Only victims have the right to forgive
Güncelleme Tarihi:
Oluşturulma Tarihi: Haziran 26, 2009 00:00
If one wants to grasp the unique nature of civil-military relations in Turkey, a good place to start might be the Museum of Military History in Istanbul. A recent exhibit featured the watercolors of retired officers.
It is hard for us to imagine the other military cultures with which Turkey is so often loosely associated Ğ those of Chile or Argentina or Iran Ğ producing an exhibit of officers’ pastoral paintings. Our point is not to paint the military in pastoral shades as well. There is much deserving of scrutiny in Turkey’s civil-military history and an accounting of all the allegations that dominate headlines today Ğ from the alleged Ergenekon conspiracy to the alleged "plan" to finish off the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP Ğ must be made. So, too, for the history of many brutal events following the 1980 coup and the anti-terror excesses in the southeast in the 1990s.
But unique circumstances demand unique responses. Turkey is a democratic republic that was founded by soldiers. No comparable example exists in the world. The Constitution drafted in the aftermath of the first coup of 1960 is still held up as the most democratic ever produced, sometimes even suggested as a model for the future.
The prosecution of political activists that followed the 1980 coup was in many respects reprehensible. Just one case is that of "Dev Yol," or "Revolutionary Path," the Marxist group whose members were among thousands arrested in those dark days. As we reported yesterday, that case remains incomplete after 30 years, in a legal netherworld. If forgiveness is in order, only the victims have the right to do so.
And now we have the military prosecutor exonerating itself of an alleged anti-AKP plot, effectively tossing the ball to civilian prosecutors. At the same time, the opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, has renewed calls to lift the immunity from prosecution of those officers who led the coup in 1980.
We reject the argument of some that Turkey’s military is the equivalent of America’s Supreme Court, one among several poles of authority that has a legitimate role to play in the balance of democratic power. But we have some sympathy for those who remind us of the power vacuum that existed before the 1980 coup, of quarrelling civilian leaders who did nothing as ideological violence reigned in the streets.
Against this unique backdrop, media-driven polemics around an amateurish four-page memo with no original copy will not move Turkish democracy forward. A show trial of aging officers will not reconcile a divided society.
Long-delayed constitutional reform might. An exercise modeled on South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission might. Quick resolution of cases like that of Dev Yol might.
Whatever might, it must be unique. Just like Turkey’s unique history of civil-military relations.
But unique circumstances demand unique responses. Turkey is a democratic republic that was founded by soldiers. No comparable example exists in the world. The Constitution drafted in the aftermath of the first coup of 1960 is still held up as the most democratic ever produced, sometimes even suggested as a model for the future.
The prosecution of political activists that followed the 1980 coup was in many respects reprehensible. Just one case is that of "Dev Yol," or "Revolutionary Path," the Marxist group whose members were among thousands arrested in those dark days. As we reported yesterday, that case remains incomplete after 30 years, in a legal netherworld. If forgiveness is in order, only the victims have the right to do so.
And now we have the military prosecutor exonerating itself of an alleged anti-AKP plot, effectively tossing the ball to civilian prosecutors. At the same time, the opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, has renewed calls to lift the immunity from prosecution of those officers who led the coup in 1980.
We reject the argument of some that Turkey’s military is the equivalent of America’s Supreme Court, one among several poles of authority that has a legitimate role to play in the balance of democratic power. But we have some sympathy for those who remind us of the power vacuum that existed before the 1980 coup, of quarrelling civilian leaders who did nothing as ideological violence reigned in the streets.
Against this unique backdrop, media-driven polemics around an amateurish four-page memo with no original copy will not move Turkish democracy forward. A show trial of aging officers will not reconcile a divided society.
Long-delayed constitutional reform might. An exercise modeled on South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission might. Quick resolution of cases like that of Dev Yol might.
Whatever might, it must be unique. Just like Turkey’s unique history of civil-military relations.