This was first conceived as a comment on Magda's post, but at the moment I exceeded 150 words I realized that my comment could be expanded into a separate blog post. So here is the result.
Unfromal meeting of the NATO member's defense ministers, held two weeks ago in Istanbul, or a "scandal which is not a scandal" gave me an idea to try to bash an argument, that seems to be, wishful thinking of the NATO camp.
So, what argument I am talking about could be very well read from the headline, and for ilustration purposes I will use Turkey. There has been an ongoing effort, very hot and delicate mind you, to put the Turkish army under civil control, on which, most of all, insists EU. Here should be noted that Turkey has been a full member of NATO since 1952 and represents NATO's second largest army after U.S.
"Scandal that's not a scandal" was the quite apparent lack of presence of General Ilker Basbug, the Chief of the General Staff from the mentioned meeting in Istanbul. It is not a scandal because his presence was not mandatory and only nine chief commanders were present at the meeting. It is a scandal becasue it would be logical for host country's chief commander to be present. It is not a scandal because Turkish chief of general staff is never present at the meeting of NATO member's defense ministers, no matter where they are held. But why?
For a very simple reason. NATO's protocol is different from the Turkish protocol and Turkey just happened to be the host. By all sense and logic, the meeting was organized in accordance with the NATO protocol and traditionally, Turkish chiefs of general staff are not not exposing themselves to that "humiliation". For, according to the hierarchy of the NATO protocol, minister of defense comes before the chief of general staff and latter is supposed to look at minister's back. The hierarchy of the Turkish protocol implies that the Chief of General Staff is fifth most important figure in Turkey, after the President of the Republic, President of the Constitutional Court, President of the Parliament and the Prime Minister. Ministers come somwhere around tenth place after chiefs of parties, former presidents and several other juridical figures. Naturally, this is the protocol that is adopted during domestic ceremonies on which there are no foreign officials, but by and large this is the basic hierarchy in Turkey.
On the sessions of the NATO's Supreme Council only the Turkish Chief of General Staff is sitting next to "his" Defense Minister. It is an unequivocal sign that the Chief Commander is not subordionated to the Defense Minister and that they are at least equal. And so it goes for the last 58 years. . .
It could be very well argued that this is at least trivial and that this is just a mere exception. However, at least to me, this exception sends a message that NATO doesn't really care whether their member states' armies are de facto under civilian control, as long as the membership of a country (in this case Turkey) is contributing to NATO's interests.
For further information I recommend an article published by The Economist
http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15505946
No comments:
Post a Comment