TURKEY: TURKS OF TWO MINDS ON THE MILITARY'S

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 001071 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/07/2027 TAGS: PGOV PINR PREL TU SUBJECT: TURKEY: TURKS OF TWO MINDS ON THE MILITARY'S INTERVENTION REF: A. ANKARA 1070 ¶B. ANKARA 1056 AND PREVIOUS Classified By: Political Counselor Janice G. Weiner, for Reasons 1.4 (b ,d) ¶1. (C) SUMMARY and COMMENT. Two main streams of thought assess the current political crisis in Turkey: one, that the ruling party's behavior compelled the military to take action; and two, that (even if the party's behavior or perceived agenda caused profound concerns) military intervention was not the appropriate course (septel). These views are not necessarily mutually exclusive. A certain amount of overlap exists among those who feel that the military's action was harmful to Turkey's democracy, but that the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) both paved the way with a series of problematic behaviors and pulled the cord by nominating FM Abdullah Gul -- a man whose pious approach to Islam (and early roots in more radical pro-Islam movements),many say, render him unable to truly represent all 72 million Turks. This debate underscores that democracy in Turkey continues to be hobbled, not just by the military's (and its allies') willingness to intervene, but by a public and political class still unable to assume responsibility for setting the terms of Turkish politics. END SUMMARY and COMMENT. "The military had to act" -------------- ¶2. (C) Secularism trumps democracy: this national priority feeds the idea that the military -- by virtue of AKP's incautious and subversive activities -- was compelled to intervene in politics. Many Turks reflect this view and argue that AKP rule was in itself anti-democratic. A department head at the Treasury, while appreciative of Turkey's economic gains under AKP, asked rhetorically whether an Islamist-controlled state that abused women's rights would really be democratic. Holders of this view point to: --the perceived democratic deficit of the ruling party's two-thirds majority in parliament, when "75 percent" (in reality, about 67 percent) did not vote in favor of AKP; --their perception of its bullying of the media; --AKP's failure to call early elections last fall and thus avoid the problem of an outgoing parliament attempting to elect a president; --AKP's failure to heed the General Yasar Buyukanit's April 12 warning and other signals; --AKP's refusal to seek a consensus presidential candidate; --the perceived creeping oppression of women through the increasingly pervasive headscarf ("turban"); and --the final insult of attempting to install the offending cover in the presidential palace (on the head of Abdullah Gul's wife, Hayrunnisa). ¶3. (C) While some contacts assured us earlier in the year that the headscarf in the presidential palace was a red herring, it has become the emotionally-charged symbol that some believe would take Turkey down the slippery slope to theocracy. This line of thought is apparent in the demonstrations in Ankara, Istanbul, Manisa, and elsewhere, where anti-AKP activists present the view that Turkey stands at the threshold of an Islamic revolution. The specter of Tehran-in-Ankara has become much more immediate in recent weeks, and makes clear the existential determination of AKP's opponents. ¶4. (C) Even politicians who consider themselves democrats argue that AKP brought this crisis on themselves; current ANAVATAN party leader and former minister in the AKP government Erkan Mumcu today stood in parliament and said just that. AKP may have been within its legal bounds, the argument goes, but it behaved provocatively in a system where ANKARA 00001071 002 OF 002 the military has always played a role: when you live with a tiger, don't pull its tail. Part of this implicit support for military intervention has to do with a combined fear and hope that the military can yet act more forcefully than conveying messages. For example, parliamentary advisor Kemal Kaya, who is considering a run with ANAVATAN, told us the military had acted very professionally and appropriately in the April 12 and April 27 verbal warnings. In a particularly extreme view, Nationalist Action Party (MHP) vice chairman Oktay Vural explained that AKP actually sought to create a crisis with the Constitutional Court, but did not foresee the e-memorandum. If AKP had acted more tactfully and not scared people, Vural said, we would not be where we are today. Visit Ankara's Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/ankara/ WILSON