Army Issues Warning - Vows to Keep Turkey Secular

[psi29a]

source

Turkey's military has warned the government that it will openly enter politics if the ruling party attempts to alter the country's long-standing commitment to secularism. The military's general staff said in a statement on Friday that the pro-secular army would "openly display its position and attitudes when it becomes necessary".

The unusual warning came after Abdullah Gul, the presidential candidate for the ruling Justice and Development Party, failed to win the first round of a parliamentary vote after opposition parties boycotted the poll, which is the first step towards chosing a new president.

"It should not be forgotten that the Turkish armed forces is one of the sides in this debate and the absolute defender of secularism," the statement said. "When necessary, they will display their attitudes and actions very clearly. No one should doubt that." The military said the the "Islamist" agenda of the ruling party threatened the very foundation of the Turkish state. "This radical Islamic understanding, which is against the Republic and has no goal but to erode the basic qualities of the state, has been expanding its span with encouragement," the military statement said.

Wow, we certainly do live in interesting times.

[MsNomer]

Sorry, from what you've posted, I find nothing particularly interesting about it... religious zealots are infiltrating the politics in an area where they have always infiltrted politics and someone else doesn't like it. I am sure our "commander and chief" will find a way to exploit the situation to make his friends richer. No doubt, we will find a way to interfer that in 20 years we will have to throw a bunch of money and manpower at to contain.

[psi29a]

yes, but this has nothing to do with our 'commander and chief'.

This is about a normally secular country I find it interesting because it pretty much says "you bring religion into politics, we will remove you from power".

I dunno about you, but I like what that officer had to say.

[MsNomer]

Oh, no doubt it is a refreshing approach... but the build up of religious ferver in that part of the world has been ongoing and escalating for a while. It generally points to a lack of faith in the secular government in place. Saying you will respond with force, only creates martyrs for the cause. A better approach would be to find out what is causing the religious option to become so attractive and counter that.

[MsNomer]

yes, but this has nothing to do with our 'commander and chief'.

As to that, unfortunately, it will. There is the matter of a certain pipeline that may become vulnerable if non-secular elements threaten stability and also if violence erupts as a counter to that effort. I know we haven't got the resources for any efforts in that area, but based on previous decision making processes coming from the shrub, it would not surprise me if he used this to justify removing troops from Iraq to "appease" the Democrats, only to deploy them to Turkey to secure his and his cronies' investments...

[guywildman]

msnomer let me get this strait... a Turkish general tells a Turkish party member that if he's party will win the Turkish army will get involved and what you see is future American involvement?
and as for not responding with force... this is a Turkish affair one that happened plenty of times, the Turkish army is the defender of the Turkish constitution, that is his job as written in said constitution, turkey is a democratic secular country and it's the armies job to keep it that way, this wont be the first time it's gotten involved there have been previous times were the government disobeyed turkeys constitution and every time the army did it's duty and preformed a co.
it's better of this way if you ask me.
Turkey is a poor country it gets a lot of its income from tourism is now trying to get into the eu which might ease it's monetary issues and it's citizens live a free life with no oppression if it will go under the rule of Islamic extremists I'm pretty sure western tourism will cease, the eu will reject they're cadency and they will live under oppression.
Any way I don’t really see this happening but even if it does it's no bigi, probably the same thing as that co in Thailand that ended In a week and no casualties.

[MsNomer]

guywildman... I am not really sure what your point was. I am aware of the military's obligation to its secular government in Turkey and I am also aware that the region just south of it is becoming extremely volitile through increasing religious ferver and I also note that George W. Bush can't seem to keep his hands out of other people's cookie jars.

There is significant US investment in Turkey now as opposed to say 20 years ago and Georgie seems to believe that is sufficient provocation in all other instances to march our troops into an area when he senses trouble brewing. Especially when oil is involved.

I am neither attacking the Turkish military nor defending the current US Administration's foreign policy. I am merely speculating at what could happen.

[psi29a]

Pro-secular demonstrators wave a huge Turkish flag during a rally in Istanbul, Turkey, Sunday, April 29, 2007. Tens of thousands of secular Turks gathered in Istanbul, chanting slogans against the pro-Islamic government, which has faced severe criticism from the powerful military for allegedly tolerating the activities of radical Islamic circles. It was the second large demonstration against the government in just two weeks and shows a deepening division between secular and Islamist camps in Turkish society. More than 300,000 secular Turks staged a similar rally in Ankara two weeks ago. (AP Photo/Murad Sezer)

By Benjamin Harvey, Associated Press Writer | April 29, 2007

ISTANBUL, Turkey --Some 700,000 Turks waving the red national flag flooded central Istanbul on Sunday to demand the resignation of the government, saying the Islamic roots of Turkey's leaders threatened to destroy the country's modern foundations.

Like the protesters -- who gathered for the second large anti-government demonstration in two weeks -- Turkey's powerful secular military has accused Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of tolerating radical Islamic circles.

"They want to drag Turkey to the dark ages," said 63-year-old Ahmet Yurdakul, a retired government employee who attended the protest.

More than 300,000 people took part in a similar rally in Ankara two weeks ago. Police, who said Sunday's demonstrators numbered around 700,000, cordoned off the area and conducted body searches at several entry points.

Sunday's demonstration was organized more than a week ago, but it came a day after Erdogan's government rejected the military's warning about the disputed presidential election and called it interference that is unacceptable in a democracy.

The ruling party candidate, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, failed to win a first-round victory Friday in a parliamentary presidential vote marked by tensions between secularists and the pro-Islamic government. Most opposition legislators boycotted the vote and challenged its validity in the Constitutional Court.

The military said Friday night that it was gravely concerned and indicated it was willing to become more openly involved in the process -- a statement some interpreted as an ultimatum to the government to rein in officials who promote Islamic initiatives.

Sunday's crowd chanted that the presidential palace was "closed to imams."

Some said Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc was an enemy of the secular system, because he said the next president should be "pious."

In the 1920s, with the Ottoman Empire in ruins, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk imposed Western laws, replaced Arabic script with the Latin alphabet, banned Islamic dress and granted women the right to vote.

The ruling party, however, has supported religious schools and tried to lift the ban on Islamic head scarves in public offices and schools. Secularists are also uncomfortable with the idea of Gul's wife, Hayrunisa, being in the presidential palace because she wears the traditional Muslim head scarf.

"We don't want a covered woman in Ataturk's presidential palace," said Ayse Bari, a 67-year-old housewife. "We want civilized, modern people there."

The military, one of the most respected institutions in Turkey, regards itself as the guardian of the secular system and has staged three coups since 1960.

"Neither Sharia, nor coup but fully democratic Turkey," read a banner carried by a demonstrator on Sunday.

source

[Facade19]

yes, but this has nothing to do with our 'commander and chief'.

This is about a normally secular country I find it interesting because it pretty much says "you bring religion into politics, we will remove you from power".

I dunno about you, but I like what that officer had to say.

Very scary if you ask me.
Here the general wants a secular republic (and republic in my book stands for democracy), and yet the part in where he makes a concealed threat against the government is a threat against the very principle of constitutional democracy. This implies to me that the general is contradicting the very idea of a republic.

[psi29a]

From Turkey:

EDITORIAL IN CUMHURIYET

Every political party in Turkey has to adopt secularism. This is a requirement of the modern state, civilisation and our constitution... The army's statement should be interpreted in this light... rather than as intervention in politics.

Try this one:

If your constitution (foundation of your style of democracy) has a 1st amendment that states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Which for instance is the US's own foundation here, I would expect people to rise up in protests and the other branches of government to support the people.

The military is bound by law to uphold the constitution, to the letter.

Now, if you want to change the constitution, then we are able to do so. But I would want the military to do everything in it's power to uphold the constitution as it stands right now.

Majority rules, minority rights.

That is democracy.

[Brainpiercing]

I'm with Psi on this one. Here in the EU we are watching Turkey very carefully - they want to join, after all. The reactions to the words of the military leaders have been universally negative, even though, considering, the military is likely the EU's best friend in Turkey. If islamists become stronger this would put their membership application on very thin footing.

Politicians here don't seem to understand the role of military in Turkey, and apply the wrong standards. Even in modern democracies like Germany (with arguably one of the most sophisticated political systems in the world at present) the separation between legislative and executive forces is not absolute, since the strongest party in the parliament elects the government. The military as the ultimate executive organ is always under the command of the government, and hence in a way limited by the legislative bodies, too. It cannot by itself act against attempts to change the constitution in ways that contradict its original spirit. In Turkey, this seems to be very different. However, I would very much like to find out just how the Turkish constitution is worded in that respect. Does anyone have any sources in English?

[MsNomer]

http://www.hri.org/docs/turkey/ <---Turkey's Constitution

[Brainpiercing]

Hmm, so far I haven't found much regarding the military, here are some quotes:

II. Restriction of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms

ARTICLE 13. (As amended on October 17, 2001)

Fundamental rights and freedoms may be restricted only by law and in conformity with the reasons mentioned in the relevant articles of the Constitution without infringing upon their essence. These restrictions shall not be in conflict with the letter and spirit of the Constitution and the requirements of the democratic order of the society and the secular Republic and the principle of proportionality.

VI. Freedom of Religion and Conscience

ARTICLE 24. Everyone has the right to freedom of conscience, religious belief and conviction.

Acts of worship, religious services, and ceremonies shall be conducted freely, provided that they do not violate the provisions of Article 14.

No one shall be compelled to worship, or to participate in religious ceremonies and rites, to reveal religious beliefs and convictions, or be blamed or accused because of his religious beliefs and convictions.

Education and instruction in religion and ethics shall be conducted under state supervision and control. Instruction in religious culture and moral education shall be compulsory in the curricula of primary and secondary schools. Other religious education and instruction shall be subject to the individual’s own desire, and in the case of minors, to the request of their legal representatives.

No one shall be allowed to exploit or abuse religion or religious feelings, or things held sacred by religion, in any manner whatsoever, for the purpose of personal or political influence, or for even partially basing the fundamental, social, economic, political, and legal order of the state on religious tenets.

I. National Defence

A. Offices of Commander-in-Chief and Chief of the General Staff

ARTICLE 117. The Office of Commander-in-Chief is inseparable from the spiritual existence of the Turkish Grand National Assembly and is represented by the President of the Republic.

The Council of Ministers shall be responsible to the Turkish Grand National Assembly for national security and for the preparation of the Armed Forces for the defence of the country.

The Chief of the General Staff is the commander of the Armed Forces, and, in time of war exercises the duties of Commander-in-Chief on behalf of the President of the Republic.

The Chief of the General Staff shall be appointed by the President of the Republic following the proposal of the Council of Ministers; his duties and powers shall be regulated by law. The Chief of the General Staff shall be responsible to the Prime Minister in the exercise of his duties and powers.

The functional relations and scope of jurisdiction of the Ministry of National Defence with regard to the Chief of the General Staff and the Commanders of the Armed Forces shall be regulated by law.

Well, some things are there, others are not. I couldn't find anywhere that the armed forces have a fundamental duty to uphold the constitution, other than the general forbidding of changing the secular spirit. Maybe someone else can find more.

[psi29a]

I like that last part of Article 24:

No one shall be allowed to exploit or abuse religion or religious feelings, or things held sacred by religion, in any manner whatsoever, for the purpose of personal or political influence, or for even partially basing the fundamental, social, economic, political, and legal order of the state on religious tenets.

If your military is to uphold the constitution, this would be the reason.

[Shaka Zulu]

If you read a little of modern Turkish history (I know of it in general terms, meaning not so knowledgable)...the military's role in it is ANYTHING but positive. Kemal Ataturk, regardless of what a great nation builder he was to them, made everything redundant by not trusting the political machinery and not giving power to his party or democracy, but basically giving most of the power to the military. They have since then overthrown goverments at their leisure, and slaughtered people who has demonstrated. His move right there was pretty fatal to the democratic growth of turkey, and the effects are still there.



I applaude the will to keep to their secularism, that is a big part of Turkish history because Ottoman empire was arguably the first secular state, but the military's general role is anything but positive or democratic. They have more restraint then in their dictorial past, but nevertheless the have WAY to much power, and has had so since Ataturk.


To clarify, I am not speaking in this case specifically (havent read into it more then a couple of articles), more of general turkish history (mentionning it to give some insight to what this can be seen as, meaning another coup...). Hearing the military making threats isnt associated to anything positive or noble in my book (even if some of you like to think so considering this "threat they are facing, Turkey should be secularist state, but the secularist has pretty much oppressed and shackled the overly religious group, fueling sentiments like todays), because I consider their track record in modern Turkey. And its nothing but undemocratic to put it mildly.

Sorry if I sound overly sceptic, and there are prolly noble Generals just protecting their state, but I would be afraid if I was a turk, and the military made a statement like that. Not because it means immediate danger, but that the possibility that they may use secularism as another excuse to wield power is allways there. And cant be excluded considering how they have ousted govts at will and elected in those favourable to them. As said, a very bad move of Ataturk....

[MrFelony]

would you think that the current move by the military is influenced more by a desire to remain secular, or more by a desire to remain in power?

[Shaka Zulu]

Mostly the former. But also both.

That they do this, or even can think of doing it...shows how they have too much power. They are prolly mostly saying it to protect secularism, even though also about maintaining power (the military echelon is more or less all atheists so to speak, so in essence its not only the interests of the state but also theirs). But them making statement like this also shows how undemocratic the country is to the core despite all of the progress it has made in its history.

Turkey is a country who can take care of itself and grow no matter what, but as I said earlier, after Atataturk, the military got most of the power, even if it was indirectly mostly (hence meaning it didnt need to be a military regime, but the parties and govts reformed themselves to the interests of the military because of the power the wielded).

And this statement is just another sign of that (showcasing the might of their past, regardless of how much they let govts run it, they can oust if they want to...), no matter how small or insignificant it may be compared to the past. Its good to uphold the secular state, but the fact that its not done another way, and the military threatening action is seen as nothing shocking, shows how undemocratic and unbalanced the state is no matter what. They may not rule, but aslong as they have the power and mandate enough to oust govertments as they did it in the past, then no real democracy can thrive, when that threat is allways there.


A showcase of military might in the running of the state....is NEVER good in my view. Even if the threat may justify it (the state should stay secularist no matter what). But even that is exaggerated, considering its not an immediate threat. Yes islamist want more power and are growing. But not to the point of it becoming undemocratic or them being just another factor or player in the political scheme. Even if you're a zealot, its still taboo to talk too much of religion in politics.

I dont want to defend the few extremist who would want to make a saudi kinda state, but know this regarding the past and current of modern Turkey...What Kemal Atataturk did when he took power, and has happen since...is nothing but oppressing and persecuting most devout religious groups. The common man practicing islam is ok, but any sect or wanting to have islam being a bigger part in your life has been completely been banned in the past

Wether its as serious as killing or jailing religious groups, not allowing mosques to be build...or simply refusing university students or state employers to wear the hijab (the women covering their hair), its all been more or less banning any sign of religion. Secular means respecting everyones religion, and its noble and my kind of govt (hence why I root for the demonstraters who call for it to remain...but the history of what made these religious groups cry for influence now needs to be understood). But thats far from what the turkish state has been doing (indirectly or directly run by the military), and hence this kind of present voice for extremism is fuled by those past actions. Instead of respecting ones right for religion...They have taken it to the extreme and done the opposite of heavily resctricting or banning it.

Now I will quit because I sound too paranoid and bringing up irrelevant things, but it hopefully this silly rambling will give you some understanding to the background of it all. I'm not religious, and I would take a secular state over islamist one...but Turkeys secular kind hasnt mostly been the good secularist kind...it has more similarity to the Syrian or Saddams Iraq kinda secularism (but ofcourse still has alot of good in it, and not psychotic like these two). Meaning instead of respecting everyones religion...its more or less banning it to a certain degree. Hence creating the kind of frustration that may fuel people to become more islamists.