Chapter Two: Turkey

Abstract

There is no recipe for democratisation that can be readily applied to all countries. Every country presents unique factors that influence the fate of its democratic reforms, which must therefore be evaluated within their specific socio-political, cultural and historical context.

Building on this premise, this paper examines military reform and democratisation through the experiences of Turkey and Indonesia, two democratising countries with predominantly Muslim populations, secular regimes, and militaries that are deeply involved in politics.

The paper strives to explain why both the Turkish and Indonesian militaries, which have developed a sense of ownership over the state, may be wary of democratic change; how the people perceive the military's traditional role in society; and in which direction societal and military attitudes towards democratic reform have been moving over the years.

In relating these domestic observations to various external factors, it seeks to identify the regional and global trends, events and actors that promote and obstruct the development of substantive democracy in each country, and to draw broader lessons for the study of democratisation and military reform.

Notes

1. Suna Kili, ‘Role of the Military in Turkish Society: An Assessment from the Perspective of History, Sociology and Politics’, in Gupta, Military Rule and Democratisation: Changing Perspectives, p. 145.

2. Ümit Cizre, ‘The Anatomy of the Turkish Military's Political Autonomy’, Comparative Politics, vol. 29, no. 2, January 1997, p. 154.

3. Mevlüt Bozdemir, Türk Ordusunun Tarihsel Kaynakları (Ankara: AÜ Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Yayınları, 1982), p. 157.

4. Tanel Demirel, ‘Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri'nin Toplumsal Meşruiyeti Üzerine’, in Ahmet İnsel and Ali Bayramoğlu (eds), Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu (Istanbul: Birikim Yayınları, 2004), p. 348.

5. İnsel ‘Bir Toplumsal Sınıf Olarak Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri’, in İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 43.

6. Eduard Soler i Lecha, Débora Miralles i Solé, Ümit Cizre and Volkan Aytar, ‘Drawing Lessons from Turkey's and Spain's Security Sector Reforms for the Mediterranean’, EuroMesCo Research Project, Istanbul, October 2006.

7. Linda Michaud-Emin, ‘The Restructuring of the Military High Command in the Seventh Harmonization Package and its Ramifications for Civil–Military Relations in Turkey’, Turkish Studies, vol. 8, no. 1, March 2007, p. 33.

8. İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 50.

9. İlhan Uzgel, ‘Ordu Dış Politikanın Neresinde?’, in İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 325.

10. For example, in a nationwide survey conducted by the governing AKP in January 2005, 84% of respondents said that they trusted the TSK more than any other institution in the country. The same survey found that political parties and the media were among the least trusted institutions. Hürriyet, 18 January 2005.

11. Demirel, ‘Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri'nin Toplumsal Meşruiyeti Üzerine’, p. 353.

12. Ahmet Taner Kışlalı, ‘Türk Ordusunun Toplumsal Kökeni Üzerine bir Araştırma’, Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, Ankara University, no. 3–4, September–December 1974, p. 90.

13. Metin Heper, ‘The Military–Civilian Relations in Post-1997 Turkey’, in George Cristian Maior and Larry Watts (eds), Globalization of Civil–Military Relations: Democratization, Reform and Security (Bucharest: Enciclopedica Publishing House, 2002), p. 58.

14. Bulent Aliriza, ‘Turks Have an Unavoidable War to Fight Against Corruption’, International Herald Tribune, 16 March 2001.

15. Ayşe Gül Altınay, ‘Eğitimin Militarizasyonu: Zorunlu Milli Eğitim Dersi’, in İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, pp. 179–201.

16. Ali Bayramoğlu, Ahmet İnsel and Ömer Laçiner, ‘Giriş’, in İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 8.

17. ‘Turkey's Military Leader Vows to Restore Democracy’, New York Times, 6 January 1981.

18. Heper, ‘The Military–Civilian Relations in Post-1997 Turkey’, p. 52.

19. Ethem Ruhi Fığlalı, ‘Islam ve Laiklik’, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, no. 33, vol. 11, November 1995, p. 653.

20. Heper, ‘The Military–Civilian Relations in Post-1997 Turkey’, p. 60.

21. Linz and Stepan, ‘Towards Consolidated Democracies’, Journal of Democracy, vol. 7, no. 2, 1996, p. 16.

22. Mark Tessler and Ebru Altınoğlu, ‘Political Culture in Turkey: Connections among Attitudes Towards Democracy, the Military and Islam’, Democratization, vol. 11, no. 1, February 2004, p. 44.

23. Ibid., p. 45.

24. Gül Altınay, ‘Eğitimin Militarizasyonu: Zorunlu Milli Eğitim Dersi’, p. 186.

25. The positive effects of the increase in Turkey's GDP per capita in recent years (from $7,000 in 2003 to $8,900 in 2006) have been limited by increasing income discrepancies. According to the UN Development Programme's 2006 Human Development Report, 18.7% of Turkey's population lives on less than $2 a day. See Bosphorus University economics department, ‘Income Distribution’ presentation, http://www.econ.boun.edu.tr/courses/spring2007/EC470_01/readings/11_Income%20Distribution.ppt.

26. Demirel, ‘Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri'nin Toplumsal Meşruiyeti Üzerine’, p. 353.

27. Ece Temelkuran, ‘Seriat Mı Gelsin, Ordu Mu?’, Milliyet, 6 April 2007.

28. Ali Karaosmanoğlu and Seyfi Tashan, The Europeanization of Turkey's Security Policy: Prospects and Pitfalls (Ankara: Foreign Policy Institute, 2004), p. 20.

29. Gencer Özcan, ‘National Security Council’, in Cizre, Almanac Turkey 2005: Security Sector and Democratic Oversight (Istanbul: TESEV, 2006), pp. 43–4.

30. İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 49.

31. Defence spending routinely amounts to more than 3% of Turkey's GDP (it varied between 10.9% and 8.2% of the budget between 1997 and 2004). The TSK also has various extra-budgetary resources, including the Armed Forces Pensions Fund and the Defence Industry Support Fund. Pınar Akkoyunlu, Eğitim ve Ekonomi (Istanbul: Filiz, 2005), p. 183.

32. Karaosmanoğlu and Tashan, The Europeanization of Turkey's Security Policy: Prospects and Pitfalls, p. 11.

33. Cizre, Almanac Turkey 2005: Security Sector and Democratic Oversight, p. 13.

34. Karaosmanoğlu and Tashan, The Europeanization of Turkey's Security Policy: Prospects and Pitfalls, p. 12

35. For the Turkish contribution to the International Security Assistance Force, see http://www.nato.int/isaf/structure/regional_command/index.html.

36. For Turkey's role in Peace Support Operations, see http://www.tsk.mil.tr/eng/uluslararasi/barisdestekkatki.htm, and in the Partnership for Peace, http://www.bioem.tsk.mil.tr/.

37. Feroz Ahmad, Turkey: The Quest for Identity (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005), pp. 177, 184.

38. Lale Sarıibrahimoğlu, ‘Turkish Armed Forces’, inCizre, Almanac Turkey 2005: Security Sector and Democratic Oversight, p. 63.

39. ‘Kılınç Paşa NATO'dan Çıkma Çağrısı Yaptı’, Sabah, 29 May 2007; ‘Military Manoeuvres’, The Economist, 7 June 2007.

40. Karaosmanoğlu and Tashan, The Europeanization of Turkey's Security Policy: Prospects and Pitfalls, p. 19.

41. Sebnem Arsu, ‘Turkey Angry Over House Armenian Genocide Vote’, New York Times, 12 October 2007.

42. Stephen Larrabee and Ian Lesser, Turkish Foreign Policy in an Age of Uncertainty (Washington DC: RAND Publications, 2003), p. 52.

43. İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 108.

44. Academic Survey Centre, Türkiye ve Avrupa Birliği İlişkileri Araştırması (Istanbul: AKART, May 2002). 29% of respondents said EU membership was needed to democratise Turkey and modernise the state, while 30% supported Turkey's EU bid because they thought membership would improve Turkey's economic welfare.

45. Over 80% of the respondents to the 2002 AKART poll were in favour of EU membership. However, more than half of these also stated that Turkey should join without making any strategic concessions. What Brussels sees as democratisation, many people in Turkey interpret as strategic concessions.

46. Mustafa Acar, ‘Avrupa Birliği'ne Tepkiler: Türkiye'nin Daha Iyi bir Alternatifi var Mı?’, CÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, vol. 2, no. 2, 2002, p. 75.

47. The rate of inflation in 2002 was 29.7%; in 2005, it had fallen to 7.7%, the lowest rate in 37 years. In the same period, GNP and per capita income almost doubled: in 2002, GNP stood at $180bn, and GNP per capita at $2,598; in 2005, GNP was $360bn, and GNP per capita $5,008. Annual Report 2006, Turkish Ministry of Finance, http://www.sgb.gov.tr/eKtphane/2006yer.pdf.

48. ‘Halk AB'ye Güvenmiyor’, Milliyet, 24 October 2006.

49. European Commission, Turkey 2005 Progress Report, Brussels, 9 November 2005, p. 14, http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/archives/pdf/key_documents/2005/package/sec_1426_final_progress_report_tr_en.pdf.

50. ‘EU Warns Turkish Army Over Vote’, BBC News, 28 April 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6602661.stm.

51. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratisation in the Late Twentieth Century, p. 283.

52. Ibid.

53. Heper, ‘The Military–Civilian Relations in Post-1997 Turkey’, p. 54.

54. Ivar Ekman, ‘Top Swedish Official Backs Turkey for EU’, International Herald Tribune, 11 December 2006.

55. Cizre, Almanac Turkey 2005: Security Sector and Democratic Oversight, p. 4.

56. İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 74.

57. For details, see the TSK official website, http://www.tsk.mil.tr/.

58. Larrabee and Lesser, Turkish Foreign Policy in an Age of Uncertainty, p. 168.

59. This was later acknowledged by the CIA's Ankara chief Paul Henze, who, on the night of the coup, cabled Washington, saying ‘our boys have done it’. Mehmet Ali Birand, The Generals' Coup in Turkey: An Inside Story of 12 September 1980 (New York: Elsevier, 1987).

60. Gencer Özcan and şule Kut, En Uzun Onyıl: Türkiye'nin Ulusal Güvenlik ve Dış Politika Gündeminde Doksanlı Yıllar (Istanbul: Büke Yayınları, 2000), p. 17.

61. An indication of current opinion of the US in Turkey is given by a 2007 Pew Global Attitudes survey, which found only 9% of respondents in Turkey looking favourably upon the US, down dramatically from 52% before the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. The survey also found intensified distrust of America in many other parts of the world. Meg Bortin, ‘Global Poll Shows Wide Distrust of United States’, International Herald Tribune, 27 June 2007, http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/27/news/pew.php?page=1.

62. Uzgel, ‘Ordu Dış Politikanın Neresinde?’, p. 74.

63. Cüneyt Ülsever, ‘George W. Bush: Ortadoğu Için Tarihi Bir Konuşma’, Hürriyet, 1 July 2004. Rather than aiding Turkey with the accession process, however, these expressions of support have arguably led to the shaping of a perception in the core member states of the EU, especially France and Germany, of Turkey as an American Trojan horse through which Washington might extend its influence inside the EU. See Charles Grant, ‘Turkey Offers EU More Punch’, European Voice, 1–7 September 2005.

64. Nikolaos Raptopoulos, ‘Rediscovering its Arab Neighbours? The AKP Imprint on Turkish Foreign Policy in the Middle East’, Les Cahiers du RMES, no. 1, July 2004, p. 12.

65. ‘US Discourages Turkish Military Action in Northern Iraq’, Turkish Daily News, 29 June 2007.

66. ‘Demokrasi Kesintiye Uğramasın’, Hürriyet, 29 April 2007.

67. Ahmad, Turkey: The Quest for Identity, p. 132.

68. Cizre, ‘The Anatomy of the Turkish Military's Political Autonomy’, p. 153.

69. Ibid., p. 157.

70. Tessler and Altınoğlu, ‘Political Culture in Turkey: Connections among Attitudes Towards Democracy, the Military and Islam’, p. 24.

71. Larrabee and Lesser, Turkish Foreign Policy in an Age of Uncertainty, p. 63.

72. The 1997 National Security Policy Document identified political Islam as the main threat to the secular republic. A few months later, the Islamist government was toppled in a coup.

73. Bayramoğlu, ‘Asker ve Siyaset’, inİnsel İnsel and Bayramoğlu, Bir Zümre, Bir Parti: Türkiye'de Ordu, p. 92.

74. Article 2a of Law no. 2945, on the National Security Council, defines national security as ‘the protection of the constitutional order of the state, its nation and integrity, all of its interests in the international sphere including political, social, cultural and economic interests, as well as the protection of its constitutional law against all internal and external threats’. European Commission, Turkey 2005 Progress Report, p. 14. For the full text of the law in Turkish, see http://fef.comu.edu.tr/sivilsavunma/kanunlar/ka2945mgk.pdf.

75. Soler i Lecha, Miralles i Solé, Cizre and Aytar, ‘Drawing Lessons from Turkey's and Spain's Security Sector Reforms for the Mediterranean’, p. 11.

76. Ilkay Sunar and Sabri Sayari, ‘Democracy in Turkey: Problems and Prospects’, in Guillermo O'Donnell, Philippe C. Schmitter and Laurence Whitehead (eds), Transition from Authoritarian Rule: Southern Europe (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), p. 184.

77. Ibid.

78. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratisation in the Late Twentieth Century, pp. 238–9.

79. Ahmad, Turkey: The Quest for Identity, p. 151.

80. Larrabee and Lesser, Turkish Foreign Policy in an Age of Uncertainty, p. 52.

81. Hakan M. Yavuz (ed.), The Emergence of New Turkey: Democracy and the AK Parti (Salt Lake City, UT: Utah University Press, 2006), pp. 1–23.

82. Soler i Lecha, Miralles i Solé, Cizre and Aytar, ‘Drawing Lessons from Turkey's and Spain's Security Sector Reforms for the Mediterranean’, p. 13.

83. For details of the National Security Council reforms, see Özcan, ‘National Security Council’, in Cizre, Almanac Turkey 2005: Security Sector and Democratic Oversight, pp. 36–50.

84. Sarıibrahimoğlu, ‘Turkish Armed Forces’, in Cizre, Almanac Turkey 2005: Security Sector and Democratic Oversight, p. 60. The word ‘reported’ is used here because the document is not made public. The only way the public is informed about its content is through leaks to the press.

85. Ibid., p. 58.

86. Larrabee and Lesser, Turkish Foreign Policy in an Age of Uncertainty, p. 63.

87. İnsel, ‘Bir Toplumsal Sınıf Olarak Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri’, p. 46.

88. Avni Özgürel, ‘En Milliyetçi: Erdoğan ve AKP!..’, Radikal, 14 March 2007.

89. ‘Turkish Military Chief Flexes Some Political Muscle’, Financial Times, 27 February 2007; ‘Paşa'dan Sürpriz Basın Toplantısı’, Sabah, 12 April 2007.

90. ‘Askerin Medya Notları’, Radikal, 8 March 2007.

91. ‘İçinden iki Darbe Girişimi Geçen Günlük’, Radikal, 29 March 2007.

92. ‘Nokta Muhabiri Için Hapis Istemi’, CNN Türk, 22 April 2007, http://www.cnnturk.com/TURKIYE/haber_detay.asp?PID=318&HID=1&haberID=351145.

93. Perihan Mağden, ‘Basın Özgürlüğünde son Nokta’, Radikal, 17 April 2007.

94. Karabekir Akkoyunlu, ‘Caught in the Middle of Turkey's Fundamentalisms’, Turkish Daily News, 16 June 2007.

95. ‘Turks Elect Ex-Islamist President’, BBC News, 28 August 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6966216.stm.

96. Ertuğrul Özkök, ‘2nci Cumhuriyetin ınci Cumhurbaşkanı’, Hürriyet, 29 August 2007.

97. See Bekir Coşkun, ‘Dügün Gecesi’, Hürriyet, 1 September 2007.

98. ‘Democracy in Turkey’, New York Times, 1 September 2007.

99. In an encouraging sign, a group of academics appointed by the government for the purpose of writing a new constitution had begun work on a draft of a new and ‘more civilian’ one as early as September 2007. How much the new constitution will help improve Turkey's democracy remains, nevertheless, to be seen. Turkish Daily News, 4 September 2007.

100. Hasan Cemal, ‘Bu da Milletin Muhtırası!’, Milliyet, 23 July 2007.

101. The murders of a Catholic priest in Trabzon, three Protestant publishers of the Bible in Malatya, and Hrant Dink, a vocal Turkish–Armenian journalist, in Istanbul during the first half of 2007, are cases in point.

102. ‘Turkey and Transatlantic Trends: Between Xenophobia and Globalization’, Transatlantic Trends 2007, http://www.transatlantictrends.org.

103. ‘Turkish MPs Back Attacks in Iraq’, BBC News, 18 October 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7049348.stm.

104. Amberin Zaman, ‘Turkey Elects Islamist President Abdullah Gul’, Daily Telegraph, 31 August 2007, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/29/wturkey129.xml.