Should the act of some of the new graduates of the Army War Academy swishing their swords and taking an additional oath after the official ceremony be considered as the resurgence of a ‘coup-minded’ mentality within the military?
Turkey is a country where the military has a habit of intervening in politics; among those who were part of the National Unity Committee after the May 27, 1960 coup, there were also low-ranking officers.
Memories of the coup record that the initial plans were made by junior officers.
So, what now?
There are those who, looking at the recent event, sense a whiff of ‘coup-ism’ from the alternative oath ceremony and especially from the slogan “We are Mustafa Kemal’s soldiers.”
Writers who support the ruling AK Party are among those making this claim.
The MHP (Nationalist Movement Party) initially gave the impression that they saw the event as an innocent gesture.
The statement by Deputy Chairman İsmail Özdemir, saying “These young people are not only defenders of Turkey’s existential struggle but also the honorable future of our global ideals under their uniforms. We fully trust them,” is along these lines.
Later, with the prompting of Devlet Bahçeli, the MHP began questioning the intentions of the graduates.
The CHP (Republican People’s Party), from the beginning, embraced the event. The “We are Mustafa Kemal’s soldiers” slogan pleased the CHP members.
As for the AK Party, they are approaching the situation cautiously. On one hand, through the words of party spokesperson Ömer Çelik, they are saying, “If there is indiscipline, it will be addressed,” while on the other hand, they are strongly opposing the interpretations that the young officers are sending them a message.
Looking at this picture, I too am surprised.
I am surprised because I find it difficult to understand the emergence of such an event and the subsequent discussions.
I am especially surprised from the perspective of the new graduates.
There is no significant difference between the official oath they first took and the subsequent alternative oath. The slogan “We are Atatürk’s soldiers” shouted by members of the TSK, young and old, wearing Atatürk badges on their chests, seems meaningless to me…
It is impossible that young people who have received education at that level did not consider how their alternative oath ceremony and slogans could be interpreted.
Despite the Ministry’s statement that “no investigation has been opened,” it is expected that the Turkish Armed Forces will address the issue, if for no other reason, because it could be perceived as ‘indiscipline.’
These young soldiers may get into trouble at the very beginning of their careers.
I wonder why they did it?
According to an indirect explanation of the question, their intention was to announce the incorrectness of the label attached to the political views of students entering military schools after being placed under civilian control…
The label that officers being trained are AK Party sympathizers…
The label that they are members of religious sects and orders…
The label that officers trained are disrespectful towards Atatürk…
The young officers wanted to announce the incorrectness of these labels with this event…
This is the indirect explanation.
Was the purpose of this event to appease those who put these labels and announce that their fears are unfounded, or was it to show the government that their efforts had been in vain?
Judging by the CHP’s attitude, it seems they liked the event.
However, even if they enjoyed it, especially the new administration of the CHP, they should have kept their feelings to themselves because it could remind everybody of the formula ‘CHP+army=government’ that always comes up in assessments of the CHP’s past.
Even if they don’t express it outwardly, it seems the two sides of the government – AK Party and MHP – agree that the post-ceremony images carry a form of challenge…
However, the AK Party should have been relieved to show the incorrectness of the criticism directed at them, “The army is being left in the hands of religious sects.” Isn’t everything that eases their partner’s concerns the preference of the MHP?
Here is the political aspect of the event that surprises me the most:
The CHP’s love for the military can resurface at any moment, which can hinder their search for new voters; but Özgür Özer and his friends are either unaware of this or don’t care…
The most important feature of the MHP as a party is its internal discipline and its cadre’s loyalty to the leader, but this event has led to the first serious disagreement within the MHP.
As for the AK Party, they are uncomfortable with the word ‘coup’ being reintroduced into circulation with this event and want the discussion to end as soon as possible. Even at the cost of leaving their supportive writers and commentators, who are only evaluating the event from a ‘coup’ perspective, isolated…
Looking at this picture, I too am left in amazement…
How fragile is the political ground in our country, astonishing…
ΩΩΩΩ
[The translation of the article is by ChatGPT with some minor modifications.]
