New 'parallel structure' in the new era
It was Abdullah Öcalan who first coined the term “parallel structure.” President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan relied on the notion to create a scapegoat in the aftermath of the Dec. 17 and Dec. 25 corruption investigations.
Erdoğan argued that the corruption investigations were a coup d'etat and that they was being staged by the Gülen movement, which was influential within the state, particularly the police. By launching a strong campaign, Erdoğan attempted to demonize and alienate the movement. This defense strategy worked well in the March 30 local elections and the presidential election, thanks to his propaganda tools and the concerns over instability. Erdoğan became president and picked Ahmet Davutoğlu to be head of the new government and in doing this, he left one problem behind: Erdoğan was able to stop the investigations against himself, but he failed to make them disappear. There are currently three judicial investigations for which parliamentary approval is expected right now. As noted by a police chief, nothing is being done in 21 corruption investigations.
There will be elections for the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) on Oct. 12. If a structure is put in place to protect judicial independence vis-à-vis the government in these elections and if the judiciary is able to act independently, the judges and prosecutors will start doing their job properly and carry out the investigations. The president will desperately watch what is happening to his team dealing with the judiciary. These investigations are now Davutoğlu's problem. Erdoğan said that he picked Davutoğlu because he appreciated his diligence and decisiveness in combating the so-called “parallel structure.” But there is one problem: Davutoğlu's definition of the “parallel structure” is different to the definition of Erdoğan. And Davutoğlu does not hesitate to express this difference.
In his speech delivered at the meeting where he was nominated as prime minister, Davutoğlu, when speaking about the “parallel structure,” said "whether a 'parallel structure' or whether any other power,” thereby providing a wider definition meaning a clique within the bureaucracy, particularly the judiciary, which is trying to influence the government policies. The remark “Seizing the bureaucracy and then blackmailing the political authority” refers to this clique. That is it. He does not share the broad definition of Erdoğan, which refers to spies, agents and assassins. What we should draw from Davutoğlu's definition is this: A strong group within the bureaucracy which considers itself the true owner of the state has employed different methods to change government policies they do not like. And they relied on the Dec. 17 and Dec. 25 investigations as a means of blackmailing to push the government into a corner. Davutoğlu's definition fits into this simple framework, and he raises objections to this because he views it as a division of state authority.
Was there really such a clash? Who represented the bureaucratic wing? How did the government invent the tools of blackmailing? Was this material really destructive for the government? It is possible to answer these questions by looking at the tapes of the Dec. 17 and Dec. 25 investigations. However, the detail that is not spelled out in Davutoğlu's speech is the point of departure from Erdoğan for “parallel theses.” Davutoğlu refers to abstract circles which try to divide the state authority. He does not refer to “the person in Pennsylvania” or assassins.
This is not all about covering up the past; there is also a future dimension in this matter. Erdoğan created a web of material interests based on public revenues. Davutoğlu now has the tools of this web in his hands. It is obvious that the new prime minister will not rely on this network that served as the main mechanism in the corruption. This means that there will not be an old “parallel structure” discourse in the new era.
- Created on .