Since the day it was founded, modern Turkey has greatly suffered from military tutelage. From 1923 to 1945, the country was administrated by a single-party regime, which was indisputably under the heel of the military. The Democrat Party, which came to power in the early years of the first multi-party election experiences, was overthrown by the military in the 10th year of its incumbency. Prime Minister Adnan Menderes and two other ministers of time were executed. Following the military coup of May 27, 1960, the public once again brought civilians to power through elections, and this time the military toppled the elected government with the memorandum of March 12, 1971. Turkish history repeated itself on Sept. 12, 1980, when the elected government was removed from power yet again. The military was adamant on not leaving politics to civilians and tanks were deployed in the streets one more time on Feb. 28 1997. Fortunately, Turkey's public was never disheartened by the military and, as was seen after all military crackdowns, they voted for a party that prioritized civilian politics, and in late 2002, just a few years after the postmodern coup of Feb. 28, 1997, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) was brought to power with unprecedented popular support. Lastly, the military memorandum, which was issued on April 27, 2007, was rejected by then Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's firm stance and popular support, which was a milestone in Turkish political history. Since then, Turkey has been taking steps toward demilitarization. The institution called the National Security Council (MGK), which included soldiers among its members and gave advice to the government, was demilitarized. The full authority of the Supreme Military Council (YAŞ), which is in charge of appointing military staff, was granted to politicians who were the civilian representatives of the population. Article 35 of the army's Internal Service Code was removed as it provided a legal justification for military coups, and the mission of the military was clarified. The area of jurisdiction of military courts was narrowed to cover largely "disciplinary offenses." All of these steps were improved with civilian politics and Parliament's embrace of moral superiority with their discourse. And finally, with the August 2014 election, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan took the presidential office as a civilian politician - a position that is also treated as commander in chief. Last week, Parliament made another strong move toward demilitarization. The AK Party government managed to pass a legal amendment to transfer the gendarmerie to the sphere of the Interior Ministry. Certainly, all this is not enough to institutionalize demilitarization, and no country in the world, no matter how democratic they are, has been able to overcome the paradox of "who will guard the guardians," with which humanity has grappled for thousands of years. This is why demilitarization is regarded as a process that entails continuous reforms and requires countries to update their systems against this potential threat. Narcis Serra, who was the Spanish defense minister for around 10 years during Spain's civilian transformation, lays emphasis on political consensus for the healthy continuation of democratic transition processes in countries. Turkish opposition supports military tutelage Turkey's opposition parties have always hampered the AK Party government's demilitarization moves over the past decade. They objected to all of the above-mentioned demilitarization steps both in Parliament and in the streets. Furthermore, they voted against the legal amendment that would transfer the gendarmerie to a civilian institution. It is sad that political parties, which describe themselves as left-wingers, stick to the old paradigm that worked in favor of the military and to the detriment of democratization. They are "uneasy" about the civilian government that came to power through elections that were watched by the whole world in a country where political means are open to the core, but they disregard the military tutelage that killed democracy though numerous coups for 80 years. They have always strived to hamper Turkey's attempts to demilitarize and integrate with the modern world by using a false agenda. Let me explain their style of opposition via a recent incident that has had a worldwide repercussion. Main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu claimed that the judiciary has prepared a case to close his party. It is really funny that even though Kılıçdaroğlu's addressee is the judiciary, he asserted that this step was taken by the AK Party, which faced a closure case itself several years ago. It is even funnier that earlier in the week, Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu called on the CHP to issue a legal amendment to completely prevent party closures. As expected, the CHP rejected it just as they voted against a similar legislative proposal from the government in 2010. In brief, the AK Party struggles not only with military tutelage, but also with the self-styled leftist opposition on the country's way to demilitarization and democratization. It does not go unnoticed that the EU turns a blind eye to the endeavors of a prospective member state while it is striving to catch up with universal democratic norms. Do you think the EU cares about demilitarization merely in member countries? Or do you think that the EU's belief in the manipulations of the pro-military tutelary opposition serves their purpose?