The Ergenekon folk have legitimized their actions by utilizing a specific reading of the Turkish War of Independence and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Unfortunately, this specific reading of Kemalism fits squarely with the official version of Turkish history. If we cannot popularly challenge the official version of our history, the roots of Ergenekon terror can never be eliminated.According to the official version, while Turkey was under imperialist foreign occupation, the Turkish people and their leaders were not bright enough to tackle the occupation. If Atatürk had not emerged out of the blue, Turkey might be a divided and dependent country. This version overlooks the fact that while Atatürk was a great leader, the Independence War was the combined effort of many leaders, including several Ottoman ministers who helped the Anatolian resistance while they were working in British-occupied İstanbul.
The official version also belittles the heroic role of the first Turkish Parliament. In the official version, the assembly is a stumbling block to the visionary Atatürk, who seriously considered shutting it down three times. It is thus not surprising to see many Ergenekonians today who argue that republic is more important than democracy. In their view, the republic has an unidentified establishment philosophy, soldiers are primary interpreters and guardians of this philosophy and civilians cannot be trusted to protect this philosophy at a time when Western imperialists threaten Turkey's interests.
As it is deeply rooted in this Kemalist ideology, the undemocratic Ergenekon mentality is shared by at least 10 percent of the Turkish population. And this segment of society is generally from the upper strata of socioeconomic groups. They include many wealthy businessmen, media personalities, civil servants and, most importantly, soldiers.
It is a common cliché in Turkey to say that unlike the Europeans we have not made any sacrifices to get democracy; democracy came to Turkey without any bloodshed and without any grassroots demand. I do not agree with this cliché, but inspired by it I can say that democracy has never been studied, discussed, analyzed and debated by many segments of society. I do not expect this to be done by every single individual, but elites in the country should have dealt with this intellectual enterprise. Many of our elite are not sure if democracy is really the best method invented by humans to administer our countries. Some of them might still be thinking that İsmet İnönü chose to end the authoritarian one-party era by declaring that we would have a multiparty system and free elections just because under Stalin's threat we had to enter to the Western camp -- NATO, etc. -- and they would not accept an undemocratic Turkey. Under this understanding, as the Cold War is over and we are no longer under Soviet threat, we can go back to normal! Moreover, today's threat comes from the Westerners who eagerly want to divide and rule the country. So it is high time to cooperate with Russia, China and Iran, which are under authoritarian regimes. To enter their camp, we might even reverse what İnönü did in 1946.
Pro-Ergenekonians or Kemalists -- to use the old terminology -- never spend anytime wondering why almost a billion people, including many bright brains and intellectuals, living in the democratic and free world never complain about democracy if it is not the best option in the final analysis. I think, the government must do one little undemocratic thing and enforce compulsory democracy courses -- from elementary to advanced -- in schools, including the military ones. The course can start with the above sentence by questioning if Westerners are stupid and can continue with "What about the Turks?"
