Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Jan 30 2007
Gen. Yaşar Büyükanıt: The unlikely agent of change
by LALE SARIIBRAHIMOGLU
Turkey’s outspoken and hawkish Chief of General Staff Gen. Yaşar
Büyükanıt has long been uneasy over what he sees as indifference
by foreign diplomats to Turkish military deaths from the outlawed
Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) terrorist organization. The
assassination of Turkey’s leading Turkish-Armenian journalist, Hrant
Dink, early this month in Istanbul has reportedly prompted
Büyükanıt to lodge similar complaints to a group of ambassadors
from several countries who visited him recently.
It has become a customary practice for Gen. Büyükanıt to invite
people who seek individual appointments from him all at the same time
when his schedule is busy. In one of those meetings full of
ambassadors, Büyükanıt was again critical of some foreign
diplomats’ decision to attend Dink’s funeral but not that of the
soldiers.
It is worth mentioning here that Gen. Büyükanıt strongly
condemned Dink’s slaying and one of his top generals in İstanbul
was at the funeral, while a wreath was sent on behalf of the Turkish
Armed Forces. I mention this to the readers to prevent a possible
misunderstanding that the Turkish military was indifferent to Dink’s
slaying.
But whether we agree or not, the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have long
been uneasy over the absence of foreign diplomats at soldiers’
funerals and apparently seek from diplomats the same sensitivity that
they show to the slaying of the country’s intellectuals and
journalists.
Büyükanıt is keen on meeting with foreign diplomats to express
the military’s views on various foreign policy issues, unlike some of
his predecessors such as retired Gen. Hüseyin
Kıvrıkoğlu , who imposed a ban during his tenure on
such meetings. But during his time no major military reforms were
attempted to reduce the still-existing political power of the
military.
Nevertheless, while meeting with the foreign diplomats, Gen.
Büyükanıt, outspoken by nature, used this opportunity to express
military views on several foreign policy issues.
Here are some excerpts from comments made by Büyükanıt during
his meeting with the diplomats:
`I want the TSK to become smaller in size, but for this to happen we
need modern equipment. Our size is big and people find it difficult
to understand’*
`We won’t send more soldiers to Afghanistan. Turkey has done its bit
in Afghanistan, such as assuming ISAF command twice.’
`NATO needs to do more in Pakistan to solve the situation in
Afghanistan.’
`The damage has already been done in Iraq’s oil-rich Kirkuk, when
records and deeds were destroyed [by the Kurds] soon after the US
invasion of Iraq.’ Büyükanıt implies, for example, that Turkmens
cannot prove that they are from Kirkuk since property records were
destroyed.
`If the US leaves Iraq, the country will disintegrate. As part of
the disintegration, Sunnis and Shiites may decide to attack the
Kurds, who may end up massing on the Turkish border as they did
following the 1991 invasion of Iraq. If the US and other coalition
troops withdraw from Iraq, it would cause instability in the entire
Middle East.’
`The US should increase focus on other parts of Iraq for the
possible stability of the country.’
`Iraqi Kurds [the Kurdish regional government under the Iraqi
Constitution] should be more cooperative with Turkey, and that will
make Ankara more cooperative with them.’
If we put aside the fact that Turkish generals’ keenness to speak
about internal and external politics causes discontent among
foreigners and Turks alike, we have to accept that, paradoxically, it
should be someone like Büyükanıt, supported by both junior and
senior officers, who can teach the powerful military that they must
accept that political authority is higher than military authority if
democracy is to mature in Turkey. But for this to happen, we need
strong a political leadership with the courage to further democratic
reforms.
*I, as a journalist, have heard this argument of the military for
many years, but the main reason behind the military’s difficulty in
downsizing personnel of around 700,000 — most of whom are conscripts
— is political. Through a big army the military maintains its
political power. We all know that ending conscription is the way to
reduce its size.