ATATÜRK’S PRINCIPLES

AND HISTORY OF
REVOLUTION II
Military coups in the history of the Turkish Republic
ID No. : 4D190084
Prepared by : Yasmin Samy Fouad
1971 military coup.
More than 200 successful military coups have taken place in 95 countries over the last 75 years.
In March 12 ,1971—The Turkish armed forces unseated the Government but made no move to take over actual rule as they did 11 years ago.
Premier Suleyman Demirel resigned under an ultimatum from the military leaders to quit or face a military takeover.
The military officers demanded a government strong enough to halt what they described as anarchy.
The ultimatum was issued by the country's four leading military men in the form of a memorandum to the President and the leaders of the Assembly and Senate.
As broadcast by the state radio, it said “The continuing attitude of the Parliament and Government has pushed our country into anarchy, fratricide, and social and economic
unrest.”
The generals demanded new government “above party politics,” and warned: “If this is not speedily realized the Turkish armed forces are determined to seize power to protect
the Turkish Republic as is their duty according to law.”
Mr. Demirel had been in office since 1965 when his conservative Justice party won the national election. He and his party won elections again in 1969 but recently he virtually
lost control of his own party in Parliament through defections of ultrarightists.

  1997 - Postmodern Coup

The Islamist REFAH or Welfare Party polled the most votes in the 1995 national election and came to power in July 1996 as head of a coalition government. Some REFAH
actions provoked the military, which labeled what it called ?reactionaryism? or fundamentalism one of the two main threats to the state. (The other is separatism.) On February
28, 1997, the military-dominated National Security Council issued a series of recommendations or ultimatums to the government on actions needed to protect secularism. The
military succeeded in forcing the Refah-led government from power later that year and Refah was banned in 1998, but it was succeeded by the Fazilet Party.
 
The name 'postmodern coup' was given to the clash between the army and the political leadership on Feb. 28, 1997 in which the military overthrew the coalition government led
by Necmettin Erbakan of the now-defunct Welfare Party (RP). The military again helped engineer the ouster - popularly dubbed a "postmodern coup" - of the then Islamic-
oriented government. The military demanded that Erbakan stop or reverse policies seen as promoting Islam in government affairs. It increasingly applied overt pressure on
Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan of the conservative Islamic Welfare (Refah) Party. At a meeting of the NSC on 28 February 1997, Top Commanders issued an 18-point
declaration, asking the government to take measures to curb the growing Islamist activities.

Enough members of the junior coalition partner defected to cause the Erbakan government to fall and force Erbakan to step down. The overall effect of this experience was to
show that Refah cannot change Turkish foreign policy and to harden non-Islamist opposition to Refah. In all of these coups, the majority of the Turkish public accepted the
military's actions because they felt they were necessary for the well being of the state and because the military did not seek to impose permanent military governance.

What happens when the army takes over a country?

In a coup, it is the military, paramilitary, or opposing political faction that deposes the current government and assumes power; whereas, in the pronunciamiento, the military
deposes the existing government and installs an (ostensibly) civilian government.
Martial law is the imposition of direct military control of normal civil functions or suspension of civil law by a government, especially in response to a temporary emergency
where civil forces are overwhelmed.

Coups d'état and Democracy: Implications on Development:

Coups d’état are a type of political instability that involves a sitting ruler being overthrown by his or her own military or other elite within the state apparatus. Coups are
commonly viewed as a threat to democracy.
there is no evidence that donor countries change their behavior in response to recent coups. A post-hoc analysis of failed coup attempts was also conducted. This analysis
revealed that donors do in fact change their behavior in response to failed coup, such that
donors tend to increase their aid to the failed coup states. This effect was observed despite the fact that the vast majority of coups occur in autocratic states.
A recent studies found that coups can help usher in democracy. If we examine this relationship empirically by looking at the political regimes that follow coups in autocracies, as
well as the level of repression against citizens. We find that, though democracies are occasionally established in the wake of coups, more often new authoritarian regimes
emerge, along with higher levels of state-sanctioned violence.
So,I’m against military coups,as the democracy can’t comes on the tanks.
References:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2053168016630837
https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1051&context=mpampp_etds
https://www.nytimes.com/1971/03/13/archives/turkish-regime-is-ousted-by-the-military-leaders-no-move-made-to.html?auth=login-google1tap&login=google1tap