Mahir Zeynalov of Today's Zaman writes:
In his highly controversial article (Democracy in Turkey, February 11, 2011), Dani Rodrik attacks several Turkish newspapers, including my newspaper, Today’s Zaman, an English-language sister paper of Turkey’s best-selling Zaman daily, erroneously accusing it of deliberately misreporting on an ongoing trial of retired Turkish generals, one of whom is Rodrik’s very own father-in-law, Çetin Doğan.
Rodrik has a vested interest in the outcome of the trial and does not shy away from accusing, incorrectly, Today’s Zaman of being “a steady source of disinformation” on the Sledgehammer probe, which includes a number of plots to foment chaos in Turkey in 2003 in the hope that they would pave the way for a military coup, this one year after the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) won a landslide victory in general elections.
Although most Turkish media outlets have surprisingly overlooked the case, Today’s Zaman was one of the few voices and the only English-language media institution to highlight the case, presenting up-to-date information on the case, unveiling some of the most dramatic scenarios alleged in the indictment and reporting any sort of irregularities during the whole probe.
Rodrik is correct in suggesting that there are many fallacies and inconsistencies in the indictment, some of which might be a result of personal squabbles among state bureaucrats. But this must not overshadow the whole case nor underestimate the military’s plans to cause anarchy and eventually topple the government. While some of Rodrik’s concerns could be addressed so as to ensure a transparent and fair trial of retired army officers, his accusation that the media are defaming defendants is unacceptable. The European Union has on several occasions welcomed and lauded Today’s Zaman’s coverage, calling the newspaper one of the “stars of Turkish media.”
The newspaper has no intention whatsoever of misrepresenting any of the individuals involved in the probe, however, it is very interested in uncovering those responsible for preventing Turkey from becoming a consolidated democracy and a state with the rule of law. Many Western governments have welcomed the probe, along with other measures taken by the authorities to limit the military’s role in politics, including constitutional amendments and parliamentary bills in this respect. Some details of the indictment might have been fabricated and others the product of an illusion. They will be discredited and rejected as due process proceeds in the ongoing case, and this is in fact the reason why the investigation continues.
The Istanbul 10th High Criminal Court on Friday ordered the arrest of 163 retired and active duty members of the Turkish Armed Forces, the day Rodrik published his article. If Rodrik is correct, and our newspaper has been misleading the public regarding the trial, he should now also include in his accusations the state prosecutors who ordered the arrest of the army officers, including his father-in-law.
Dani Rodrik Responds:
In my article I cited numerous instances of falsehoods printed by Zaman (I could have provided many, many more). I argued that Zaman has consistently overlooked the evidence that points to forgery and consistently vilified the defendants in the case. I wrote that Zaman’s editor Ekrem Dumanli failed to respond to my invitation to an open debate. Finally, since Zaman is the media flagship of the Gülen movement, I argued that these facts raise questions about the Gülen movement’s true colors. Mr. Zeynalov challenges none of these assertions—none with any facts, in any case.
Mr. Zeynalov’s letter is disingenuous at best. He says I am “erroneously accusing [Zaman] of deliberately misreporting” but doesn’t deny any of the examples of misreporting I provided.
I suppose I should be happy that Mr. Zeynalov grants I am “correct in suggesting that there are many fallacies and inconsistencies in the indictment” or that “[s]ome details of the indictment might have been fabricated and others the product of an illusion.” I wish he would share these views with his newspaper’s editors, who have never published anything about such fallacies, inconsistencies, and fabrication save for thinly veiled attempts at covering them up.
Mr. Zeynalov’s statement that some of these fallacies and inconsistencies “might be a result of personal squabbles among state bureaucrats” is typical of Zaman’s style: Would he care to elaborate how such squabbles might account for information from 2009 findings its way into CDs that were supposedly prepared in 2003? So is his attempt to minimize the importance of these inconsistencies. All of the incriminating evidence in the case is tainted by the anachronisms we have identified. Instead of investigating or at least reporting on these discrepancies, Zaman has either hidden them (by deleting, for example, an anachronistic NGO from its coverage) or papered them over by explanations that have proved to be bogus.
It is simply not true that “most Turkish media outlets have surprisingly overlooked the case.” The Turkish media has in fact had a feeding frenzy over the case ever since it broke in January 2010. And I don’t know that “the European Union” has ever referred to Today’s Zaman as one of the “stars of Turkish media,” but if someone affiliated with the EU has, it would only go to show how misinformed he or she really is when it comes to Turkey. The people I know in the EU are well aware of Zaman’s one-sided propaganda.
The day that my article went online a Turkish court ordered 163 of the defendants to be jailed. As I have explained in my two National Interest articles, the obviously forged documents on which the case is based would be inadmissible as evidence in any country where the rule of law prevails. In Turkey, it apparently is good enough to imprison the defendants while the case still goes on. Does that increase my confidence in the Turkish judiciary? No. Does it make me think that it is under political pressure and is being manipulated? You bet.
