Received 28 March 2016; accepted 24 April 2016; published 27 April 2016
The same act also annulled the rule that, according to the Basic Law, prohibited the right of congressman selection under the service of someone else. Following that day, at least in the legal scheme, voting right in Turkey was totally made independent from the issue of wealth or paying tax or being selected as a congressman unless one is a laborer (Later on, with a constitutional change made in 1934, women were also given the right of selecting and being selected). During the establishment years of the Republic, the new regime, for an important majority of the laborer movement, was not only seen as the main reassurance of the sovereignty of the country; but also as the liberation of the labor which was seen as an important integrant of sovereignty. We present our gratitude to sublime person in the capacity of the chief of the Turkish Revolution who rescued millions of people from captivity and gave them political freedom and with the agreement of peace, we are in the high hope of reaching to an economical freedom.
“During the establishment years of the Republic, some intellectuals, gathering around the magazine of Aydınlık and with the leadership of Şefik Hüsnü, were continuing their struggle to let the Laborer and Farmer Socialist Party gather support from unions.” In this period, Turkish Association Unions were basically established as a result of these efforts.
2. Internal Opposition to the Republic and Pashas’ Struggle
There were claims of corruption about placing Turkish immigrants, migrated from Greece, when these discussions were at the center. By taking advantage of this, Mr. Rauf and his companions interpellated to the assembly speakership in order to overthrow İsmet Pasha Government. Behind the scenes Kazım Karabekir and other Pashas made several actions to occupy the key points in the army and when they believed that they occupy enough location, they planned to attempt a coup together with Mr. Rauf. Right before this incident Kazım Karabekir offered his resignation to the assembly with Ali Fuat Pasha. Mustafa Kemal who realized that there was attempt to coup to the assembly did not accept the resignations of Pashas for the reason that they had not hand over their armies to the newly appointed commanders yet and Pashas remained outside the assembly (excluding Kazım Karabekir; he attended to the voting himself and he even voted) therefore the censure offered by Rauf Orbay to the assembly was refused. This defeat of Mr. Rauf and Pashas in the assembly caused a foundation of a new party. By taking the support of Istanbul press which had not good relations with Ankara, this formation got started officially at 9 November 1924 (Aydemir, 1966: pp. 88-89) .
Progressive Republic Party incorporated most popular people of the National Struggle. Kazım Karabekir was the leader of the new Opposition Party. The second presidents were Rauf Orbay and Dr. Adnan Adıvar; General Assembly members were: Rüştü Pasha, delegate of Erzurum; Mr. Sabit, deputy of Erzincan; Mr. Şükrü, deputy of İzmir; Mr. Muhtar, deputy of Trabzon; İsmail Canbolat; deputy of Istanbul; Mr. Necati, deputy of Erzincan; Halis Turgut, deputy of Sivas; Mr. Necati, deputy of Bursa; Mr. Faik, member of army; and Refet Bele, deputy of Istanbul (Hüsameddin, 1964: p. 95) .
The ones who were called “Second Group” in the First National Assembly and who could not enter the assembly in the new voting established the internal organization of the Progressive Republic Party. Right after the Party was founded, most Istanbul newspapers obviously supported the Party. Most of the papers said that there would be separations en masse soon in the People Party. By the way; there was news on the papers said that: “At 10 November 1924, one day after the word “Republic” existed in the name of Progressive Party and its adoption, ruling party which was known only as People Party also added the word ‘Republic’ to its name. However; it became Republic People Party after the adoption of opposition party.
The reports and proposals of Kazım Karabekir was examined by relevant offices of General Staff, the ones which were possible for adopting and implementation were taken into consideration and implemented. But fictional and arbitrary proposals which were too much for power of the state or had no scientific value assuredly were not taken into consideration. It was not seen necessary for Kazım Karabekir giving him a letter of appreciation for he offered reports and proposals. At October 30 it was informed that The Second Army Inspector Ali Fuat Pasha arrived from Konya. I invited him to the dinner, but he did not come even I waited him for a long time. When I sent someone to look for him I learned that Fuat Pasha was welcomed by Mr. Rauf in the station. He went to the General Staff after he visited Ministry of National Defense and had a talk with some of his friends. For a while he talked with Fevzi Pasha; before leaving he left him this paper to the assistant of Fevzi Pasha:
I learned that Mr. Rauf got back the resignation of Refet Pasha who had informed his resignation from deputyship to the Assembly Speakership. At October 18, after the ceremony in Dumlupinar, after the one and half month tour at Bursa, Black Sea Region and around Erzurum I turned back to Ankara. I was welcomed by many deputy friends of mine and others. I did not see Mr. Rauf and Mr. Adnan who were at Ankara amongst the welcomers. However, I did not expect such a movement that could be displeasing. I instantly realized that we were facing with a conspiracy. This situation and appearance could be evaluated and analyzed like this.
One year ago, since Mr. Rauf resigned from presidency, an order was thought between Mr. Rauf, Kazım Karabekir Pasha, Ali Fuat Pasha, Refet Pasha and others. It was seen necessary to take the control of the army to achieve success. With this aim, After Kazım Karabekir was appointed to First Army Supervisor position, he set forth that Ali Fuat Pasha also did not like foreign policy when he was visiting the eastern provinces he served before and he indulged to military. He was appointed to Second Army Supervisor position. They thought that Cevat Pasha, Third Army Supervisor, and Cafer Tayyar Pasha, attached to this army corps, would join to this order. They worked on armies according to their own aspect and they thought that they won. They tried to move together with some generals before their resignations. In one year time, our works such as revoking caliphate, proclamation of the republic enabled them to move together by approaching the common order possessors. They started with policy. They were waiting for a suitable time and opportunity. The arrangements in army and in policy were seem enough for them. Mr. Rauf and others, with their protection inside party, really found an opportunity to provoke the whole nation against us by the Second Group which was unsuccessful on members and in new voting during the vacation month of the Assembly. They started to be organized secretly in country and made attempts. They united on newspapers such as Vatan in İstanbul, Tanin, Tevhid-I Efkar, Son Telgraf, Tok Söz published by Mr. Kamil n Adana. In these papers, they attacked us with anonym articles. They caused a disturbance in general public opinion (Ağaoğlu, 1981: p. 103) .
November 1, 1924 was the opening day of the Assemly’s second meeting year. So, I opened the session. I declared the opening speech. After I left the chairman desk, the resignation letters of Fevzi, Fahrettin, Ali Hikmet and Şükrü; Naili Paşa, and İsmet Paşa’s letter of Prime Minister dated 31/10/1924 about changing the command were read successively. The session was ended with the announcement that next meeting the Assembly would be held on 5th of November.
Kazım Karabekir Paşa applied to the chairman of the Assembly with a letter dated the November 1, 1924, and complained about that the Ministry of Defence had prohibited himself to attend the Assembly. On the 5th of November, in this letter read in the Assembly, Kazım Karabekir Paşa said: “After abdicated from the commandership (at midnight on Friday, 30/10/1924), I received a letter from the minister of Defence, and he was in the desire of keeping me from attending the Assembly until the commander, who will take my place, comes from Sarıkamış”. The letter ended with these sentences: However, I would like to submit that I am waiting for the decision of supreme Assembly. Kazım Karabekir Paşa also writes a letter on the same date to the Ministry of Defence, and said: “By pleading the takeover process, I am being informed not to start to the legislation duty for an uncertain period. In the day I resigned I hadn’t been stipulated to wait the commander who will take my place. I don’t know why that kind of excuse was come up with, five days later. After attending the Assembly, even temporarily since admitting a duty again is based on both my will and the decision of the Assembly, I submit that I wrote the case to the Speakership of the Parliament.”
3. The Government Accepted Fighting Overtly and Face-to-Face
The Parliament moved on to the general debate. The issues to be debated were Population Exchange and motion of censure on the Ministry of Public Works and Housing. The Prime Minister İsmet Pasha took the floor and make the following suggestion: “I have seen that many speakers dwelled not on affairs concerning public works and housing but concerning other ministries through various ways. Then again, some speakers requested the Prime Minister to give detailed information on the domestic and foreign policy of the State. I accept these requests gladly. The Minister of Exchange has been elected Vice President as the great Parliament deemed it convenient and voted for it. However, I suggest that the importance and scope of the motion of censure not be underestimated. I like timely and appropriate tactic.”
Therefore, the Government winded up the curtain and expedited the process of staging for people preparing for a game. By doing this, the government accepted fighting overtly and face-to-face
Approximately thirty speakers took the floor including both the ones in favour and against. Ministers of Justice and National Education also delivered speeches. The debate lasted five hours without yielding any results. The debates on motion of censure were left to the next day. The next day, the debates started at 14.30. The first person to take the floor was the Minister of Interior and the Acting Minister of Public Works and Housing Mr. Recep. He delivered his speech by making long explanations. The dissidents teased him from time to time in their seats. At one point, Mr. Recep said “Some newspapers and people say that there is a government in Ankara. In all holiday period of the parliament, they ruled the country with all possible irregularities. According to the rumors, some friends have secret notebooks and illegal deeds done by the Ministers are written there. People say that one day the parliament will convene and call the government to account for. Then the government will account for before public for the things written in the notebook. Now, this day has come!
They should disclose what is written there to the nation! Mr. Feridun Fikri answered by using the plural form “When the time comes, we will disclose them.” Mr. Recep replied: “Disclose the please, we are waiting. The Government will always be present before the nation with a sense of readiness for responsibility.” And he added “The country cannot take obliqueness, uncertainty or indecisiveness”. By whispering every day that there are some clouds of danger on the horizon and making it seem as if there are harmful contradictions in the structure of this tender entity, the Republic of Turkey is treason against this country. Instead of confusing the public opinion by putting forward unreal, groundless apprehensions in the corners, corridors here and there, everybody should tell the truth by going up to the rostrum which is equally open to everyone. If the truth is not told and these groundless, apprehension-based rumors continue, I will conclude that the people doing so do not have a strong and sincere bond to the destiny of this country. I will deem it this way. I think the nation will deem it this way, too. I invite to this floor. I want the nation to know. On which side is the accusation, apprehension and delusion and on which side is the truth?
So in this way the government held the stage’s pitches and quickened the people’s effort for staging their tricks. The government got to accept the struggle face to face and freely. Approximately both the opposing and the approving thirteen lecturers took the floor. Minister of Justice and Minister of Education made a speech too. The discussion went ahead without any result. Negotiations about interpellation were postponed to the day after. The next day meeting began at 14.30 p.m. The first person taking the floor was The Minister of Interior and Minister of Housing and Development Mr Recep. He spoke by making long statements. The outs were annoying Mr Recep from their seats. He said: “Some newspapers and some people say that there is a cabinet in Ankara”. They govern the domain unlawfully in all left days of council. According to rumours some people have confidential notebooks in which illegal affairs of ministers are written. They think that someday the council will come together and judge the government. The affairs written in the confidential notebooks will be asked to the government. Here that day has come! Display the things written in these notebooks to the nation. Mr. Feridun replied in the name of his colleagues by meaning third person: We will display in good time (Aydemir, 1966: pp. 99-100) .
Mr Recep answered back: We are waiting for it. The government has always been across to you by way of being under liability in the presence of the nation. The government can’t stand obscurity, confidentiality, uncertainity and indecision. Quite openly without criticizing, whispering every day there are some danger situations in the future, and showing as if there are dangerous chaus in Turkish Republic’s young structure is treachery to this country. Instead of stirring up public with some baseless fancies in different places, one should tell the truths to the nation chair which is available to all. If truths are not told, and if these baseless fancies instillings are continued to be told I will decide that the people who make these things do not have sincere and strong ties with this county’s destiny. I will accept this in this way. I think this nation will accept it like that either. I am inviting to this chair for nation’s enlightment: Where is the truth? Where are the idea, fancy, wrong things and blaming?
After Mr. Recep’s speech, some members of parliament being in opposition were listened. Minister of Commerce Mr. Hasan and Minister of National Defence Kazım Pasha answered back. There was Mr Rauf among the opposers. He made a speech too. While Mr Rauf disapproved of adressing a question and interpellation about Ministry of Development and Housing to the whole government on the other hand he regarded The Prime Minister’s attitude bravely and added to his speech: The council has given assault to the government being against the intention. Mr Yunus Nadi said: “We havent understood.’Mr Rauf cleared up: People criticizing made a deliberate thing as they were speaking to the government and I see a situation as if they are making and assault to it.”
Mr Rauf touched upon Mr Feridun’s suggestion and defended it gently by saying to lecturers not use opressive words and not give place to humiliating statements about government in their speeches. Deputy of Tunceli’s suggestion was a parlimentary survey. An urgent decision had to be made to set up a commision that was going to make a council questionnaire. Mr. Feridun had suggestion about it and his sixteen collegues had also another suggestion to be put Mr Feridun’s suggestion to the vote by saying the name of it. Mr Rauf said: “It has been discussed about a commision that I explain away as questionnaire of commision. The person discu- ssing is Mr Feridun.” Mr Rauf went ahead with his speech: “The minister have regarded accepting such a commision as a blot or dispising on country’s and nation’s emotions.” Mr Yunus Nadi put in a word: “A bit like that.” Mr Rauf went on: “I propose by accepting our fallibility and I desire its being necessary in advance of the others because I am interested in too.”
4. Rauf Bey Was Not Willing to Say the Word “Republic”
Rauf Bey was watching for an opportunity to show his big respect to the GNAT-Great National Assembly of Turkey while he was talking. Creating a suitable opportunity he said: “Some ascriptions like ‘Factitious Laws’ have been attributed to the laws enacted by our Grand Assembly”. Rauf Bey was asking for some payment of obeisance to Grand Assembly.
Mazhar Müfit Bey (MP of Denizli) said “Your esteemed friend Muhtar Beyefendi has told this firstly before you”. These words caused Rauf Bey to alter the course of the conversation. However, Muhtar Bey was offended. Saip Bey (MP of Kozan) broke in the conversation. Eventually Rauf Bey was allowed to continue his words upon interference and warning of the Chair. Rauf Bey, after talking about various subjects came to the issue of principle. He said “Our manner of conduct and our policy is the unconditional principle of national sovereignty.” Yunus Nadi Bey’s voice was heard: “Republic”. Rauf Bey did not answer back. Rather, he ended his sentence by saying: “The only place where the national sovereignty shows its existence is Grand National Assembly of Turkey”. “Republic” cries filled up the entire hall of Assembly. “Saip Bey (MP of Kozan) said: Republic!” Rauf Bey began to speak with Ali Saip Bey (Kirçak, 2001: pp. 63-66) .
İhsan Bey interrupted him and said: “Rauf Beyefendi, your esteemed words do not bear clarity”. Rauf Bey replied by saying “They do have. Please İhsan Beyefendi” İhsan Bey: “Your words are not that clear. We cannot reach an agreement for a long time on anything!” Rauf Bey, after mentioning İhsan Bey’s high sense of justice and his being a former prosecutor, said to him: “Innocence has to be taken as the basic principle. It is neither right to impute an offence to a person without evidencing and nor to express it in this way.” İhsan Bey replied: “The judge has the right of suspecting the defendant who does not tell the truth”. The dialogue between Rauf Bey and İhsan Bey dragged on for a longer while. The Chairperson intervened. Rauf Bey went on and said: “A law regarding the duties and authorities of ministers in my constitution was under consideration. Has it been made? I am asking.”
Rauf Bey, after mentioning of the court of appeals, directed questions like “Has the law of Prevention of Brigandagebeen applied?” firstly to the Minister of Interior and subsequently to Ministers of Public Works, Trade, Agriculture, National Defense and National Education beginning. It could be seen that he was trying to draw the attention of the nation and the army. For example he talked about news concerning a process with regard to Karadere forests he had noticed by saying: “How did that happen? We heard and became very proud about the maturity and orderliness displayed by our self-denying and heroic army during the transition period from the Independence War to peace. But can we also consider and accept the subsequent nutrition and sheltering conditions as successfully accomplished as them? We would kindly like to be illuminated on this issue, too.”
It can be understood that the question he directed is actually a common concern of him with his mates. He uses the word “kindly”. It is almost impossible to think that he has prepared this question with two army inspectors who had been in office till then. Rauf Bey wanted to learn if the procedure that has come into being due to the mutation in the judicial organization had been the most appropriate system and method in achieving justice. And he requested from the Ministry of Education to explain why the period of primary education had been lessened unlawfully.
Rauf Bey, after talking about the Governor of Istanbul’s night maneuver and expressing that the governance of Istanbul on “entrustment” is a violation of rights, continued his words―mentioning of an occurrence between Vasıf Bey, the Minister of National Education and press and mentioning of teachers due to their connection with this matter by saying “Is it right for the army of teachers, this intellectual army, to make publications in a manner that they support a particular side?” Rauf Bey said that such occurrence had not existed and finished his words with this sentence: “May God protect our country, nation and all of us.”
The Ministry of Interior took the floor after foregoing phrase’s being vigorously applauded. Zeki Bey, MP of Gümüşhane, asserted that he had to speak firstly. Vehbi Bey said:”Sirs, this subject has come to a state of an interrogation of the Assembly by the ministers”. The Chair called attention to the article of the internal regulations regarding the floor of Ministers. Recep Bey, after stating that disclosure of the truth would not be promoted if the ministers, who were facing a very voluminous general questioning, were not allowed to use their rights of floor granted to them by the internal regulations, replied the directed questions that were related to him one by one. During his speech he called attention to Rauf Bey’s taking the floor in an advisory manner and he said: “This Assembly is neither a school nor a science academy where the attendants act in a complete silence”. He drew attention of the Assembly’s General Council to Rauf Bey’s never speaking openly on the floor and supporting Feridun Fikri Bey’s meaningless, unjust, senseless, unlawful proposal of Assembly’s investigation having a destructing nature for the balance of the government regarding the one-year works of three ministries without using the word investigation. Fikri Bey objected to “senseless” attribution of Recep Bey from his chair. He demanded that this word had to be taken back. Recep Bey continued: “I am not taking my word back. It IS senseless. You have to express the truth as it is.” Recep Bey, as an answer to Feridun Fikri Bey’s phrase of “I do not accept the word ‘senseless’”, replied him by saying: “Feridun Fikri Bey, you should have to get used to accepting harsher criticisms” (Danişmend, 1955: p. 23) .
Necati Bey, the Minister of Justice has used even harsher words… Feridun Fikri Bey said: “The Minister of Justice took his words back”. Necati Bey, jumping up from his chair, said “I did not take my words back” Some noisy quarrels took place. Finally the Chairperson said: “Silence, please.” Recep Bey continued his explanations by saying “I said that many people had had notebooks. Now we shall have the opportunity of erasing ten to fifteen questions prepared according to the words of Rauf Bey, Here we are, Gentlemen” the first pages of the notebooks are beginning to come in sight bit by bit”.
Recep Bey drew attention to the tactic which Rauf Bey used during his speech and said: “Rauf Bey asks all these questions and still says that he does not ever have the purpose of neither imputing responsibility to government nor overthrowing the government. A person, who takes the floor on a day when there is a general questioning, is for or against it. If he is for it then he demands support for the government. If he is against it then he requires the government’s being overthrown. And this has to be stated clearly. Otherwise Rauf Bey’s words will be useless and senseless.” Recep Bey’s last clause caused a short dispute between him and Rauf Bey. They used phrases like “But, you are assailing.” and “And you are interrupting me.” to each other. Finally Recep Bey continued his speech and said: “Dear Gentlemen! They ask some questions… Has Ahmet come? Has the law been applied? The floor of Grand National Assembly of Turkey is not a place of directing aimless questions and words during the negotiation of such an important general questioning (Aydemir, 1966: pp. 100-101) .
They take the floor and talk for a while and subsequently they say “I am telling, I am telling but there actually is not such a thing. Under these circumstances these words are meaningless and futile. This is the exact description of the situation”. Recep Bey continued speaking by adding: “I kept a very careful eye on Rauf Bey. He took the floor and did not say the word Republic when it needed to be told but made another description. He said “Dear Friends!”, “We are not playing a game. We have just made a great revolution and we are approaching a bright future”. We are walking to a target with its all requisites, conditions and accuracy. Now that the time seems ripe and having received such an opportunity from my friends I would like to say that this disagreement of Rauf Bey makes him resist against using this auspicious reputation. However it would be noteworthy to mention that cited person has made a great fuss about this matter in İstanbul. He tried to do whatever he could do against it. And when he came face to face with you he fell back from his old deeds and he said by swearing: “I am a Republican”. I am doubtful of him on this very day. If he deems it necessary to persuade me about the wrongfulness of my doubts he must express that there is no place for such suspicions by taking the floor or at another platform.
Otherwise I am doubtful that Rauf Bey is not committed to Republic and this doubt of mine will continue. This is the truth.” Recep Bey gave an end to his explanations by saying “Dear Friends, we have brought this matter, which will definitely enable to elevate the prosperity of our holly country, to its current situation by being covered with blood up to our necks.” The biggest mistake that will be made after today will be due to instabilities, doubts and indefiniteness. No one can estimate where such approaches may lead us eventually. As Recep Bey was leaving the floor the Chair gave the right of verbal self-defense to Recep Bey (Rauf Bey) upon his request (Danişmend, 1955: p. 23) .
Rauf Bey said: “Am I obliged to swear or to take an oath whenever you are suspicious or doubtful?”. Voices raised saying “You are obliged!”. Rauf Bey replied by saying: “No Gentlemen, nobody has the right to be suspect from anybody Ali Bey MP of Afyonkarahisar replied this from his chair saying “Then you cannot live in this land. You will go to the place where your father and grandfather had come from. This is the request of this land.” In consequence of this situation, Rauf Bey made a speech intending to clarify the point where they had disagreement and said: “The nation has chosen us as their representatives to establish the foundations of a model of government based on unconditional national sovereignty: ‘the people’s government which is called democracy. Some of our friends have adopted some trends and thoughts like taking this right of nation from the Assembly and assigning it to any other authority. This is what I am against!’” Recep Bey, answered these words by explaining that when Rauf Bey made objections nor the Constitution neither the assignment of such rights to any party were under consideration. These subjects were negotiated many months later. Recep Bey said: “Gentlemen, this is a demagogy”. Rauf Bey deemed it necessary to make such an explanation for the reason of his opposing thoroughly by saying: “Gentlemen, Aside from being a defender of the Caliphate and Sultanate, I am against any authority that can acquire the rights of this Assembly.”
Rauf Bey, while declaring that he had not been on the side of the Caliphate and Sultanate, was also expressing that he was neither against the President nor the office of Presidency. As I previously stated occasionally, Rauf Bey was insisting on the administration system of “Government of Grand National Assembly of Turkey”. Although the name had changed as Republic he wanted the assembly to keep that specific nature of it. Why? Because the office of Presidency could supposedly acquire the rights of offices like caliphate and sultanate. Gentlemen, aren’t these words that are told as personal thoughts futile and meaningless words as Recep Bey said? How else would you call a logic based on these words if you do not name them as “demagogy”? Rauf Bey’s efforts and exertions show the meaning and the essence of this approach and reasoning in the best way, today. But we could not show the heedlessness of waiting so as to fathom this fact till this very day. I hope they excuse us for this.
Gentlemen, it was not possible not to notice for what purpose and in which mood these and alike expressions were written down and not to understand the negative and harmful effects of those publications on the members of the Assembly and on public opinion. Unfortunately, these insurgent effects have actually reflected their operational reactions. The same republican writer, who feels sad about the fact that the pashas such as Refet, Kazım Karabekir and Ali Fuat Pasha were not elected for the National Defence Commission, yet does not approve of the fact that the commanders of the army were not elected for a commission which would produce an effect on the armies. At this point, he withdraws from even the appropriate attitude to democracy, which he would like to explain that he likes too much. Let’s examine all together the sentences containing those ideas. Among the articles written under the subtitle of “Politics” it says, “the National Defence Commission is almost the least political task force of the National Assembly, besides the one which has no connection with politics”. The writer would like to mean “Why weren’t the Army Inspectors having entered the Assembly allowed to work on an area which does not have any connection with politics?” with this sentence. It is possible to give an answer to it by this way: Considering that the National Defence Commission is a commission which does not have a connection with political issues, it was the reason that there was a drawback of putting those, who came to the Assembly just for dealing with political issues, there! The writer goes on after this sentence by saying. “New laws to serve for commanding the army which will defend the homeland’s honesty and independence, making it more organized and excellent, and making it more developed will be made here. It is a homeland debt of those who have not yielded to the greed of being politicians but who think only about the homeland to give this task to the most capable people among the notables of the army” (Muammer, 1996: p. 173) .
I will also look over the following sentences: the issue of commanding the Army, its getting more organized and more excellent and its getting much more developed is very important. The charged and the contending office with this issue is the General Staff. As the writer has asserted, there are our most distinguished officers in this office. The General Staff, which has accepted the responsibility of commanding the Army, managing it, and developing it to a more excellent condition advances proposals to the government if necessary. The issues which are determined while pondering by the General Staff and the Ministry of National Defence, which is in the government, are analysed and discussed by “the Supreme Military Court”, which meets every year. The Supreme Military Court is made up of Chief of General Staff, Minister of National Defence, and Naval and Army Inspectors. The required ones among the issues which were passed by from the Supreme Military Court and which were accepted to be administered were suggested to the government.
Trying to make the commanders, who want seriousness and who don’t approve of the government, the Ministry of National Defence, and the General Staff and seeing them far from assessing their own ideas and plans on the profession of arms after understanding the account and importance of the situation and who prefer to work in political arena, get in the National Defence Commission can ground on the purpose of implementing their bad desires such as bringing down the government and changing the Chief of General Staff by preventing the finalization of all kinds of suggestions about the Army coming from the government to the Assembly and using them as trump cards. It is useless to suppose that the purpose of the editorial writer of the Tan (ya da Tanin) at this point is a different thing.
The writer, who is “worried and sad” because his purpose has not come true, says, “in the ancient Athens Republic, they were so strictly devoted to the principles which was put by democracy that they could not accept a hegemony rule even in terms of knowledge and excellence on any department about the government. In spite of this exorbitance in democracy, in Athens democracy the generals were excluded from these rules.” They are not the actions, I dare say, that honest people can do that a person like him, who tries to express to the nation that the democracy of the People’s Party is on their lips and the Republic is identical to autocratic government, puts forward this fallacy, still on the days when it is being read in his newspaper, that the view of excluding the generals, for whom he has made efforts to make attain power in the government, even from the democracy rules (Muammer & Ulaş, 1996: p. 174).
Uttering the exact opposite of the truth, this writer, who has demagogy and fallacy, sees and presents the party that we founded, the face of Ismet Pasha, who we charged with making up a cabinet, and his government ugly. Gentlemen, our face have always been clean and unblemished and will always be clean and unblemished too. Those whose face is ugly and whose conscience is full of ugliness are the ones who are trying to present our patriotic, conscientiously clean and honourable behaviours ugly because of their own dishonourable and horrible ambitions.
Gentlemen, it was impossible to be unaware of these words and alike words were written in which kind of feeling or with which purpose and not to understand that bad and destructive implications of these publications for the members of Parliament and public. Unfortunately, those destructive implications actually present themselves in an operational reaction. The same republican writer who felt sorry for not to be elected of Refet, Kazım Karabekir and Ali Fuat Paşa for Commission of National Defence, this time does not find right that commanders of the army are not elected for a commission which can be effective of armies. At this point, he is withdrawing from the appropriate manner for democracy on which he is dependent, according to his expression. Let’s have a look at the sentences which include these thoughts: The writings under the title of “Politics” one can read the sentence: “Commission of National Defence is a task force of Parliament, which is least political indeed has no relation with politics.” With this sentence, the writer wanted to say that why army inspectors in Parliament are not given opportunity for working in an area that has no relation with politics. It is possible to answer this question in this way: Considering that Commission of National Defence is non political commission, it is risky to put people who are in Parliament for only political reasons. The writer is going on with this sentence: “Here, the laws will be made, which will make army that defenses the country’s independence and honour, more excellent, coordinate and advanced. It is a duty of people who is not getting into himself political ambition but only thinks his country that they should give this task to well known people in army, who are the most capable ones” (http://www.yenisafak.com, 2005).
I will emphasize on these sentences, too: Commandment of army and making army more coordinate, excellent and advanced are really important issues. It is General Staff which is responsible for these issues. As the writer points out in this agency there are the most distinguished commanders. The General Staff which is responsible for commanding the army and making army more excellent, coordinate and advanced is making suggestions in necessary positions. The issues which are determined and thought in depth by the Ministry of National Defence included the General Staff and government are examined and discussed by The Supreme Military Court which gets together once a year. The Supreme Military Court includes Chief of General Staff, Minister of National Defence and Navy and Army inspectors. The most necessary subjects which are examined and determined for putting into practice by the Supreme Military Court are suggested to the government.
In these suggestions, if there were any necessary ones for becoming a law, they would be presented to Parliament. These suggestions are discussed and enacted in the Parliamentary Committee after the consent of Commission of National Defence according to its process in the Parliament and the consent of any other related commission. The members of Commission of National Defence have to understand profession of arms. However it is not only enough to understand profession of arms but also they need to know about finance, politics and many other things. If it was considered enough to understand only profession of arms for drafting a bill about army, it would not be necessary for any other commission or commissions’ investigations after the consent of Supreme Military Court and determination of the General Staff. Because the people who are dealing with politics even they come from the army background, cannot be more expert and authorized than the people who devote their whole lives with following all developments in profession of arms, science and technics day to day and with putting into practice. For the army inspectors-according to law they are the members of the Supreme Military Court―who think that they have the most appropriate thoughts and the greatest experiences about commanding the army, reorganizing and making it reach its ideal condition, the most appropriate area of work was their place in the army and their place in the Supreme Military Court.
5. The Last Day of the Interview of the Interpellation
Gentleman, the interview of the interpellation was still going on at 8 November. The speech of Mr. Feridun Fikri about the acceptance of the parliamentary investigation got longer because of being interrupted by lots of other speakers. After that coming on the rostrum, Mr. Yunus Nadi said: “Gentleman, the administration of our country is the subject. The republic management is the subject. It is necessary to discuss this before all things. Emphasizing on the speech of Mr. Rauf having made previous day, Mr. Yunus Nadi explained that it was irrelevant to discuss a theory like that, whether the national sovereignty emerged from the development of the republic or the republic was the result of the development of the national sovereignty. Mr. Yunus Nadi interpreted Mr Rauf’s sentences “I’m not only against caliphate or sultan but also I’m against any authorities which derogates from a right of authorities” as “According to Mr. Rauf, this authorities have some rights. The expression is clear. Never get this right from them. One day it might be required” (Okyar, 1980: p. 103) .
After having talked about Mr. Rauf’s and his friends’ behaviour just like showing off, the resignation of pasha inspector and after having warned not to play within the assembly, he said: “It is disregard to sit at the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and do actions against it while imagining to achieve some purpose with the special and secret arrangements. Gentlemen, we can’t accept this.” Pointing out Pasha Refet, he said “As you know, Pasha Refet has resigned from the representative because of showy and baseless explanation and statements having taken place in the media six or seven months ago. It is strange. He added such strange justification for having resigned from the representative that there is a national vow among only his friends which was given in the dark room. His friends who are forgathering there will give him a job. Gentleman, I am really conscious about this job. The representative of Afyonkarahisar interrupted his speech as sitting on his place and said: “In other words General Government”. Mr. Yunus Nadi went on his speech saying that “I’m very curious about this job”. He said: “There is a constitution. The republic has already been established. How the form of a government must be has already been defined there. The Grand National Assembly of Turkey is the only authority to rule all of them. It is imagined that Pasha Refet would resign from his representative and establish a government and his friends would come together. Gentlemen, where are we? Would he take Demirci Efe to and get him to establish a government? Isn’t there any assembly? Isn’t there any constitution? What such an illogical act” (Okyar, 1980: p. 104) !
Pasha Refet came to the rostrum to give an answer to Mr Yunus Nadi. While justifying himself, Pasha Refet said he had the same idea with Mr. Rauf and whatever Mr. said must be recorded into his account too. Then he said: “Does it mean that I would desire to establish a government as in China if I had wanted two soldiers representative to return back to the assembly again. Many representatives began to give short reply to Pasha Refet’s sentences as sitting on their chairs. His speech almost turned into mutual arguing. At last a new adversary came to the rostrum. He was Mr. Mahmut Esat (İzmir). He said: “Neither revolution nor nation can endurance such an endless arguments which have been lasting for days”. Then he explained that it was such a situation that it was not enough to bring down the government for making revolution and even for advancing the revolution. Mr. Mahmut Esat said the first thing they had to do was to define the ways to follow. By this way they could follow this way in sincere and certain manner. Pointing out Mr. Rauf’s thoughts, he assessed it with these sentences: “National sovereignty is a different subject” (Okyar, 1980: pp. 105-106) .
In the prepared regulation, “POPULISM”, “REPUBLICANISM”, “NATIONALISM” are designated as the basic principles; “NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY”, “REVOLUTION” and “DOMINANCE OF LAW” also took place. Following these, Anatolia and Rumelia Defense of Law Community was changed to People’s Party, and in 9 September 1923, Mustafa Kemal announced the establishment of People’s Party by applying to Ministry of Internal Affairs. As this progress line put forward as well, Republican People’s Party is the continuance of Anatolia and Rumelia Defense of Law Community which organized the Independence War and carried it out. The name of the party, initially People’ Party, became Republican People’s Group in 1924; and Republican People’s Party in 1935. Although congressman selection act which included strict lawful limitations for the political participation of proletarian people was in force till 1934; with a change made in 3 April 1923, paying tax obligation for voting was annulled.
The republic, constitutional monarchy, the methods of absolutism and autocracy are another subjects. Some of them are forms of government. The others are the way of using national administration and the application of this administration. In these four forms, that national administration is applied in different ways in these four different ways. Even autocracy consists of national administration. Constitutional monarch consists of national assembly more than autocracy. And the republic consists of the most national administration. For this reason, it is necessary not to confuse two things to each other: It is not said that national sovereignty is a consequence of the republic. Because national sovereignty is not figural. It is a soul and essence. After having adequately emphasized on the brought forward words of Mr. Rauf who claimed these words were the reflection of his own thoughts, Mr. Mahmut Esat said: “Turkish revolution is rising, but it is required to shed on this subject to make revolution to achieve its aim. He finished his speech by adding these words: “Turks are waiting this as a drawn sword to the democracy”. After that, he finished his speech. Then Minister of Justice Necati and the President of the Board of the Education Mr. Vasıf answered adversary speaker’s questions by making a long speech.
The Minister of Finance Mr. Mustafa Abdülhalik wanted explanation to some words of Mr. Rıza Nur being in written record before starting his speech. Mr. Rıza Nur uttered some doubtful words about the position of Janian, whether they were originally Turks or not. Mr. Abdülhalik corrected the mistake in the thoughts of Mr. Rıza saying these: Mr. Doctor denounced descendants who traced back my forefather after having gone Janian, a part of Albanian, 600 years ago. He showed them as they had descended from another race. Who is doing such a thing? Unfortunately, he is an honorable man who has just become a fanatic nationalist for 6 years. He wasn’t a fanatic nationalist before. He knows this better than me. While I who was called as a Janian by him was fighting with a gun in my hand for Turks, he provoked Albanian against Turks. It was really known that Mr. Rıza Nur had participated in lots of controversy in his political life. His fanatic nationalist manner wasn’t regarded as a hindrance to work and find a work place during the time of national assembly. But we didn’t know fanatic nationalist Mr. Rıza Nur had worked together with Albanian rebellious against Turks in the movement of the getting thrown out Turks from Rumelia which is an endless and unforgettable implosion in the hearts of Turks. When it was learned, confusion and terror covered the Grand National Assembly of Turkey.
After that Minister of Finance made an explanation about other subjects. After him, Farm Minister started to talk. He gave an answer to a speech which had criticized Mr. Şükrü Kaya especially, as the Farm Minister. After having explained that agriculture works couldn’t disguised with nice sentence and nice words, with nice logic, he said: “This sail is a written work. Its pages are open and it is read by everyone.” and he added: “Can it be demagogy, talking about what has been done or hasn’t been done. How can you dare to do this?” After the Minister of Commerce Mr. Hasan and the Minister of Public Works Mr Süleyman Sırrı, now departed, it was the Foreign Minister’s and the Prime Minister’s turn to speak now.
Gentlemen, the Prime Minister became ill and he was lying ill in the bed after having suggested interpellation to be general. He was so ill to join the negotiation. The Minister of National Defence Pasha Kasım came to the rostrum in the name of Pasha Ismet made required explanation. It was high time finish the negotiation of the interpellation. After adequate negotiation had been accepted, Mr. Feridun Fikri’s suggestion of parliamentary investigation was rejected.
England delivered an ultimatum to the government while we were trying to suppress the Nasturi rebellion with our army around Hakkari region. I convened the Assembly for an extraordinary meeting. We responded to the English ultimatum as it is known. We considered the probability of war. Now, the people who we mentioned flattered themselves that they could easily reach their aims by attacking us in this downturn and in the days a foreign country might attack us. They left their army leaderless which they always had to hold at the ready condition for a war, and rushed to the politic area which they declared they didn’t like before. A topic came up with in the gathered assembly was such as to make their rush faster. With his proposal on 20 October, the deputy Hoca Esat Efendi was really asking some questions on the topics of exchanging and location the immigrants, the number of free boarder student received in boarding schools, and where the primary schools were opened. The issues covered by these questions were really concerned the public opinion. And also these issues were very convenient to revile the ministers. Especially, the points everyone preoccupied in the issues of exchange and settlement of the immigrants were obviously known. Based on what I saw on a trip, even I myself, directly, complained about the process of exchange and settlement; when returned to Ankara, I proposed being abolished of the ministry on these issues, and to begin to work in a way which will lead the government to activate with all its potentials. We agreed on this topic. Even this case was increasing the possibility of gaining too many partisans on this topic for the people who will attack.
The council made a common meeting. The topic for discussion was the interpellation about Commutation and Ministry of Development and Housing. The Prime Minister İsmet Pasha ascended the floor and advanced a proposal: “I’ve realized that several lecturers give importance to affairs about other ministerial offices rather than development and housing affairs. Moreover some lecturers demand from The Prime Minister to give detailed information about the government’s foreign policy and home politics. I accept all these demands with pleasure. The Minister of Interchange is elected as an acting president by means of council’s voting. However I suggest that the interpellation ought not to be undervalued under no circumstances. I approve appropriate and well-matched tactics.”
If, among these suggestions, there are the ones which are required to become laws to be implemented, then it is these ones that are submitted to the Assembly. Complying with the process in the Assembly, these are discussed in the Parliamentary Committee and enacted after they are examined in the National Defence Commission and in the other commissions if they are related. The members in the National Defence Commission should know about the profession of arms. However, it is not satisfactory for them to know just about the profession of arms. They should also know about the finance, politics, and various other things of the State. If knowing just about the profession of arms were considered to be satisfactory to prepare draft bills about the Army, there wouldn’t be a need for the draft bills to be checked again in another commission or other commissions after the General Staff’s determination and the Supreme Military Court’s acceptance because the people who are engaged in politics, though they come from profession of arms, cannot be more expert and perfect than the people who spend their whole life with science and technique and with following and applying the military developments day to day. For the Army Inspectors, who suppose that they have the most appropriate points of view and the greatest experiences for commanding the Army and its being enhanced to a more perfect condition after its being organized and who are members in the Supreme Military Court by law, the most appropriate working area is the place at the head of army groups and in the Supreme Military Court.
In fact constitution had already been established. All the authorities had already been defined. All the conditions had already taken their places in the constitution and they had already been defined in the constitution. But he is still talking about a legend and a fallacy. After these sentences, Mr. Yunus Nadi said: “There are some people who don’t appreciate the republic. There are creatures who really don’t like the republic but cannot explain their real thoughts and they are still with us. Gentlemen, the heads of such men must be smashed.”