Turkey's agenda is busy with the question of who is the political pillar of the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ), which was responsible for the military coup attempt on July 15, 2016.
The political circles and the public wonder who coup plotters planned to appoint after overthrowing President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his government on that night.
Former Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ has brought into question the 2009 amendment to the law, stipulating that soldiers would be judged in private courts – which has fueled the debate over "whether there is another mobilization within the army."
The recent report, "Turkey's Nationalist Course: Implications for the U.S.-Turkish Strategic Partnership and the U.S. Army," published by the RAND Corporation, a U.S.-based think tank, has come to the agenda in such an environment, adding fuel to the fire.
The report by the RAND Corporation, which writes reports for the U.S. Department of Defense and provides strategic assessment support to Washington, conveys the message of working with a "U.S.-friendly political opposition" and "contacting NATO soldiers" in Turkey. The article highlights the fact that mid-level soldiers in the Turkish army have been troubled by purges in the army following the coup attempt.
It is quite normal that the report has stirred a reaction, since Gülen and his cronies, who have been proven to be behind the July 15, 2016, coup attempt in hundreds of rulings, reside in the U.S. On top of that, despite allying with Ankara for more than half a century in NATO, Washington is unwilling to extradite Gülen to Turkey to stand trial on charges of killing 250 people.
Naturally, the Turkish public thinks that the U.S. will have a finger in a possible coup attempt. This pervasive perception is not just about the U.S. position in the 2016 coup attempt. It also stems from the proven role that U.S. administrations have played in coups in our recent political history.
However, since 2016, there has been a president in the U.S. who has not continued the Middle East policies pursued in previous eras. President Donald Trump is taking a more rational line in international affairs, unlike his predecessor Barack Obama. He develops independent policies based on the electorate, rather than on ideological obsessions, or "circles of interest surrounding Washington," in his own words.
The sound dialogue process that Trump has developed with Erdoğan is indicative of this. The two leaders have shown the courtesy of overcoming many issues that have caused a crisis between the two countries through communication.
While the Turkish public and media are talking about the threat of a coup with the U.S. behind it, Washington is conveying warm messages about Erdoğan.
The White House statement on the phone conversation between Erdoğan and Trump over the weekend said, "Trump thanked Erdogan for Turkey's efforts to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe."
Last Tuesday, Trump said he was working with Erdoğan to resolve the issues over Idlib, adding that he had a good relationship with Erdoğan, whom he described as a "strong and tough" leader.
Was the president aware of the RAND Corporation's report and the debates in Turkey when he made these statements?
Who knows, maybe in the coming days, he would say something about the rumors of a coup and clarify the answer to the question "Which U.S.?" in the mind of Turkish people.
In fact, it is clear that the Gülenists in the U.S., who are the sources of this report, will be a burden on the relations between Ankara and Washington, whose interests have become common in the new era.