Recipe for Turkey to escape culture of excessive security

The formula for Turkey to escape its culture of excessive security is alignment with the European practice of making the military accountable to Parliament via the Defense Ministry, according to a Netherlands-based think tank.

 “That’s the wording of the European Union: further alignment with the European practice,” said Peter Volten, director of the Center for European Security Studies, or CESS, as he gave an interview to the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review on the sidelines of an international security conference in Ankara.

“There is not a ‘one size fits all’ model. French, Germans do it their way, and the Turks do it their way as well, but there are some basic understandings of separation of power and submission of the armed forces to political oversight,” he said.

“In European practice it differs very much, but we talk about an integrated ministry of defense, which means the general staff is part of the ministry and not separate. The chief of general staff reports the most important military advice to the defense minister, and the minister, as a member of the Cabinet, is answerable to Parliament,” said Volten.

In Turkey, the General Staff is run under the Prime Ministry, not the Defense Ministry.

“This happens in emergencies, in very rare situations in the U.K. but the normal procedure is that the Cabinet is answerable to parliament, no one else. If the [chief of staff] can also call upon the prime minister, that’s fine, but the prime minister’s office is not equipped as a whole ministry of defense. If it were, there would only be a PM’s office, not a defense ministry,” said Volten.

Another criterion for alignment with European practice is the military avoiding political declarations, according to the Dutch director, who stressed that military commanders do not make political statements in the EU.

“It would be impossible. He would be fired the next day if it happened in the Netherlands or Germany. [The chief of general staff] is not supposed to act as a, let’s say, spokesman of a political party,” he said.

The position of the Turkish military has changed over the last five to six years, according to Volten.

“Chief of Staff Gen. [İlker] Başbuğ’s speech last April was again a political speech but he showed awareness that the position of the military was not taken for granted as it was in the past. The electronic message in 2007 was something that made the Turkish population say, ‘Look, we don’t want this anymore,’ so Gen. Başbuğ understood that he had to return to the population. The military has come to the point that they also have to justify their position and views on defense and security. They are not being taken for granted anymore,” he said.

On April 27, 2007, the General Staff posted a statement on its Web site, often referred to as an e-coup or e-memorandum, which was interpreted as military interference in the presidential elections. The e-memorandum led to the snap elections in which the AKP emerged victorious.

‘History has a role’

While analyzing the role of the military, one should take into consideration the history and strategic culture of that country, according to Volten.

“If you have a history like France then the military is a revered institution respected by the population, like it is here,” he said. Asked about Turkey’s challenging geographical location, Volten said the emphasis on military strategic concerns because of the region should not be an excuse for not looking into other matters that must be solved.

“Of course Turkey is not the Netherlands. The location of Turkey is different from the Netherlands or Germany. We should take that into account, but that cannot be an excuse for not reforming. A volatile region should not be a reason to keep secrets,” he said.

At the conference, a question highlighted by security experts was the military’s failure to establish good relations with the civilian government in Turkey, whereas the success of the Turkish military in peace operations abroad relied on in its dialogue with the civilians.

Volten said the military had to accept that a democratically elected government is the ruling government.

“If one party is [in power] and if it is a party you don’t trust completely, well that doesn’t mean that you can say ‘I don’t trust that party’ and ignore the people who elected it,” he said.