In Britain I sense people take democracy for granted. With a long democratic tradition in transition for centuries, Britons are unaccustomed to a tradition of renegade soldiers and juntas; in fact few would even contemplate a threat to the democratic process or the arrival of tanks in parliament square. But last week in Turkey, a country that is in accession talks with the European Union (EU), the threat of a 21st century military coup was one step closer to a reality. A plot organized by mostly ex-military officers and generals, which would have inevitably resulted in bloodshed that anti-democratic paramilitary groups that are dormant but not entirely inactive can inevitably become potentially dangerous for any country if left unchecked. 

HISTORY OF COUPS

Nearly all media reports on Turkey focus on the three 20th century coups that occurred in 1960, 1971 and 1980 but historically Turkey has a long line of military coups dating back to Imperial times, some would even argue a “culture of coups.” Mutinying “Young Ottomans” launched a coup in the spring of 1867. In 1876, the Ottoman military forced Sultan Abdülaziz (1861–1876) to abdicate in favour of Murad V, later Murat V was himself deposed and his heir Abdülhamid II (1876-1909) was invited to assume power on the condition that he would accept to declare a constitutional monarch. More over according to some historians it was a series of gun barrel coups and counter coups that led to the formation of the Republic of Turkey after Enver Pasha, a Turkish military officer launched a military coup against the Sultan in 1908, proclaiming a new regime on July 6. This was followed by a counter-coup on 13 April 1909 by the Sultan. But the Ottomans continued to be troubled by political instability, until another coup d’état in 1913, which gave the Young Turks absolute control of government. 
 

CLANDESTINE POLITICS REPRESENTS AN UNEASY TRUCE

Imperialism was defeated but coups continued. After the death of Founding President Mustafa Kemal Ataturk of the new Republic of Turkey in 1938, it was the military who saw themselves as the natural heirs and defenders of the Republic and the core ideologies that were regarded as pillars of the Republic; arguably the most significant being Secularism and Kemalism. The military self-identified themselves as the ‘saviour’ of the Republic and cite this as the main motivation behind their three brief military coups in 1960, 1971 and 1980, despite the fact that many independent reports revealed serious human rights violations during these periods of military rule. But although military meddling in politics has become less open in more recent times, clandestine politics on the other hand has increased. Shrouding an uneasy truce between the military and government, clandestine politics has produced somewhat bizarre events. On 3 November 1996 near Susurluk in Balıkesir, Turkey, Deputy Chief of Istanbul Police Hüseyi Kocadağ, the leader of the ultra-nationalist paramilitary group Grey Wolves Abdullah Çatlı, his Beauty Queen turned Hit Woman girlfriend and elected DYP Şanlıurfa MP Sedat Bucak all in one car were involved in a road accident. Dubbed by the media as the “Susurluk Scandal,” the event revealed the extent of a clandestine influential and informal anti-democratic network known as the ‘deep state,’ which involves an allegiance to nationalism.  

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF TURKISH DEMOCRACY

Naturally, the concept of the ‘deep state’ alone still haunts the elected government, leaving a political climate of fear particularly for political parties calling for the most reforms. Adding to this fear public messages against the government by the military reveal not only discord between military and government but has enormous impact upon the psychology and expectations of voters in the democracy. An occasional stern message from the Chief of Staff is enough to raise the goose pimples of any government and cause a media frenzy. “Has the government crossed the line? as if democracy in Turkey is self-reinforcing rather than self-correcting, or “Should we expect a coup now?”  are all examples of questions ordinary Turks ask themselves, thus creating an unconscious public dependence on military interventions in politics.

However, while even those in the military have political convictions, it is essential to be aware of certain points. Primarily, that the government is elected by the will of the Turkish people, secondly, memory of past military coups and news reports of clandestine political dealings still fresh in many people’s minds paralyses with fear some who find themselves to be in dissent with the military – neither are healthy for a democracy that ought to be based on all-party dialogue and compromise. Thirdly, in most democracies the civilian government has control over their military, so any verbal thumping of the government by the military rather makes Turkey ressemble a military democracy. “Who’s in charge?” - some may rightly ask.  

THE PLANNED COUP D’ETAT OF 2009

In view of a psychology where the military is expected to check the government, it is not totally unpredictable that some paramilitary groups may eventually plot to overthrow Turkey’s democratically elected government.  Foiled by Turkish police last week, Ergenekon, an ultra-nationalist gang of ex-army officers planned to cause chaos in Turkey after assassinating a string of Turkish intellectuals, including Nobel Laureate Orhan Pamuk, provoking a military coup in 2009. Police suspect the paramilitary group had already hired hitmen and may be linked to the killing of Hrant Dink and Turkish protestants last year.

Turkish Columnist Cengiz Candar described these types of paramilitary groups: “When the Cold War ended those structures [illicit paramilitary gangs] went out of business, but they still existed.” Confirming the need to deal with ultra-nationalist paramilitary groups and emphasize the rule of law, the event has revealed once again that there are those who are still ready to pursue a gun barrel politics to meet political ends in a country that has come so far politically and economically. With ‘national interests’ as a justification, renegade ex-army officers may see themselves as ‘saviours’ but by their failure to trust the democratic process, they do great damage Turkey’s international standing, her EU aspirations, and give Turcophobic European governments ammunition with which to attack Turkey.  

PUTTING ONE’S TRUST IN DEMOCRACY

A great country with a colourful history, Turkey is regarded by many in the West as a paragon democracy in the Middle East, but in the midst of accession talks to the EU Turkey must resist any attempt to draw the country into Gun Barrel Politics with transparency. The recent coup d’état attempt may reveal the extreme side of dissatisfaction over the choice of political party in power in Turkey amongst some Turks, but it is not a justification to try to shift Turkey from democracy to mobocracy. A test for democracy itself, the current Turkish government may not appeal to all, but it must not be forgotten that it is a democratically elected government. Undermining this government like any democratically elected government means you are undermining the millions of your own citizens who voted for them. Who has the right to bypass the democratic process and disregard dialogue and compromise? And on a regional level, without a democratic Turkey where there is respect for rule of law anchored in the EU, there is little hope I fear for a change in the status quo in Cyprus, for improving further Greco-Turkish relations or resolving the Kurdish question.  Abraham Lincoln once declared before leading one of the world’s first democracies: “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people for the people.”