What is the army's mission? Being prepared to defend the country, protecting the country against attacks by enemy armies, possessing the necessary equipment, human resources, preparedness and the power of deterrence to do this.
Our army still delivers the "domestic politics" message. If the country is surrounded by enemies, if there are important developments going on in the Caucasus; if Iraq is still a threat; if there is serious tension between Iran and Syria and the West; if terror is still influential, then what needs to be done is not to criticize "postmodernism." Let the academics and writers do this.
It is our right to expect a speech from Land Forces Commander Gen. Işık Koşaner in the handover ceremony that would reference the country's preparedness, readiness, capacity, ability, and strength vis-à-vis the threats and dangers emerging in Turkey's near surroundings and deter enemies, instead of a speech on postmodernism and globalization. The army needs to go back to its actual mission right away, especially at this time when the security problems surrounding us have become more imminent.
Gen. Koşaner spoke as if he was a political leader -- and not a military commander. Let us review the thesis: "Nation-states are subjected to dissolution in the name of democracy and human rights." He suggests that democracy destroys nation-states while human rights divide them. The reality is just the opposite of this argument. Both democracy and human rights fortify the state. Nation-states that fail to embrace democracy and protect human rights are disappearing because when these noble values are absent, the legitimacy of the state becomes questionable; even the most repressive administrations have to submit to the demands for freedoms and rights.
Another argument is that the EU harmonization laws made the security forces' job in their combat against terrorism harder. Let us ask this question: When were the EU laws adopted at Parliament? In February 2002. If the harmonization laws made the security forces ineffective, why did the army fail to eliminate the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) terror in the absence of these laws before 2002? It is necessary to think about this question and avoid blaming the "liberties" for this failure.
The commander's description of the reforms introduced for EU membership as "impositions" and his attempt to present the EU criteria as "pressure and threat" shows that there are serious problems. Most importantly, this implies that the army is outside the institutional and social consensus on EU membership.
Civil society activities cannot be described as "security issues with destructive impact" by the army in a democratic country. The image of a civil society whose international affiliation is seen as dangerous is the extension of a vision of a Turkey that has closed its doors to the outside world. All individuals and institutions with connections abroad are seen as dangerous. This approach -- held by a commander of a country that has been a NATO member for over five decades -- to globalization and "the outside world" should be considered a reflection of the army's nationalist reflex since the end of the Cold War. We have frequently heard the statement, "The army is the pioneer of modernization in Turkey." But the army as described by the mentality in that speech seems to have embraced an anti-modernist stance.
Gen. Koşaner holds that the media, academics, capital circles, and civil society organizations, as "a postmodern layer" that has been "designed by the global forces," work tirelessly to "undermine and dissolve national unity, national value and security parameters" relying on their "web of propaganda and influence." What would those who hold such grave misunderstandings do? They would keep records on media, academia, capital holders and civil society actors and stage a psychological war against them.
The speech by Gen. Koşaner is a political manifesto that opposes the EU, democracy, human rights, market economy, and globalization, and it has nothing to do with the army. Those who are eager to be involved in politics should take the uniform off, take part in political activities or grab a pen to participate in the discussions. Nobody should ever promote their political agenda on behalf of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK).
31.08.2008
Our army still delivers the "domestic politics" message. If the country is surrounded by enemies, if there are important developments going on in the Caucasus; if Iraq is still a threat; if there is serious tension between Iran and Syria and the West; if terror is still influential, then what needs to be done is not to criticize "postmodernism." Let the academics and writers do this.
It is our right to expect a speech from Land Forces Commander Gen. Işık Koşaner in the handover ceremony that would reference the country's preparedness, readiness, capacity, ability, and strength vis-à-vis the threats and dangers emerging in Turkey's near surroundings and deter enemies, instead of a speech on postmodernism and globalization. The army needs to go back to its actual mission right away, especially at this time when the security problems surrounding us have become more imminent.
Gen. Koşaner spoke as if he was a political leader -- and not a military commander. Let us review the thesis: "Nation-states are subjected to dissolution in the name of democracy and human rights." He suggests that democracy destroys nation-states while human rights divide them. The reality is just the opposite of this argument. Both democracy and human rights fortify the state. Nation-states that fail to embrace democracy and protect human rights are disappearing because when these noble values are absent, the legitimacy of the state becomes questionable; even the most repressive administrations have to submit to the demands for freedoms and rights.
Another argument is that the EU harmonization laws made the security forces' job in their combat against terrorism harder. Let us ask this question: When were the EU laws adopted at Parliament? In February 2002. If the harmonization laws made the security forces ineffective, why did the army fail to eliminate the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) terror in the absence of these laws before 2002? It is necessary to think about this question and avoid blaming the "liberties" for this failure.
The commander's description of the reforms introduced for EU membership as "impositions" and his attempt to present the EU criteria as "pressure and threat" shows that there are serious problems. Most importantly, this implies that the army is outside the institutional and social consensus on EU membership.
Civil society activities cannot be described as "security issues with destructive impact" by the army in a democratic country. The image of a civil society whose international affiliation is seen as dangerous is the extension of a vision of a Turkey that has closed its doors to the outside world. All individuals and institutions with connections abroad are seen as dangerous. This approach -- held by a commander of a country that has been a NATO member for over five decades -- to globalization and "the outside world" should be considered a reflection of the army's nationalist reflex since the end of the Cold War. We have frequently heard the statement, "The army is the pioneer of modernization in Turkey." But the army as described by the mentality in that speech seems to have embraced an anti-modernist stance.
Gen. Koşaner holds that the media, academics, capital circles, and civil society organizations, as "a postmodern layer" that has been "designed by the global forces," work tirelessly to "undermine and dissolve national unity, national value and security parameters" relying on their "web of propaganda and influence." What would those who hold such grave misunderstandings do? They would keep records on media, academia, capital holders and civil society actors and stage a psychological war against them.
The speech by Gen. Koşaner is a political manifesto that opposes the EU, democracy, human rights, market economy, and globalization, and it has nothing to do with the army. Those who are eager to be involved in politics should take the uniform off, take part in political activities or grab a pen to participate in the discussions. Nobody should ever promote their political agenda on behalf of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK).
31.08.2008
No comments:
Post a Comment