The 17 December process will end too

Details of what was discussed at the meeting held by Prime Minister Erdoğan at Dolmabahçe with a group of journalists, columnists and representatives of civil society organizations, for the purpose of briefing them on what has happened in the aftermath of the December 17 operation, appeared in the newspapers yesterday. The presence of ten of the government's ministers showed the importance attached to the meeting. What has happened since December 17 had in essence already created, in society, the sufficient impression that the matter did not simply consist of a corruption operation.

Even those who dwell on the corruption dimension have very little doubt that the events the Prime Minister calls the "December 17 process" are a coup attempt. Even so, while some of those who dwell on the corruption dimension genuinely think the possibility of corruption cannot be easily brushed aside, others are at the point of seeing the intention, method and style of whoever topples the government as not important at all, if the government is to be toppled on this occasion.

In any case, from the beginning there have been moves put forward by the Prime Minister against what has been happening in the process, and these undoubtedly try to respond to the moves of those conducting the operation. December 17, even if its pretext and grounds are law, is in essence a political move, and to answer it by staying purely on the ground of law would mean knowingly surrendering to an ambush. For that reason, it must be noted that the Prime Minister took a very apt step in drawing into the field of politics a move that had at first insisted on staying within the field of law.

Even so, the legal ground to which the December 17 move clings has not been entirely ignored. That is why, at one point in his remarks at the 4-hour meeting, the Prime Minister said that he had "taken the corruption allegation raised on the occasion of this affair seriously despite everything and fulfilled what it required."

What this requires is leaving the cases to the legal process, drawn back into its natural channel. Indeed, the Prime Minister drew attention to the fact that the judicial part of both the December 17 operation and the second operation, whose sensational execution was halted afterwards, is currently proceeding in its own channel.

Prime Minister Erdoğan knows the December 17 operation to be from the structure called the community; this is now clear. In essence, the fact that all the actors of the community own what is going on with fanatical excitement also makes it impossible to expect him to think otherwise. But it appears that, until the day of December 17, the Prime Minister did not expect from the structure called the community such an irrational move of this magnitude, one that would do great harm not only to his person and his party but to the whole country, to the country's future, and even to the community itself.

If you assume that this move was really made with calculation, it is impossible to get to the bottom of what kind of calculation it was, however much you think about it. For it appears that no one will come out a winner from this attack, whose result is a kind of suicide attack for the Community.

So what sort of vision of the future might have persuaded the Community to such an attack? The Prime Minister has no doubt that, by God's permission, this move will be warded off like earlier coup attempts. The December 17 Process, too, will end, and after the damage assessment is made, God willing, the journey will continue from where it was left off.

When asked whether, in the measures he will take against the community, to which he attributes responsibility for this move, he would embark on a new purge similar to the one on February 28, Prime Minister Erdoğan states his stance very clearly:

"There will never be an unlawful witch hunt or purge. However, to continue on the road with those who have played a role in the structure, who have conducted surveillance for blackmail in an unlawful manner and been found to have used it with ill intent, who have been found to have gotten hired by placing a lower-scoring candidate ahead of a higher-scoring one in examinations, would be a loss to this homeland. On this matter, no one should expect us to tolerate crime. In essence, while we as the AK Parti try to accumulate strength for 76 million and make the country's people strong throughout the world, if some have come to the point of gathering strength only for their own narrow groups and using it against others, we cannot tolerate that either."

Prime Minister Erdoğan from time to time uses a strong "language of religion," and reminds those who criticize this that those on the other side are also trying to slander him by abusing the language of religion. In return, the following sentences he said in fact reveal, from his own standpoint, the religious core of the dispute with the community:

"We are human. In our actions and our views we sometimes make mistakes too, and you criticize. We take your criticisms, correct ourselves, and continue on our way like this. But if what some people do is looked at with the eye of 'there is wisdom in everything they do,' they cannot be criticized, but I would like to remind of the sin of that. Shall we be servants of our Lord, or of a servant? We need to make a decision on this."

In parallel with the Gezi events, these words were like an invitation to confront, for the community's writers who constantly portray the Prime Minister as a dictator, a personality with no tolerance for criticism, the question of how open the Hocaefendi is to criticism.

Undoubtedly this can be objected to by saying "the Prime Minister is a politician, while the Hocaefendi is a religious community leader." But the words and actions of the Hocaefendi, who now intervenes with his day-to-day messages in every subject on Turkey's agenda, from the match-fixing affair in football to the Mavi Marmara, from politics to the economy, cannot be kept beyond debate behind a religious guise, however much one might wish. Insisting on this and attributing sanctity to his statements would only provide an unfair competitive advantage, and after this hour even this unfairness will not be possible. Because the Hocaefendi has now become, as a politician, open to every kind of debate and criticism.

Many more subjects were discussed at Dolmabahçe, but these are the points I can underline, together with my own comments, within the limits of this article.