On the one hand, it's nice that they're so dedicated to the separation of church and state, given Turkish history. There hasn't been any (directly related) violence yet reported, as far as I know.
On the other hand, the implicit threats of a military coup are frightening, as is the blatant nationalism. But it is Turkey, so that's to be expected.
It does seem certain, however, that any hopes of EU membership for Turkey have been indefinitely dashed.
Anatolia is in an odd spot right now...
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage stumbled drunkenly to the keyboard and typed:
Uh, constitutionally, it's the military's job to take over in case the government does something extreme. It can hardly be considered a coup when it's actually a constitutional process.
That seems rather subjective, though.
Of course, it is objective fact that the Turkish constitution provides for the military to intervene politically in order to protect the interests of Turkey's ideals. The legitimacy of the Turkish National Security Council seems pretty contentious, even if most accounts (like, say, this one or this one) note that the military is unusually popular amongst the Turkish civilian demographic (or at least more publicly respected than, say, the U.S. or U.K. military).
My point is not to condemn the Turkish military- they obviously haven't actually done anything in response to this recent strife. It's just that the Republic of Turkey has averaged a coup a decade since 1960- with military intervention in that year, 1971, 1980, and 1997. Again, it's debatable whether these are pure "coups" or merely, as you've said, constitutional actions. Regardless of how these events are labeled in Turkey, they've certainly been referred to as coups elsewhere (here's one example).
I guess it all boils down to whether one deems it necessary for intervention to be illegal for said action to constitute a "coup".
It wasn't so much the military statement that led me to believe that the EU potential for Turkey had been tarnished- mostly, it was because of the fact that Abdullah Gul, the Muslim politician at the center of this dispute, was in fact pushing for EU admission more than any other Turk in power.
The struggle I intended to highlight wasn't really "military dictatorship vs. democracy", but more "secular modern values vs. Turkish tradition"; as beloved as Ataturk was, it seems as though his reforms still place Turkey as more Asian than European- especially considering the recent election of Sarkozy, and the current sway held by German Chancellor Merkel in the region. This, in combination with the recent riots seems to be pushing Turkey off the fence and into Asia.
Here are the 2004 numbers: http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2005-05-23-prestige-usat_x.htm Bloodsage fucked around with this message on 05-14-2007 at 05:09 AM.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
Here are the 2004 numbers: http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2005-05-23-prestige-usat_x.htm
[/QUO TE]You have a point there- and an interesting, informative article- though I would myself distinguish between support for military personnel and support for a military in general. In both Turkey and the U.S., individuals in service are highly respected, but in Turkey it seems as though the actual military, as both an organization complete with policies and as an abstract concept complete with historical power are afforded the same sort of respect. By this, I suppose I'm implying this respect does not exist in the U.S.- and I'd say that in many cases it doesn't. Something like the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 garnered little critical response in Turkey, or in the Turkish areas of Cyprus- the equivalent of which has been unheard of in regards to recent U.S. military operations.
I mean not to say the U.S. military is hated or even mistrusted by a significant portion of the populace. More, I mean to highlight the fact that Turkey's civilian-military relationship is significantly different, enough so that actions which would normally constitute what many nations would consider a coup would instead be welcomed as constitutionally necessary and responsible.
