Turkey’s political landscape has been shaped significantly by the military, an institution that has played an instrumental role in the country’s governance since its foundation as a modern republic in 1923. The Turkish military has historically been seen as the guardian of secularism and the ideals of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Republic of Turkey. However, its involvement in politics has been both controversial and transformative, influencing Turkey’s political trajectory in profound ways. This evaluation critically examines the role of the Turkish military in politics, focusing on its interventions, the evolving civil-military relations, and the implications for democracy and governance in Turkey.
Historical Context and Military Interventions
The Turkish military’s involvement in politics is deeply rooted in the history of the Republic of Turkey. The military has carried out three major coups in 1960, 1971, and 1980, and intervened indirectly through a “soft coup” in 1997. These interventions were justified by the military as necessary to preserve the secular and unitary nature of the Turkish state, protect national unity, and maintain stability. Each coup had significant ramifications for Turkish politics and society.
1960 Coup
The first coup in 1960 was carried out against the Democrat Party (DP) government led by Prime Minister Adnan Menderes, who was accused of steering the country away from Atatürk’s secular ideals and towards authoritarianism. The military justified the coup as a means to restore democracy and prevent civil conflict. However, the subsequent military junta led to the execution of Menderes and several senior officials, demonstrating the military’s willingness to use extreme measures to assert its authority.
1971 Coup
Known as the “Coup by Memorandum,” the 1971 intervention did not involve direct military rule but rather forced the resignation of the government by issuing a memorandum. This intervention was aimed at curbing political instability and curtailing the rise of leftist movements. The military’s actions led to a crackdown on political dissent and the suspension of democratic norms.
1980 Coup
The 1980 coup was the most severe intervention by the military, resulting in the dissolution of political parties, the suspension of the constitution, and widespread arrests of political activists. The military established a National Security Council that effectively governed the country until 1983. The coup was justified on the grounds of restoring order amid political violence and economic crisis, but it also had long-lasting effects on civil liberties and democratic institutions.
1997 "Soft Coup"
In 1997, the military issued a series of recommendations that led to the resignation of the Islamist-led government of Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan. This intervention, known as the “postmodern coup,” did not involve overt military rule but rather exerted pressure through the National Security Council and other institutions. The military’s actions were seen as an effort to protect secularism from perceived threats posed by political Islam.
Evolving Civil-Military Relations
The Turkish military’s interventions in politics have had a complex impact on civil-military relations in Turkey. On one hand, the military has been perceived as a stabilizing force that intervened during periods of political crisis. On the other hand, repeated military coups and interventions have undermined democratic processes and established a pattern of military dominance over civilian authorities.
Since the early 2000s, however, civil-military relations in Turkey have undergone significant changes. The rise of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan marked a turning point in reducing the military’s direct influence over politics. Several factors contributed to this shift:
EU Accession Process
Turkey’s bid for European Union membership played a crucial role in redefining civil-military relations. The EU emphasized the importance of democratic norms and civilian control over the military as part of the accession criteria. Consequently, the Turkish government implemented several reforms aimed at curbing the military’s autonomy, reducing the powers of the National Security Council, and increasing civilian oversight.
Ergenekon and Sledgehammer Trials
The AKP government pursued legal action against military officers allegedly involved in plotting coups against the government. The Ergenekon and Sledgehammer trials, although controversial and criticized for their fairness, led to the imprisonment of numerous military officers and further weakened the military’s political influence.
Failed Coup of 2016
The failed coup attempt on July 15, 2016, marked a critical juncture in civil-military relations. The government accused elements within the military, allegedly affiliated with the Gülen movement, of orchestrating the coup. In response, the government purged thousands of military personnel and undertook extensive measures to restructure the military, placing it more firmly under civilian control. The coup attempt also served to rally public support around the civilian government, further delegitimizing military interventions.
Implications for Democracy and Governance
The evolving role of the military in Turkish politics has had significant implications for democracy and governance in the country. While the military’s historical role as a guardian of secularism and stability was initially seen as necessary by some segments of Turkish society, it has also been a source of democratic deficits and political instability.
Democratic Deficits
The military’s repeated interventions in politics have weakened democratic institutions and undermined civilian governance. The coups and subsequent military rule disrupted political processes, curtailed civil liberties, and created an environment of fear and repression. Even after the return to civilian rule, the military maintained significant influence over political decisions, especially through the National Security Council.
Polarization and Political Instability
The evolving role of the military in Turkish politics has had significant implications for democracy and governance in the country. While the military’s historical role as a guardian of seculMilitary interventions have contributed to political polarization and instability in Turkey. Each coup exacerbated divisions within society, particularly between secular and religious groups. The military’s actions often targeted political parties and movements that were perceived as threats to the secular order, leading to cycles of repression and resistance.arism and stability was initially seen as necessary by some segments of Turkish society, it has also been a source of democratic deficits and political instability.
Civilian Control and Authoritarianism
The reduction of military influence over politics in recent years has been a double-edged sword. While it has strengthened civilian control, it has also coincided with the rise of more authoritarian governance under Erdoğan and the AKP. Critics argue that the weakening of the military has been accompanied by increased centralization of power, erosion of democratic norms, and curtailment of press freedom and political opposition.
Conclusion
The role of the military in Turkish politics has been both influential and contentious. While the military has historically acted as a guardian of the secular state and national stability, its interventions have often undermined democratic governance and exacerbated political polarization. The evolution of civil-military relations in Turkey, particularly since the rise of the AKP and the failed 2016 coup, reflects a shift towards greater civilian control. However, this shift has also raised concerns about the erosion of democratic norms and the rise of authoritarianism. The challenge for Turkey moving forward is to consolidate democracy, ensure civilian oversight of the military, and foster a political culture that prioritizes democratic governance and respect for civil liberties.