The Turkish Republic and its Army, 1923–1960

Abstract

The story of the army's role in Turkish politics between the 1920s and the 1950s is here divided into three phases. During the first phase, between 1923 and 1926, Atatürk succeeded in establishing his personal dominance over the political system by overcoming challenges to his authority by several of his fellow military commanders. After 1926, the army's loyalty to the regime was secured, and it played an important role in Atatürk's nation-building program. This period of symbiosis between the military and the political regime lasted until 1950, when the victory of the Democrat Party opened up a third phase, culminating in the coup d'état of May 27, 1960.

Notes

Liman von Sanders, Five Years in Turkey (reprinted, Nashville, TN: Battery Press, in association with War and Peace Books, 2000), pp. 2–3. In preparing this article, the writer has also drawn on his earlier book, Turkish Politics and the Military (London and New York: Routledge, 1994), Chs. 4–5.

Erik Jan Zürcher, The Unionist Factor: the Role of the Committee of Union and Progress in the Turkish National Movement, 1905–1926 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1984), p. 52.

Quoted, Dankwart A. Rustow, ‘‘The Army and the Founding of the Turkish Republic,’' World Politics, Vol. 11, No. 3 (1959), p. 546.

Ibid., p. 537; Zürcher, Unionist Factor, pp. 60, 107–9; Andrew Mango, Atatürk (London: John Murray, 1999), p. 199.

George S. Harris, ‘‘The Role of the Military in Turkish Politics,’' Part I, Middle East Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1 (1965), p. 56.

Traditionally, the commander in a victorious war against the infidel.

George S. Harris identifies seven such officers: they included one General, one Colonel, one Lieutenant-Colonel, three Majors and one Captain: ibid., p. 56.

Frederick W. Frey, The Turkish Political Elite (Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press, 1965), p. 324.

1924 Constitution, Article 23. For the English text, see Suna Kili, Turkish Constitutional Developments and Assembly Debates on the Constitutions of 1924 and 1961 (Istanbul: Robert College Research Center, 1971), pp. 163–71.

Ibid., Article 40; see also Harris, ‘‘Role of the Military,’' Part I, pp. 57–8.

A Speech delivered by Ghazi Mustafa Kemal “Atatürk” in October 1927 (Leipzig: K. F. Koehler, 1929: reprinted, Istanbul: Üçdal, 1965), pp. 686–94: Ali Fuat Cebesoy, Siyasi Hatıralar (Istanbul: Doğan Kardeş, 1960), Vol. 2, pp. 94–7; Erik Jan Zürcher, Political Opposition in the Early Turkish Republic: The Progressive Republican Party, 1924–1925 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991), pp. 45–8.

Zürcher, Political Opposition, pp. 45, 52–4, 80–3, 90–5.

Zürcher, Unionist Factor, pp. 144–5, 152–3; Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, Tek Adam (Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1966), Vol. 3, pp. 279–81: Cebesoy, Hatıralar, Vol. 2, pp. 110–16.

August Ritter von Kral, Das Land Kamal Atatürks: der Werdegang der Modernen Türkei (Leipzig and Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller, 1937), p. 252.

Lilo Linke, Allah Dethroned: A Journey through Modern Turkey (London: Constable, 1938), pp. 122–3.

Harris, ‘‘Role of the Military,’' Part I, p. 62; Sıtkı Ulay, Harbiye Silah Başına! (Istanbul: Kitapcılık Ticaret, 1968), p. 8.

Atatürk'ün Söylev ve Demeçleri (Ankara: Türk İnkılâp Tarihi Enstitüsü, 1952), Vol. 2, p. 266.

Askeri Ceza Kanunu, No. 1632, May 22, 1930, Article 148 (from http://www.basarmevzuat.com/dustur/kanun/3/1632/1632.htm).

This wording is repeated in the current version of the law, passed in 1961: Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri İç Hizmet Kanunu, No. 211, January 4, 1961, Article 35 (from http://www.hukuki.net/kanun/211.14.text.asp).

Selim Deringil, Turkish Foreign Policy during the Second World War: An ‘‘Active’' Neutrality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) pp. 31–40. Budget data from Z. Y. Hershlag, Turkey, an Economy in Transition (The Hague: van Keulen, 1958), pp. 113–14.

Harris, ‘‘Role of the Military,’' Part I, pp. 60–1.

Edward Weisband, Turkish Foreign Policy, 1943–1945 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973), pp. 248–50.

Harris, ‘‘Role of the Military,’'Part I, p. 63. In fact, this change was effected in 1949, but under the 1961 constitution the pre-1949 arrangements were restored (Article 110).

Rustow, ‘‘The Army,’' p. 514.

Feroz Ahmad, The Turkish Experiment in Democracy, 1950–1975 (London: Hurst, 1977), pp. 150–1; Abdi İpekçi and Ömer Sami Coşar, İhtilàlin İçyüzü (Istanbul: Uygun, 1965), pp. 15–24.

Ahmad, Turkish Experiment, pp. 151–3.

Dündar Seyhan, Gölgedeki Adam (Istanbul: Hürdağıtım, 1966), pp. 17–19, 29; Talat Aydemir, Talat Aydemir'in Hatıraları (Istanbul: Kitapçılık Ticaret, 1968), pp. 22–4; Orhan Erkanlı, Anılar…Sorunlar… Sorumlular (Istanbul: Baha Matbaası, 1973), pp. 9–10; George S. Harris, ‘‘The Role of the Military in Turkish Politics,’' Part II, Middle East Journal, Vol. 19, No. 2 (1965), pp. 170–1.

For fuller details, see Hale, Turkish Politics and the Military, pp. 100–4, on which this account is based, and Harris, ‘‘Role of the Military,’' Part II, pp. 171–4.

Quoted, Metin Toker, İsmet Paşa'yla 10 Yıl, Vol. 3 (Ankara: Akis, 1967), p. 17.

For a fuller account, see Walter F.Weiker, The Turkish Revolution, 1960–61: Aspects of Military Politics (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1963).

It is claimed that İsmet İnönü persuaded Atatürk to drop the charges, but there is no convincing proof of this (I am grateful to Andrew Mango for advice on this point).

Daniel Lerner and Richard D. Robinson, ‘‘Swords and Ploughshares: the Turkish Army as a Modernising Force,’' World Politics, Vol. 13, No. 1 (1960), pp. 41–2.

Murat Yetkin, ‘Genelkurmay 50 Yıl Sonra 27 Mayıs‘tan Memnun mu?’ Radikal, May 30, 2010.

İhsan Dağı, Turkey between Democracy and Militarism: Post-Kemalist Perspectives (Ankara: Orion, 2008), p. 96.

The most serious charge brought against the former Democrat government was that of violating the 1924 constitution: this entirely ignored the fact that the leaders of the 1960 junta had themselves flagrantly violated it by overthrowing the government by force on May 27, and then abolished the constitution itself.