Talk:1997 Turkish military memorandum

Coup or not?
The events leading up to the 28th of February process were most definitely a coup, though as the article notes a post-modern one. The information contained in this article is not correct. The military did not urge Erbakan to step down, what they did is force Demirel as current president to pressure Erbakan to step down or face military intervention, so he complied. It was an entirely undemocratic means of removing a prime minister who achieved his position though legal constitutional methods.

It is referred to as a post-modern coup mainly due to the fact that the military is no longer using violence as their first choice of intervention, and instead called upon the president to act on their behalf.

It could indeed use some cleaning and expanding however, and a new name since calling it a coup outright is somewhat misleading. I've generally read about it as the 28th of February Process or the alternate title of a Post-Modern Coup.

Chupac 17:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Where is the evidence? and sure you don't know about the coalition contract, which notes that PM chair will be shared time basely between Erbakan and Çiller.


 * It was not actually a coup but it was a threat kind of thing. I think the word "coup d'etat" is too much for that. I think this article should be removed or replaced with another appropriate title. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.96.6.158 (talk) 15:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

In fact the February 28 was one of the most democratic event in Turkey, The only thing happened during the national security consul was denouncing communism threat (5 years after USSR collapsed) and announcing fundamentalism as new thread, PM Erbakan had signed it without hesitation, which turned the arrows to his own camp, it was like a suicide for Refah Party and subsequently coalition term ended(Erbakan wanted it to end earlier) and Tansu ciller would be next PM but President Suleyman Demirel appointed Mesut Yilmaz, leader of the second largest party on the parliament ( that is a tradition ), who managed to form next government.

Where is the coup? the government completed its term (earlier but the coalition agreed) next party took the mission to form government and they did so why do people still call this as a coup? just because announcing fundamentalism as a thread which lead unreast among Refah Party ranks? 5 years later, 9/11 proved that fundamentalism is a global threat.


 * This title does not represent the case in 28 February 1997. Turkish military had concerns on several issues and warned the government in National Security Council. 4 month later, prime minister Necmettin Erbakan resigned to let the coalition leader and vice prime minister Tansu Ciller to become the Prime Minister as part of the coalition deal. The President Suleyman Demirel didn't consider the deal and assigned some other party leader for government. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.6.105.208 (talk) 05:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

There was no goverment overthrow, this falls best in to the catagory of "giving a warning", in Turkish "gozdagi vermek". The actions of Erbakan leading to resignation afterwards is his descision ...--Tendergluttony 13:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * As wikipedia defines "coup d'état is the sudden overthrow of a government through unconstitutional means". There was nothing unconstitutional during this event. Army definitely had a role in the events, but I believe using coup d'état term is not correct.  I suggest this article be renamed or deleted.--Charlesriver 05:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know the correct terminology for such events is Memorandum. Regards Kerem Özcan 13:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. It's a coup—by memorandum. --Adoniscik(t, c) 00:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Naming debates
See Naming conventions and Naming conflict for how to resolve dispute concerning titles. By the way, some of you might be interested in the controversy concerning the title of Macrohistorical battles tied to the existence of European civilisation [sic]. Cheers! Tazmaniacs 20:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Renamed the article, etc.
I was surprised to read that there was a "coup" in turkey in 1997. I was living in ankara at the time, One wouldn't miss something like a coup, no?

Like the second paragraph of the article stated it was political, it may be the army intervening but mediums used are political.

I've read the discussion and went ahead, edited the title, and then the article. I erased the misinformation on N. Erbakan (if interested the writer of the first article can rewrite about Erbakan's political views in the article on Erbakan and would meet a more active disapproval, I think.)

I can't understand why nobody did it before I did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IIIIIIIII (talk • contribs) 22:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for not seeking consensus first. --Adoniscik(t, c) 00:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

POV?
This page is POV because of claims such as:


 * "During the 1990s, Turkey's economy and social welfare has been gradually improving"


 * "however,the countries secular parties wanted to gain the power they had lost in the elections and put pressure on the army to step in and remove him from power.

i.e it represents a HIGH controversial political point of view.

Signed Timothy Scriven


 * Here in Turkey the CHP (Populist Republican Party) and the army see themselves as the founders and by extension "owners" of the state. What RefahYol (the coalition between the Welfare and True Path parties) did was threaten their power bases by the reforms they were planning. The real agenda was redistribution of economic wealth to different stratas of the society. Traditionally large conglomerates belonging to a select few families controlled much of the national economy. Beginning in the 80's during Ozal administration the average "backward" folk of Anotolia found the chance to really participate in the economy. By the mid 90's these entrepreneurs known as "Anatolian Tigers" were beginning to challenge the established socio-economic order. The events surrounding the so called post-modern coup was a final attempt by the establishment to consolidate their power over the nation. However in hind sight we can say that it failed. Currently the Army and CHP has lost much of their clout in Turkish politics. The EU accession process, liberal attitudes of the previous chief of staff of Turkish Military and the economic (political) crises of 2001 in concert with the Erdogan government has greatly undermined the power of the aforementioned establishment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.229.151.243 (talk) 07:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC).

Image copyright problem with File:Radikal 2008-12-25 fft17 mf89982.jpg
The image File:Radikal 2008-12-25 fft17 mf89982.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --09:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

On 04-02-1997
the tanks moved in Sincan... & after that "military memorandum"(on 28-02-1997). Böri (talk) 14:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Translation needed
If http://tr.wikisource.org/wiki/28_%C5%9Eubat_Kararlar%C4%B1 is translated, it would help. Can I use wikisource as a source? Kavas (talk) 19:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Salim Dervişoğlu
The lede includes a label for the subject by a person named Salim Dervişoğlu. Who is this person and why is his opinion important enough to be in the lead section? —Ynhockey (Talk) 18:40, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on 1997 Turkish military memorandum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=168113

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 1997 Turkish military memorandum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://arsiv.sabah.com.tr/1997/06/28/y12.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120229132600/http://www.zaman.com.tr/haber.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2153B7BF1F511541A43DF7D4A5DDCC38?haberno=147833 to http://www.zaman.com.tr/haber.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2153B7BF1F511541A43DF7D4A5DDCC38?haberno=147833
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.latimes.com/1997/jul/13/opinion/op-12239
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713150604/http://www.kibrispostasi.com/index.php/cat/22/col/102/art/2855 to http://www.kibrispostasi.com/index.php/cat/22/col/102/art/2855

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:49, 16 June 2017 (UTC)