“A coup whose plotting was known beforehand, a coup not prevented, a coup whose consequences are abused for power is called a ‘controlled coup’. We demanded that all the measures against the putschists would be discussed in Parliament, but they did not… I do know, that there are many dark dimensions behind this coup attempt…”
These were the latest remarks by Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, the leader of the main opposition, CHP, in a TV interview. Now busy marching ‘for justice’, his inquisitive tone raises as the first anniversary of the coup attempt that turned Turkey upside down, approaches.
“Just until recently, I had thought that they didn’t know about the date set for the putsch. But there is a fresh finding I have, which I have had confirmed…”
This sensational statement came from Prof Ümit Özdağ, a prominent figure of the ultra-nationalist opposition, known to have ‘deep contacts’ within the Turkish state. In a most recent interview with the nationalist daily Sözcü – whose top editors were arrested lately – he went on to explain that in his new book he comes out with revelations about the puzzling coup attempt in Turkey last summer and clarified what he meant:
“I wrote that Erdoğan knew beforehand about the coup preparations and knew who was involved in it. Until most recently I had though that they didn’t know about the date. But there a data that I reached and had confirmed. This tells that they also knew the date and took measures. To me, it looks like he took a great risk…”
So, after nearly a year, we have a coup whose plot is as thick as ever.
Özdağ, who is a maverick in the ultra-nationalist MHP party, injects new allegations and if his finding is true, we have new data that brings us closer to the presumption that this was a coup that could be prevented without a bloodshed.
But we are still facing all those major questions.
These three key questions remain as puzzling as ever, for the Turks as well as across the world. Meanwhile, Turkey, a powerful NATO ally, is left with its vast repercussions, with a state apparatus in turmoil due to the purges; and an army with almost half of its top brass in jail, crippled in its combat capabilities.
A parliamentary commission set up by four parties was abruptly disbanded early this year shortly after President Erdoğan publicly called its members to ‘end the activity’, although he had no official authority to intervene. The writing of its report was, according to the opposition, done in secrecy; without any consultations. And when the draft report was made public some weeks ago, it was regarded widely as stillborn. Questions asked since the day after the uprising, remain the same.
Some would even say, they are more than before. It became clear when recently the opposition parties, which had objected to the report, each published their bulky dissenting opinion. Theirs makes a chilling read, raising strong suspicion of a massive cover up.
The MHP, smallest opposition party, for example, stated that it had asked two key figures – prime witnesses – of the coup attempt, namely the Chief of Staff Hulusi Akar and Director the Secret Service, Hakan Fidan, to be called to testify. ‘The chairman (of the commission) assured that our demand is met. But we have learned via his TV statement after the publication of the report hat he had not even bothered to write to them. Thus, the night of the coup is left entirely in the dark’ it said.
The minority report of the secular main opposition party, CHP, was far more dramatic. 307 page-long, it argues the point after point that Turkey was subjected to what it calls a ‘controlled coup’; that there were some among top Turkish authorities who knew about the coup plans. ”“The treacherous and bloody coup attempt was an unexpected, shocking and appalling development for the innocent citizens of the country. However, there were some who knew that (it) would take place and those who waited for it,” said the report.
Akar and Fidan had that day had met alone for 6.5 hours on the afternoon of July 14, when it became known at 2.20 p.m. that ‘there was a serious threat’, the report underlined, and asked: ”Chief of Staff had sent orders to all the wings at 6.29 p.m. which reached them 7.26 p.m. Yet many commanders attended weddings, to be arrested then. This remains inexplicable.”
The third largest party, pro-Kurdish HDP, calling the coup attempt ‘a pretext for a counter-coup’, questions further why these two top figures failed to inform the president, prime minister and the relevant ministers in due time.W
While the three minority reports unite in claims that what happened on July 15 last year amounted to a ‘hijack’ of the system, by way of a hastily declared state of emergency, there was more to add to the questions.
Speaking to Vocal Europe, a Brussels website operating as a public newsletter service to EU circles, five senior Turkish officers who all defected to NATO countries, gave new details on what may have taken place. that night.
“Frankly, the coup was shocking for all of us, as we never expected it,” said, one officer:
“…most of those arrested we know would have never thought of organizing a coup against the country’s political authority. It should be said as well that there was a massive resentment among the public and the armed forces against President Erdogan due to the failing of the Kurdish peace process and particularly due to the developments that happened afterward. Those purged generals and officers had liberal visions to solve long-awaited Kurdish issue, they believed in democratic ways for solving this issue rather than using military might.”
“Two weeks before the coup, some social media accounts that are now gone were referring to a coup in making. It is very clear that the coup was not known to us but it was certainly known to President Erdogan’s close circles” said the other.
Officers asked if the coup trials were so important, why they were not broadcast to the nation. “President Erdogan does not want the realities of the 15 July to come up to the surface, and to be acknowledged by the public opinion,” said the third officer.
Overall, they were concerned of what they see as dismantling of a key institution, to be infiltrated by Islamists, and warned that ”…if the current setting will continue, we think that NATO will have, in two or four years, a member Army full of extremists and Salafists.”
Such additional data, published by the opposition and fugitive officers are certainly useful in the broader context. Yet, what we know at the time being is scarce; all the input strengthens the views that it was an uprising which involved Gülenists as well as pro-NATO flanks: That the forces who pushed the button to remain yet in the dark and, evidence is deeper that the coup attempt was foreseen, with counter-measures ready at hand.
Özdağ was the last man in line to add to the debate.
Yavuz Baydar has been an award-winning Turkish journalist. In December 2013, Baydar co-founded the independent media platform, P24, Punto24, to monitor the media sector of Turkey, as well as organizing surveys, and training workshops. Baydar wrote opinion columns, in Turkish, liberal daily Ozgur Dusunce and news site Haberdar, and in English, daily Today’s Zaman, on domestic and foreign policy issues related to Turkey, and media matters, until all had to cease publications due to growing political oppression. Currently, he writes regular chronicles for Die Süddeutsche Zeitung, and opinion columns for the Arab Weekly, as well as analysis for Index on Censorship. Baydar blogs with the Huffington Post, sharing his his analysis and views on Turkish politics, the Middle East, Balkans, Europe, U.S-Turkish relations, human rights, free speech, press freedom, history, etc. He won the Umbria Journalism Award in March 2014 and Caravella/Mare Nostrum Prize in 2015; both in Italy. Baydar completed an extensive research on self-censorship, corruption in media, and growing threats over journalism in Turkey as a Shorenstein Fellow at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.
