Kurdish editorial criticizes Turkish Army chief’s speech

Ozgur Politika web site, Neu-Isenburg
22 Apr 05

Text of report by German-based Kurdish newspaper Ozgur Politika web
site on 22 April

Turkish Chief of [General] Staff [Gen] Hilmi Ozkok has given a very
long speech at the War Academies. He has expressed his views regarding
the developments in the EU, the United States, the Far East and the
Middle East as well as the recent political developments. It is
possible to say that with his speech, Chief of Staff Ozkok aimed to
give or even succeeded in giving messages related to domestic and
international politics. When taking up the developments in the world
with the air of an elected political representative, he also
underlined – as a soldier – what constitutes a threat and what should
be done against such threats.

It is beneficial to know that such attitudes are normal where Turkey
is concerned. In other words, in Turkey it is normal for a soldier,
including the chief of staff, to assess the developments as if he were
an elected political representative, to take up the relations with the
neighbours, to underline that one of the neighbours should apologize
to Turkey, and to express views with regard to the constitution. We
are saying that it is normal because the state tradition in Turkey
shows that the last and the most influential word with regard to all
the developments and the things that should be done has always been
uttered and will be uttered by the soldiers.

The day before yesterday Ozkok merely carried out the requirements of
an existing tradition. He fulfilled the duty that should have been
fulfilled by the president or by the prime minister who heads the
government. And the press properly fulfilled the duty of effectively
reporting the messages that were issued to the domestic and
international public. Let no one doubt that the messages were
effectively transmitted to the EU, for which they were actually
intended.

Once again they refreshed the memories of the entire world and the EU
countries about who has a decisive say and who the authority to reach
decisions regarding crucial and critical processes in Turkey. The
intervention of the soldiers in political and social issues
constitutes one of the basic obstacles that the Turkish state, which
is a candidate for EU membership, should overcome en route to the
EU. With this speech, it has once again been clarified that the
soldiers continue to be decisive where political and social issues are
concerned.

The Turkish media used very clear expressions when featuring the
messages that were issued and the “viewpoint of the Turkish Armed
Forces”. [The chief of staff’s speech] was interpreted as “a speech
that referred to national issues without hiding anything – national
issues that the government and high-level politicians try to avoid
discussing, which they usually skip, or which they try to cover due to
the pressure or the expectations from the EU”. This interpretation
shows that we are very right in our assessments.

In addition to expressing his views with regard Greece, religion,
Armenia and Kirkuk [northern Iraq], the chief of staff felt the need
to emphasize that the United States does not show the necessary
sensitivity with regard to the PKK [Workers Party of Kurdistan] in
south Kurdistan [northern Iraq] and that therefore the PKK has become
the third force in this region. He added that in addition to becoming
the third force in the south, there has been an increase in the number
of the guerrillas who have passed to the north and that these
guerrillas aim to achieve their goal through politicization. In other
words, with this stand the chief of staff actually underlined that the
PKK should not have any place in south or in the north and that it
should not politicize. Furthermore he showed that he does not want to
present any alternatives other than insistence on annihilation and
attack.

Saying the last word with regard to international issues, the chief of
staff continues to assume a role that shows that he is the only
decisive force where domestic politics, social issues, the Kurdish
problem and democratization are concerned.

The chief of staff does not want to see that social violence and
social problems do not stem from migration, but that social, political
and economic problems have actually resulted in migration. And it is
time for the chief of staff to understand that the problems should no
longer be resolved through ignoring, denial and violence – in other
words, they should no longer be resolved through military methods. He
should understand that these problems should be resolved through
political methods.