Turkish Military in Trouble
The Turkish Armed Forces, and especially their leading generals, have had to deal with blistering attacks from newspapers, pundits and, of course, supporters of the PKK and of the Justice and Development Party in recent weeks. It seems that the army has a serious PR problem, with many voters believing that the army should dedicate a bit more time fighting the PKK and protecting the country’s borders, than interfering in domestic politics.
The Christian Science Monitor wrote a fairly decent article about it, albeit one that does not give room to any defenders of the military to voice their opinion. I remember the day that serious news outlets would let different people express different opinions. That time is no more.
But, overall a pretty decent article, if – that is – you want to know what critics of the army and the refusal of Turkey to talk to the PKK think.
One thing to keep in mind, and which the article does not mention (major error on the part of the CSM): the leading AK Parti (Justice and Development Party) is just about the main enemy of the army, because the latter represents the country’s strict secularism, and has defended it on quite some occasions in the past. The AKP, however, wants to break with Turkish secularism, and wants to mix religion and politics to a higher degree than currently allowed. The army has tried to prevent that in recent years, however, and AK Parti leaders knew that if they would go too far, they would face serious problems with the army, possibly a revolt.
So: the ones behind the current criticism of the army aren’t merely those who believe that the army failed to protect its own citizens and soldiers against Kurdish terrorists October 3. They are also those who simply needed an excuse to go after the army, and to try to destroy its image as protector of Turkey.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
