A Comparative Reading of the 15 June 1826 and 15 July 2016 Attempts

There Were Turks in History, There Will Always Be:

Turks, one of the ancient nations with a continuous state tradition in history, conquered the places on the Silk Road, which connects the East and the West, and which was the axis of civilization for centuries, and made them their homeland. They have established governments that reinforce their sovereignty according to the conditions of the time and place they are in, and have been important political and cultural actors of the region for centuries.

The Oghuz Tribes showed the political and cultural continuity to the whole world by giving their names to the first state they founded and the states they founded recently (Gök Türk and the Republic of Turkey). With the French Revolution of 1789, the intellectual and political transformation in the ancient world began to be within the framework of the understanding of the nation state by passing from a monarchy to a republic. Instead of political structures that take religion as a reference, secularism has come to the fore. He developed cultural and political projects (Three Styles of Politics) in order to preserve the existence of the Ottoman Empire, which was a theocratic political structure that gave importance to religious values. He tried to adapt to the new system with the Tanzimat and reform edicts and the 1st and 2nd Constitutional Monarchies.

Ottoman Dynasty:

The Kayı tribe, who established the longest lasting state under a single dynasty, saw that his comprehensive policy under the name of Ottomanism was blocked, and tried Islamism with the support of his ally Germany. After the efforts to reduce the impact of the attacks against the country with this policy, he put his Turkish vision to the fore in order to establish a system suitable for the "new world order". In accordance with the world political system of that period, the Republic of Turkey was established as a secular, social and legal state in Asia Minor, that is, Anatolia. This is the result of the Turks always putting a new identity into action under new conditions, as required by the state's mind, which can be explained in the context of this nature/ore and identity. For the theoretical background discussions of the new state that was established by retreating to Anatolia, it is sufficient to look at the discussions held in the Turkish Hearth.

Sixteen Stars:

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the leader of the team that founded the Republic of Turkey, enacted the law in 1936 that placed 16 stars, symbolizing the unity of all tribes and the states they founded, on the Presidential pennant, and registered this. These sixteen stars represent our historical, political and cultural background; The crescent and star show the final result of these. Although each of them is in a different political geography, the Presidential Fort is the symbol of belonging to the cultural basin brought about by being a member of the same language and race, the same religion, and developing joint cultural, economic and political projects.

The Reason for Coup and Terrorist Attacks

It can explain the reason for the coups and indirect/proxy or direct terrorist attacks that we experienced with the establishment of the Republic of Turkey at the confluence of three continents with territory on two continents. Because with this position, the Turkish state was established by geopolitical experts at the end of the heart of the world and at an important point of the first edge belt. In this sense, it is the hinge of the world island (Asia, Europe and Africa). Even the lock hit on this hinge is worth the key as well.

To put it in the words of Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu, “The sub-systems and regions of Turkey, which is a bridge in both East-West and North-South crossings (a Turkey at the intersection of the Balkans, the Caucasus, and the Middle East) are more volatile and volatile than before. uncertain and has become so important."

For this reason, Turkey has always been unstable due to its location and has been exposed to coups and attempts organized by global powers. The revolutions of May 27, 1960 and September 12, 1980, the processes triggered by the assassinations of March 12, 1971, 1993 Uğur Mumcu and Eşref Bitlis, the post-modern coup of February 28, 1997, the e-memorandum of April 27, 2007, and finally the terrorist attack of July 15, 2016.

A Comparative Reading of the 15-16 June 1826 and 15 July 2016 Attempts

Comparing the events of 15-16 June 1826 and 15 July 2016 is an indication that a state mind continues by emerging with different identities in different times and places. In two attempts of uprisings, some senior officers and soldiers under their command (hearths) did not comply with the call for an uprising, and scholars sided with the administration. The people acted according to the signal of the Head of State and stood against those who tried to attempt.

Case-i Hayriye:

If we recall the event that is known as “Vaka-i Hayriye” in the history, even in the period of Kanuni (1516), which turned into gangrene and showed its first plunder in the Buçuktepe incident during the reign of Mehmet the Conqueror (1445), and made Yavuz Sultan Selim return by shooting his tent after the Çaldıran war. The units formed by the Janissaries and Janissary-minded people who plundered in Istanbul (1525) and tied the people and shopkeepers to extortion had to be disbanded. 

He wanted to switch to the military system. (1730-1754) Afterwards, Mustafa III (1757-1774) made armory reforms, Abdulhamid I (1774-1789) increased the speed artillery, and finally Selim III (1789-1808) formed the Nizam-ı Cedid. In short, the search for a new order in the period of Mahmud II was tried to be prevented by important turmoil and chaos.

Sultana Coup Attempt:

In the face of the terrorist attack on July 15, 2016, when the state took into account the negative experiences of the Sultan's coup attempt, on 15 June 1826, with the support of the Janissary Agha Hüseyin Pasha and the scholars of the period, by removing the Sanjak-ı Şerif and calling the people to join him and calling for a fight against the insurgents. I would like to draw attention to the fact that the measures are the same.

Muhsin Yazicioglu:

It should also be considered in this context that the founding leader of the Great Unity Party, Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu, called the people to the streets against a possible coup attempt and called for a passive act of civil disobedience, and that the party stood by the State to reduce the traumas experienced after the 15th century. Because when we think about what happened after 15-16 June 1826, it is necessary to act above the parties in order not to experience similar problems today. Because at that time, the Ottoman Sultan Mahmud, who was in a state of war with France, England and Russia, gained some resistance, albeit a little. However, the Egyptian Khedive Mehmet Ali Pasha, who was also an Ottoman pasha, took advantage of these events and the turmoil, and declared war on the Ottoman state. We were able to stop the Egyptian soldiers who came to Kütahya with the military aid of Russia. It should not be forgotten that we were thrown out of Anatolia with the support of England and France. In the light of these historical experiences, it is time to think with common sense once again by analyzing which projects have started and/or will begin to be implemented after the July 15 attempt.

Conclusion:

As a result, if we add the USA and China in addition to these global powers, it is imperative that we produce cold-blooded real policies without forgetting our historical experience of the conditions in our country in political economy-centered conflicts in our region. A comparison should be made between the attitudes of sects and communities at that time and the attitudes of today's, and it should be tried not to make the same mistakes again.