 rule for a party to enter the parliament. That means, a party has to have a minimum %10 of the national votes to take seats in the parliament. Our resident journalist went as far as to claim that it was to stop Kurds from being elected. That has never been the case, there are many Kurds in the parliament today, some of them openly suggest a Kurdish federation would be a good idea. The reason such a law was passed was to stop religious parties entering the parliament Obviously it failed.

Each party will always have a certain percentage of the public in their pockets. The problem arose when AKP passed itself as a moderately religious party. I guess they can be seen as moderate from the outside when compared to other extremists, but they continuously contradict the very principals the Republic was founded on. This will cost them big as most of their votes was from sympathetic voters.

[pkeating]

I think it's time for a military coup. As the lessons of Iraq and some other countries have shown us, secular military dictatorships appear to be the only effective means of keeping radical Islam in check. Failing this, extremist dictatorships of the Soviet and National Socialist mould are also quite effective. The problem with democracy or what we describe as democracy in Europe and other civilised places like Turkey is that extremists can and do benefit from our inability to suppress them by legal means. As the late Pym Fortuyn asked rhetorically, at what point must we become illiberal in order to protect our liberties?. Of course, he was murdered...because he made sense. Turks should signal to the military that it is time to send in the tanks before your women end up wearing tents and you are not allowed to watch television anymore...

PK

[Beykoz]

I think it's time for a military coup.
I think that would be over reacting.


As the lessons of Iraq and some other countries have shown us, secular military dictatorships appear to be the only effective means of keeping radical Islam in check.
Do not misunderstand.
Turkish politics doesn’t represent a dictatorship, the army doesn’t interfere in the daily politics.

There are three separate entities, the government, the presidency and the military. The first one governs the country (duh! :)), president holds the right of veto on the laws being passed and the military upholds the constitution. There is no influence of Islam in Turkish Constitution. In fact, it’s a fact that Turkey, as a state, has no official religion.

Now, having a party like AKP governing the country complicates a few things, it certainly smacks the notion of secularity on the face. One of the first things they wanted to bring in was to criminalize adultery. It got a huge reaction from the public and they had to discard it quickly.

On the other hand, they bring up milder issues, like the acceptance of headscarves in official buildings. This has been a big topic for a while now and it’s discussed at length in amongst people and the media a fair bit. Unlike UK and other Western countries, we have an official dress code for government buildings. Personally, I am a supporter of this law, but at the same time have some sympathy for friends’ mothers, who have to take their scarves off under certain circumstances. However, the situation is also very similar to those in UK, Germany, etc… The moderate Muslims never see it as an issue and have no qualms about taking their scarves off, it’s the stricter minority that make all the noise. Of course, we have our own libertarians who speak on this minority’s behalf as well.

In the end, we will do what is in our country’s best interest. If it draws heavy criticism from the outside, it won’t be a big issue for us. It has never been.

[Ergnkon]

I really can't help but admire Turkey's determination to keep mosque and state separated (or at least the military's determination..) and also their view that appeasement is not the way -how ironic that the pressures eminating from the EU might force a coup.

Isn't it... Both sides using eachother for their own interests. Erdogan is using the EU stick to pasificise the military's power in protecting the secular system and the EU knows that they won't find another government in Turkey so much willing to play along and give for the certain achivements, so they're just trying to please couple of its members as much as they can while Turkey is on the way to this dead end path to EU.

Luckly for the both sides, accession talks has almost stopped already. EU decided to slow it down...pitty they didn't dare to suspend the membership for good.

If the coup comes, they'll definetelly suspend the whole thing, but I think the military first will give democracy and the people the chance, as they've always done before and wait for the next year's scheduled elections. They know people are fed up with the situation and they sure that majority of Turkish people will reflect this feeling to the ballot box.

Question though:
@ LazyLob

-What do you think about the article you posted mate?

[turan8]

Yeah, in Turkey, the people are true believers in the military. The military answers to the people more effectively than the government does in many situations.

People also trust the military because it's a binder in Turkish lives because of the conscription process. Most of the people you talk to in Turkey have some level of military experience and therefore the military is an institution not only for the defense of the homeland but as a civic institution of the highest order.

[daily666]

Kemalism FTW

That's all I can say about this. I agree with Ergnkon, that Erdogan is using the EU to undermine the military position in the country, while maybe EU is sending some clear message about it's stance by taking accession talks into a halt. Maybe...

[turan8]

Of course Erdogan is using the EU to decrease military control.....

The Turkish public never were really excited about joining EU in first place. Ironically, there was collusion between AKP and Greece/Cyprus because they've been the biggest supporters of Turkey's EU seccesion talks; because they know it will decrease Turkey's military power.

[Freedom06]

If the coup comes, they'll definetelly suspend the whole thing, but I think the military first will give democracy and the people the chance, as they've always done before and wait for the next year's scheduled elections. They know people are fed up with the situation and they sure that majority of Turkish people will reflect this feeling to the ballot box.



Out of interest who will serious contenders in the upcoming election-who will the military be backing?

[turan8]

Turkey is like Israel and France and uses multi-party democracy...probably they'll back whoever has a competent plan for the nation.

My guess is coalition between CHP and DSP would be supported by the military at the moment.

[Lazy Lob]

Question though:
@ LazyLob

-What do you think about the article you posted mate?

I think it’s a very good article that highlights Europe’s fly-by-night politics that do more harm than good. It gets worse when we gave Islamist terrorists from other states asylum. There’s Turkey trying to restrict the Islamists and we just “pour petrol onto the fire”. Europe has its priorities a tad mixed up to say the least.

[Beykoz]

The Turkish public never were really excited about joining EU in first place.
That is not exactly correct mate.
%75 of the public were in favour of joining EU at the very start. The EU card was AKP's main election propaganda and it won them the election.




My guess is coalition between CHP and DSP would be supported by the military at the moment.
Once again mate, your guess is far from the truth.
The Military hasn't backed a single party in Republic's history.
However, they oppose the parties that are against the first four amendments of the constitution.

These are :

I. Form of the State
ARTICLE 1. The Turkish State is a Republic.

II. Characteristics of the Republic
ARTICLE 2. The Republic of Turkey is a democratic, secular and social State governed by the rule of law; bearing in mind the concepts of public peace, national solidarity and justice; respecting human rights; loyal to the nationalism of Atatrk, and based on the fundamental tenets set forth in the Preamble.

III. Integrity of the State, Official Language, Flag, National Anthem, and Capital
ARTICLE 3. The Turkish State, with its territory and nation, is an indivisible entity. Its language is Turkish.

Its flag, the form of which is prescribed by the relevant law, is composed of a white crescent and star on a red background.

Its national anthem is the "Independence March".

Its capital is Ankara.

IV. Irrevocable Provisions
ARTICLE 4. The provision of Article 1 of the Constitution establishing the form of the State as a Republic, the provisions in Article 2 on the characteristics of the Republic, and the provision of Article 3 shall not be amended, nor shall their amendment be proposed.



Turkey is like Israel and France and uses multi-party democracy.
Yep, there are over 20 political parties.

[Freedom06]

I think Britain could really do with a similar, consolidated written Constitution. At the moment it's all a bit of a mess...

[Lazy Lob]

I think Britain could really do with a similar, consolidated written Constitution. At the moment it's all a bit of a mess...

Don't panic!!!!


http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/9126/dadssf7.gif

[Beykoz]

I think Britain could use really use a similar written Constitution. At the moment it's all a bit of a mess...
If you went ahead and did that after all this time, it may be percieved as reactionary by some circles. I assume 'perception' is an important word in Europe. :)

Our first four amendments has been standing firm for 80+ years.

[Freedom06]

^ Before my time , I'm afraid... Granddad p-)

No, not you Beykoz! Besides I saw a very interesting program which said that Dad's Army ( Home Guard) would have stopped any potential Nazi invasion, according to War Games carried out by former German/British officers albeit with very heavy losses and the RN steaming to the rescue. But that's so OT it's ridiculous.

[Freedom06]

If you went ahead and did that after all this time, it may be percieved as reactionary by some circles. I assume 'perception' is an important word in Europe. :)

Our first four amendments has been standing firm for 80+ years.

Yes but it would perhaps give us back a sense of national identity that we have been lacking, and maybe help us with this integration malarky.

Edit: given also that the Monarchy is becoming increasingly irrelevant and used to perform this function of giving a sense of national identity.

[Beykoz]

As I said in the veil thread mate... Good Luck.

I for one, find it absolutely absurd for Britain to consider, debate, or even "think of dreaming about imagining" such thing as 'a second set of laws' within your borders.

[Freedom06]

Now I feel bad that I called LL Granddad...


As I said in the veil thread mate... Good Luck.


Briatin has a funny knack of muddling through difficult times like these and more often than not leads the way.. maybe those times are over but I don't think its time to panic just yet..pragmatism rules!

[Beykoz]

...but I don't think its time to panic just yet..pragmatism rules!
Sure...
Not that you disagreed, but, while you can afford to be pragmatic, the situation can be a little more troublesome for us, considering %99 of our population is Muslim.

[Lazy Lob]

Now I feel bad that I called LL Granddad...



Briatin has a funny knack of muddling through difficult times like these and more often than not leads the way.. maybe those times are over but I don't think its time to panic just yet..pragmatism rules!

Not a grandad yet, but time does whistle by.

But to topic. I think this time it'll be stickier than before as muddling has become the domain of the inept. It won't save the day anymore. The Turks have one up on us


"I asked the Iranian generals after the 1979 revolution why they had done nothing to stop it. By the time they realized how far the Islamists had come, they replied, it was too late," he told me. "We will never let that happen in Turkey." Indeed, this very principle is enshrined in the bylaws of the Turkish General Staff, which declare that the military is "the sole protector" of Turkish secular democracy and of the "principles of Ataturk."

[Freedom06]

Not a grandad yet, but time does whistle by.

But to topic. I think this time it'll be stickier than before as muddling has become the domain of the inept. It won't save the day anymore. The Turks have one up on us

Well its true we could do with fewer Ken Livingstones in british politics-if guys like him ever formed a goverment we would really be suckers missing the low punches, and it seems like we have a few things to learn from the Turks regarding this issue.... but what would you do in response to the threat we're facing? We need a clear lead from the goverment as to what it is they think this country should be in the future and what it is we stand for as a society-without over-reacting in a dogmatic fashion...difficult balance to achieve.

[turan8]

Beykoz, I can understand that the military doesn't officially support one party of the other, but in a realistic sense this occurs. Example 1980 coup that stripped all left wing parties of power including Ecevit and Demirel. They didn't directly replace them with Ozal, BUT they certainly created the right conditions for Ozal to come to power.

As far as the Turkish support for EU membership, I think that came from early support of the AKP government, not necessarily from everyone wanting to be in the EU all of a sudden. Most Turks we just excited with new AKP programs and agenda, but we didn't necessarily support individual programs.

[turan8]

Well its true we could do with fewer Ken Livingstones in british politics-if guys like him ever formed a goverment we would really be suckers missing the low punches, and it seems like we have a few things to learn from the Turks regarding this issue.... but what would you do in response to the threat we're facing? We need a clear lead from the goverment as to what it is they think this country should be in the future and what it is we stand for as a society-without over-reacting in a dogmatic fashion...difficult balance to achieve.

I think the first thing is to establish, on paper, what you and your country is.

For Turks, we're anyone who says that we're Turks, even if we're Kurdish or Jewish or whatever. If you say you're a Turk, than you're a Turk. If you're a Turk, than you're de-facto a following of the Kemalist revolution and all that it stood for.

What does your country stand for? This is a good question to ask, because establishing a national identity isn't really a bad thing, as long as that national identity isn't clearly fascist or too extreme on one side or another.

[ShotOver]

Just a couple of questions, this journalist seems to have good information - but has there ever been a coup attempt by the Islamic radicals? Or at the very least a threat by a group.

Are the people of Turkey aware of this? I mean, a coup is a pretty serious deal. Can I get some stats as to the religious breakdown of Turkey? Such as the percentage of Christians, Jews, Muslims..
Cheers.

[turan8]

Islamic radicals have no military power in Turkey, so it's impossible for them start a coup.

As for numbers it's hard calculate them because numbers of christians is contested. But Turkey is 99.8% muslim for sure....

[ShotOver]

Islamic radicals have no military power in Turkey, so it's impossible for them start a coup.

As for numbers it's hard calculate them because numbers of christians is contested. But Turkey is 99.8% muslim for sure....

No worries mate, cheers.

[Ergnkon]

I think it’s a very good article that highlights Europe’s fly-by-night politics that do more harm than good. It gets worse when we gave Islamist terrorists from other states asylum. There’s Turkey trying to restrict the Islamists and we just “pour petrol onto the fire”. Europe has its priorities a tad mixed up to say the least.

Well said mate.

Just a solid example; who remembers Metin Kaplan (http://www.answers.com/topic/metin-kaplan)?, a fanatic who wowed to destroy secular Turkish Republic openly and funded numerous terror acts in Turkey. He benefited from the European democracy on the expenses of the Turkish one. After two decades of "freely expressing" himself against Turkey and its secular sytem, in 2001(after 9/11 events) he was suddenly declared "dangerous" for the hosting state and his organization was outlawed. In 2004 he was extradited to Turkey (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4110803.stm).

Today, the Turks believe that there are other issues similar to this case which Europe refuses to help Turkey with...at least not before these issues presents threat to their own society.


Just a couple of questions, this journalist seems to have good information - but has there ever been a coup attempt by the Islamic radicals? Or at the very least a threat by a group.

It's known that military rules are very strick about exploiting the religion in the military. If they spot these kind of ppl, they just throw them out. Fundementalists couldn't infiltrate it for the last 80+ years to do any coup (reverse revolution as Turks calls something like that)

....so they've changed their methods. Four years ago, they started to use the democracy, to destroy it.

[Beykoz]

Beykoz, I can understand that the military doesn't officially support one party of the other, but in a realistic sense this occurs. Example 1980 coup that stripped all left wing parties of power including Ecevit and Demirel. They didn't directly replace them with Ozal, BUT they certainly created the right conditions for Ozal to come to power.

1980 coup had nothing to do with Islamists.
Even then, three parties had the run in the elections thereafter and Ozal wasn’t backed by the military. You are looking at it with very simplistic views.
Demirel wasn't left wing, he was as liberal (perceived as right wing in Turkish politics) as they came back then. Ozal was his continuation in many ways.




As far as the Turkish support for EU membership, I think that came from early support of the AKP government, not necessarily from everyone wanting to be in the EU all of a sudden. Most Turks we just excited with new AKP programs and agenda, but we didn't necessarily support individual programs.
%34 of the country voted for AKP but %75 supported EU accession.
AKP's intentions weren’t very clear at the start and public supported their policies as they were deceived.

If you want to continue, please take it to PM. :)