Balkanalysis.com

The recent ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli incidents in Hakkari, the far southeastern province of Turkey, have strained Turkish civilian-military relations once again and raised crucial questions about the durability of those relations. Do the EU-led improvements in Turkey’s civilian-military relations have substance, or are they just rhetoric? And is the subordination of the military authority to the civilian administration, a goal that has under Chief of General Staff Gen. Hilmi ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k’s democratic leadership seemed more possible than ever before, proving to be just a mirage? Is it not possible after all for even the top military official to change the status-quo attitude within the Turkish military towards the civilian administration?

Despite the unusually open and democratic leadership of Gen. ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k, the Turkish military has failed the democracy test by letting the judiciary process disrupt the ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli case. It had promised a remarkable mentality change by initiating the legal prosecution process against the former Commander of Naval Forces, Admiral Ilhami Erdil, and recently against Lieutenant General Ethem Erdagi, for their allegedly corrupt activities and abuse of their offices.

However, by intervening in the legal process in the ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli case, the Turkish military leadership has not only disappointed both domestic and international democracy-seekers in Turkey, but has also deprived Commander of the Land Forces General YaˆšÃ–¬üar BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t the opportunity to prove his strict compliance with the rule of law and democratic norms.

With regards to the charges against him, Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t has boldly announced that he would be happy to be questioned by the TBMM (Turkish Grand National Assembly) sub-committee on the ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli case. Yet, and once again in contradiction to the Chief of General Staff Gen. ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k’s democratic tradition and transparency, the rule of law has been forced to give ground to the generals, for unidentifiable reasons.

Prosecuting the Generals

The former Commander of Naval Forces Admiral Ilhami Erdil, and the 3^rd Army Commander, Lt. Gen. Ethem Erdagi, have been recently prosecuted for corruption. The Turkish military, under Gen. ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k’s leadership, initiated the investigation of former Admiral Erdil on charges of wealth accumulation through illegal means on September 15, 2003.[i] The military prosecutor and senior Colonel Saim ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±ztˆšÃ‰Â¬Âºrk sought a sentence of up to 18 years for the former Commander of the Naval Forces. The judicial process which included also several family members of the former-Admiral Erdil ended on February 07, 2006 with the verdict being a 2.5 year sentence.[ii]

Recently, the same military prosecutor, Senior Colonel ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±ztˆšÃ‰Â¬Âºrk, has asked the Military Court for a 1.5-6 years’ sentence for Lieutenant General Erdagi. [iii] The Lieutenant General Erdagi has been accused of abusing his authority during the construction of the 8th Army Corps’ service building and of producing fraudulent documents. Along with Lt. Gen. Erdagi, ten other suspects, three of which are colonels, have also been charged with the same crimes.

This latest prosecution is not one made against an ordinary army member, but against a senior army official who had been assigned the 3^rd Army Commander after his successful service as the Commander of the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) in Afghanistan from February to August 2005.[iv] So even if it could be tragic for those who are prosecuted, it is quite promising for the fate of democracy and the rule of law in Turkey.

Such high-level military prosecutions reaffirm the democratic legacy of the Chief of General Staff Gen. ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k, just as his attitude toward the current ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli case prosecution indicates an aberration from his transparent and democratic norms.[v] That aberration raises questions about the likely presence in the case of higher, “invisible’ authorities above the top military official.

General BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t: Doubts About the “Great Monument“

Chief of General Staff Gen. Hilmi ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k has remarked that the latest controversy about Land Forces Commander Gen. YaˆšÃ–¬üar BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t’s alleged involvement in the security forces’ illegal covert activities in ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli, Hakkari, has turned Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t into a “Great Monument,” as his last name means in Turkish.[vi] No one would doubt him being a “great monument” given his matchless military career. However, it is the very military leadership that after all ceased the judicial process which could most probably strengthen the public image of Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t, by proving his innocence concerning the provocations that recently took place in ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli.

Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t could have benefited from the judicial process, which required him to testify before the TBMM sub-committee. In doing so, he could have reasserted his image as the “right choice” before August 30^th, the date on which he is supposed to succeed Gen. ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k as the next Chief of General Staff.

The incomprehensible disruption of the judicial process, which interestingly enough came after Gen. ˆšÃ‰Â¬Ã±zkˆšÃ‰Â¬ˆ‚k’s unfavorable remarks about the investigation of Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t, and which were followed by the latter’s unexpected visit to Prime Minister Erdogan, has sullied the public’s image of Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t, as the monumental military man. So one might wonder, therefore, as to whether the disruption of the judicial process was meant to help or hinder Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t, in light of his looming appointment as the next Chief of General Staff.

Prosecuting the Prosecutor

Prosecuting the prosecutor in retaliation has apparently seemed like a better idea than repudiating the prosecutor’s accusations by simply testifying against them. The Economist reports that the Turkish military has decided to prosecute the prosecutor who had called for Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t to be investigated, on charges of “setting up an armed gang [in Southeastern Turkey] to provoke tension with the Kurds and torpedo Turkey’s progress towards the EU.”[vii] The public prosecutor is accused of abusing his office to harbor a political agenda and target the secular foundations of the state.

On an issue like the recent ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli incident, the Turkish military could have taken the opportunity to refresh its “most trusted institution by the public” status by simply preparing the necessary conditions for the investigation of Land Commander Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t, potentially its next chief, given that it was sure the general had nothing to do with it.

However, it preferred not to do so, leaving in the public’s mind a big question mark. This has only deprived Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t of the opportunity to prove how well-suited he is for the top job in the military – if not reinforced the speculation that his bumpy relations with the civilian administration on fundamental issues would plague Turkey’s democratization process, and accordingly, prove harmful to economic stability.

Therefore, disrupting the judicial process in the ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli case has not only damaged the public image of the Turkish military, it has also reinforced the popular belief that the appointment of Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t as the next Chief of General Staff is the most unfortunate choice possible for the fate of democracy and stability in Turkey.

Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t: A Scapegoat-elect for the Collapse of Turkish Democracy?

The approaches of certain media and political circles to the latest ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli incidents imply the likelihood that Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t will become tacitly elected scapegoat for the possible collapse of Turkey’s democratization course. Despite the statements and gestures of both Prime Minister Erdogan and Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t attesting the opposite,[viii] the ultra-secular circles have been seeking to construct an image of incurable Erdogan-BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t conflict, which would soon after August 30^th entail a series of disastrous collisions.

Accordingly, their mildly secular and conservative counterparts have been serving that prophesy of doom, simply by echoing the same dismal expectations for Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t’s term in high military office. [ix] And the intellectuals in all camps seem to have been setting the stage for a self-fulfilling prophecy, rather than doing objective analysis of the latest civilian-military relations.

Nevertheless, Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t could still turn that disruption in the ˆšÃ–¬ûemdinli case investigation into an advantage by willingly resuming the judicial process and testifying before the TBMM sub-committee investigating the provocation attempts executed there.

Doing so would prove to the public not only Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t’s respect for and compliance with the rule of law, but also show that he adheres to democratic values even when they would appear to challenge him. Thus he could demonstrate how suited he is for the top job in the Turkish military. Indeed, why would Gen. BˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºyˆšÃ‰Â¬ÂºkanˆšÃ‘±t avoid testifying on something that he has nothing to do with? The longer he avoids the sub-committee, the more the question will come up.