21-22 NOVEMBER 2009, Istanbul

Larespark Hotel
Topcu Caddesi No:23
34437 Taksim - ISTANBUL

In the state tradition of Turkey, the army has a dominant position. The military do not limit the definition of their duty to the security of the country and have always been one of the most important actors to shape the political, social and economic life of the country. Ever since the foundation of the republic, the military have tried to drive and shape all spheres of life whether in direct or roundabout fashion. The army has become institutionalised through its central role in the nation-state structure and has been presented as the epitome of the modern Republic of Turkey on the basis of what it represents.

In the context of the EU, the military-civilian relationship has to be examined over and over again from the viewpoint of democratisation, the development of civil society, and civilian domination of politics, and repositioned within a new framework.

The topics to be debated in this context are the following:

The Role of the Military in the Political System of the Republic of Turkey – The National Security Council (MGK)
It is crystal clear that, since the foundation of the republic, the army has been trying to regulate, drive, and guide politics, whether directly or indirectly. The strongest form that the intervention of the military in the social and political spheres takes is the grabbing of political power through a coup d’Etat. The army has so far staged four putsches and has repeatedly caused disruptions in the democratic political life of Turkey. Having acted as the absolute rulers of the country in the post-coup periods, the army then continued its tutelage over the system through institutions such as the National Security Council (MGK in its Turkish acronym). The National Security Council was instituted under the 1961 constitution and has to this day continued to intervene in politics, despite the changes effected in the reform process. The e-pronunciamiento posted on the web site of the General Staff was the clearest and obvious instance of this. At the same time, the “press information meetings” aim to manipulate public opinion.

The Supreme Military Council (YAŞ)
With its decisions exempted from judicial review, the Supreme Military Council (YAŞ in its Turkish acronym) is a mechanism that increases the power of the military within the system. Meeting in camera, Supreme Military Council meetings do not merely make decisions on cases of retirement, promotion and expulsion at the military command level. They also pronounce an opinion on draft laws, statutes and regulations. Before and after each Supreme Military Council meeting, the public fixes its attention on what the Chief of the General Staff will declare to the press and tries to deduce from such declarations the attitude of the army regarding current political questions. Because of this attribute, the Supreme Military Council becomes an instrument of intervention of the army in the civilian sphere by consolidating the institutional and political autonomy of the army and by complementing the duty of the army regarding the duty of protection and care it has with regard to the regime.

The Distinction between the Civilian and Military Court Systems
Another mechanism in Turkey’s established order that creates prerogatives for the military is the distinction between civilian and military courts. The basic function of military courts, which gained constitutional status in the aftermath of the 1960 coup d’Etat and maintained this status after the 1980 coup, is to protect the autonomous and superior position of the army within the system. The effectiveness and the institutionalisation of the intervention of the army for the purpose of maintaining its privileged position within the system is predicated upon the exemption of this intervention from the review of civilian courts. What provides the army this possibility is the existence of military courts with quite extensive powers. A reform package has been prepared in the sphere of military and civilian courts within the context of the European Union harmonisation process.

The Defence Budget
Article 160 of the Constitution stipulates that “the High Court of Audits shall have the duty of auditing on behalf of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey all the revenues and expenses of, as well as property belonging to, public organisations and institutions of social security that come within the compass of the budget of the central administration, of reaching a definitive assessment on all the accounts and transactions of those in charge, and of conducting work attributed to it by laws regarding examination, auditing and reaching definitive assessment of relevant accounts”. However, as the progress report issued by the European Commission in 2008 points out, notwithstanding this clear provision, “no progress has been achieved toward the enhancement of the control of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey over the military budget and expenditure”. The transparency and accountability of the state is a democratic demand. Although the share allocated to the military amounts to one half of the entire annual budget of the Republic of Turkey, the Grand National Assembly of Turkey cannot fulfil its duty of controlling military expenditures and expenditures relating to domestic security and thus how the army spends its funds is a mystery.

The Mutual Assistance Agency of the Army (OYAK)
The army also wields great economic power in Turkey, thanks to the income generated by and the spheres of activity of OYAK (the mutual assistance agency of the army), one of the major holding companies of the country. Already powerful in the political and social spheres, the army thus consolidates its might through its influence and authority in the economic sphere. Hence, there arises a concern to separate the civilian and military spheres, in particular regarding the military industrial complex. OYAK has long become an economic power rather than being an organisation for mutual assistance.

Ergenekon, the Deep State
Recently, investigation and court proceedings have been conducted on formations that work to reorient the state and civilian politics, unofficial organisations within and outside the army, sometimes labelled the “deep state”. It is becoming clear that these unofficial formations work hand in hand with certain organisations posing as non-governmental organisations that are in effect controlled by the former and try to lead the public in certain directions and with certain persons and groups employed in various public bodies and organisations, working towards shaping social processes according to their own views.

On the basis of the mission it has appropriated for itself and the large room for manoeuvre it wields, the military have positioned themselves in the very centre of the history of Turkey and the institutionalisation and the structure of and the values represented by the military have been attributed inviolability. This central position of the army creates significant problems for the democratisation and development of Turkey and its attempt to overcome obstacles.  The army’s attitude is the major factor that has created a status quo that is resistant to change in particular in such areas as the Kurdish question, the Cyprus question, the tension between the religious and the secular etc., all questions that have been awaiting resolution for a very long time.

The European Union
The initiation of negotiations toward Turkey’s accession to the European Union has led to the questioning of this powerful position of the military and to preparations of reforms in this area, since the effective intervention and power of the forces of security in the public and even private domain, manifested in its most extensive and mature form in the intervention of the army in politics, blocks Turkey’s process of harmonisation with the European Union. For this reason, parallel to EU negotiations, it has become imperative that the present civilian-military relations be reconsidered and repositioned within the context of democratisation and what in Turkey is called “transformation into a civilian regime”.

The fact that, despite its manifold direct and indirect interventions, the army should turn out, throughout a series of public opinion polls, to be regarded as the most trustworthy institution that protects democracy and Turkey stands before us as a paradoxical situation.

During the conference, the Policy Report on Security Sector Reform, prepared on the basis of the problems identified in the Almanac Turkey 2006-2008: the Security Sector and Democratic Control issued by TESEV will be publicised and discussed. The report, prepared by the editors of the Almanac, Ali Bayramoğlu, Ahmet İnsel, and Hale Akay, aims to discuss possible solutions to the problems regarding the security sector put forth in the Almanac and be of guidance for reform policies to be implemented in the security sector.

At the conference on 21-22 November 2009, organised by the Representation for Turkey of the Heinrich Böll Stiftung, we wish to dissect the relation and the control of the sphere of defence and security, above all the army, with politics, together with experts from Turkey and from abroad, thus bringing on the agenda one of the most important questions of democratisation and contributing to the generation of ideas on the required reforms and changes.

Please click here for the conferance program: (PDF, 200KB)

Respectfully

The Heinrich Böll Stiftung Association, Turkey Representation