Posted on 05/07/2003 6:17:17 PM PDT by pkpjamestown
Turkey’s military, which has long cast itself as the defender of the country’s secular tradition, is facing a two-front political challenge. Turkish generals have already clashed with members of the governing Justice and Development Party over recent policy moves. At the same time, the military has come under heavy criticism from top US officials for not assuming a “strong leadership role” in Turkish regional diplomatic initiatives following the Iraq conflict.
An indicator of the challenges confronting the Turkish military was the length of the April 30 meeting of the National Security Council (MGK), which provides a monthly opportunity for Turkey’s top brass to discuss policy with civilian political leaders. That MGK session lasted seven-and-a-half hours, the longest such meeting in several years. In sharp contrast, the statement released following the meeting was startlingly brief – one sentence reaffirming that “secularism must be meticulously protected."
Well before it gained a landslide victory in last November’s parliamentary elections, the Islamic roots of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) prompted deep suspicion in military circles. And despite repeated AKP insistence that its political approach is moderate, and that it should not be compared to the Islamist government pushed out of power in February 1997, government-military tension has escalated in recent weeks.
Worried by a recent Foreign Ministry circular advising embassies to improve links with Milli Gorus, a conservative religious group with a wide following among Europe’s massive Turkish Diaspora, Turkish military leaders are increasingly concerned by government moves to replace senior bureaucrats with AKP-loyalists.
AKP-military tension burst into the open April 23, when top generals, along with President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and opposition politicians, declined to attend a reception hosted by parliamentary speaker Bulent Arinc to celebrate the anniversary of the parliament’s foundation. The cause of the boycott was an announcement that Arinc’s head-scarfed wife would attend the reception. Those staying away from the reception viewed the announcement as a political challenge to Turkish secularism. Ultimately, Arinc backed down, saying his wife would not attend.
Some political observers, including Cengiz Candar, have criticized the AKP for bowing to the military’s pressure. But other experts suggest that the AKP’s large parliamentary majority can be deceiving when it comes to gauging the party’s political influence.
"The AKP’s hold on power is less secure than crude [parliamentary] seat-counting suggests," Ankara University political scientist Dogu Ergil said. "When you take into account abstentions and the 10 percent electoral threshold required for parliamentary representation, only a quarter of Turks actually supported it ."
AKP influence is further diluted by the fact that "most Turks still see the army as the only trustworthy barrier against political mismanagement," Ergil said.
Political analysts suggest the government’s electoral promise to promote reforms that bring Turkey into compliance with European Union accession criteria may increase military-civilian friction.
"Almost every one of the changes AKP will try to push through will affect the army directly or indirectly," Ergil said. He pointed to the government's failed attempt to reform the deeply unpopular Higher Education Committee, which enables the state to impose ideologically suitable rectors on universities. The AKP dropped the initiative in the face of a storm of establishment criticism.
Since last November, the government has also stepped back from plans to introduce an appeal system to State Security Courts, retracted criticisms of the army’s right to expel soldiers suspected of religious extremism, and failed to persuade the bureaucracy of the need to grant greater cultural rights to the country’s Kurdish minority.
Far more significantly to Turkey’s EU hopes, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan back-tracked on his original insistence that Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas compromise on a UN plan to re-unify Cyprus. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The reason? The army and hard-liners in the bureaucracy feel an ongoing Turkish military presence on the island is vital to the defense of what they term "Anatolia’s soft underbelly."
"The European process would cause tensions between military and government no matter which party was in power," says Istanbul-based political scientist Soli Ozel. "The fact it’s the AKP just gives the generals a convenient stick to beat them with – a secret Islamic agenda."
In contrast to the domestic political realm, where the AKP is under pressure, it is the Turkish military that is feeling the most heat in the international arena. On May 6, US Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz lashed out at the Turkish military, appearing to tacitly hold the generals responsible for recent diplomatic moves by Ankara that have rankled Washington. “For whatever reason, they [Turkish military leaders] did not play the strong leadership role … that we would have expected,” Wolfowitz said in an interview with CNN-Turk television.
US-Turkish relations have been marked by tension since early March, when the Turkish parliament rejected a US troop basing agreement shortly before the outbreak of the Iraq conflict. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].
Overall, Wolfowitz castigated Turkey for not towing Washington’s tough line on relations with Iran and Syria. He called on Turkey to admit it “made a mistake” on its stance toward the Iraq war, adding that Ankara should now “figure out how we [Turks] can be as helpful as possible to the Americans.”
Some analysts predict the US criticism may weaken the Turkish military’s position in the domestic political battle. Others add that the military may be vulnerable to counter-attack over the issue of Turkey’s defense budget.
Some estimates say up to 8 percent of Turkey’s overall budget is routinely set aside for defense, in particular the maintenance of NATO’s second largest land army with nearly 700,000 troops and 4,300 tanks. Some observers say that the changing regional geopolitical environment, especially the elimination of Iraq as a security threat, may make it harder for the military to demand large share of the budget for defense.
Editor’s Note: Nicolas Birch is a journalist specializing in Turkish affairs.
Ignorance or Fear??????
The Iraqis had similar feelings for Saddam and his "Bathing party"....., before his demise!
The Turkish army is also in the process of aquiring nuclear capability from the Chinise and the Pakistanis.
The US is aware of what is going on!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.