Indirect praetorianism: the case of Turkey's military

• Autorzy: Shpak Valerij

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0016.0757

Warianty tytułu

PL

Pretorianizm niebezpośredni: przypadek tureckich sił zbrojnych

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Based on a case analysis of the Turkish military interfering on 27 April 2007 in the presidential elections, the article seeks to analyse the mechanisms of indirect interventions and contribute a new perspective to the analysis of praetorianism. The study found that the military intervention that took the shape of an e-memorandum of 27 April 2007 was a form of veto coup that is often used by the guardian-type military. In this paper, the subjects of direct non-violent intervention, their methods, as well as negative consequences for the military environment have been identified. The presented analysis of modern forms of praetorianism focuses on such forms of indirect actions of the military in which it is difficult to identify the interests of the military or see an increase in its political influence.

PL

Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu przeanalizowanie mechanizmów niebezpośrednich interwencji wojska oraz wniesienie nowej perspektywy do badań zjawiska pretorianizmu w oparciu o studium przypadku ingerencji tureckich sił zbrojnych w wybory prezydenckie 27 kwietnia 2007. Wykazano w nim, że interwencja wojskowa w formie e-memorandum z 27 kwietnia 2007 była formą prewencyjnego zamachu stanu, często przeprowadzanego przez siły zbrojne pełniące w państwie rolę „strażnika”. W pracy zidentyfikowano podmioty bezpośredniej interwencji bez użycia przemocy, stosowane przez nie metody oraz negatywne konsekwencje dla środowiska wojskowego. Przedstawiona analiza nowoczesnych form pretorianizmu skupia się na tych formach działań niebezpośrednich wojska, w których trudno jest zidentyfikować jego interesy albo dostrzec wzrost jego wpływów politycznych.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

praetorianism; coup; guardian; intervention; e-memorandum

PL

pretorianizm; zamach stanu; rola strażnika; interwencja; e-memorandum

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Akademii Wojsk Lądowych imienia generała Tadeusza Kościuszki
• Czasopismo: Scientific Journal of the Military University of Land Forces
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 54, No. 4(206)
• Strony: 624--638
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 44 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Shpak Valerij

• Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3530-1594

Bibliografia

• 1. Hacaoglu S, Kozok F. Erdogan Accuses Retired Admirals of Coup Plot Against Him, [online]. 5 April 2021. Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-05/turkey-accuses-some-retired-admirals-of-erdogan-overthrow-plot [Accessed: 11 April 2021].
• 2. Turkey condemns retired admirals’ declaration on political matters, [online]. TRTWorld. 5 April 2021. Available at: https://www.trtworld.com/turkey/turkey-condemns-retired-admirals-declaration-on-political-matters-45590 [Accessed: 8 April 2021].
• 3. Turkey detains 10 retired admirals over maritime treaty declaration, [online]. HurriyetDailyNews. 5 April 2021. Available at: https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-detains-10-retired-admirals-over-declaration-163689 [Accessed: 11 April 2021].
• 4. Huntington SP. Political order in changing societies. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1968.
• 5. Nordlinger E. Soldiers in Politics. Military Coups and Governments. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1977.
• 6. Perlmutter A. The Praetorian State and the Praetorian Army. Toward a Taxonomy of Civil-Military Relations in Developing Polities. Comparative Politics. 1969;1(3):382-404.
• 7. Aknur M. Towards More Democratic Civil-Military Relations in Turkey. L’Europe en Formation. 2013;1(367):31-50. DOI: 10.3917/eufor.367.0031.
• 8. The Kingmakers – The Rise and Fall of the Praetorian Guard, [online]. 23 April 2016. Available at: https://historythoughtsbypaul.wordpress.com/2016/04/23/the-kingmakers-the-rise-and-fall-of-the-praetorian-guard/ [Accessed: 15 April 2021].
• 9. Marx K. The Rule of the Pretorians. New-York Daily Tribune. 1858;5270.
• 10. Kinney DH. Politicians at Arms: Civilian Recruitment of Soldiers for Middle East Coups. Armed Forces & Society. 2019;45(4):681-701. DOI: 10.1177/0095327X18777983.
• 11. Egreteau R. The Continuing Political Salience of the Military in Post-SPDC Myanmar. In: Cheesman N, Farrelly N, Wilson T. Debating Democratization in Myanmar. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies; 2014, p. 259-84.
• 12. Welch CE. Civilian control of the military. Theory and cases from developing countries. Albany: State University of New York Press; 1976.
• 13. Rapoport DC. A Comparative Theory of Military and Political Types. In: Huntington SP. Changing patterns of military politics. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe; 1962.
• 14. Aslan Ö. ‘Unarmed’ We Intervene, Unnoticed We Remain: The Deviant Case of ‘February 28th Coup’ in Turkey. British Journal Of Middle Eastern Studies. 2016;43(3):360-77. DOI: 10.1080/13530194.2015.1102710.
• 15. McAlister LN. The Military. Johnson JJ (ed.). Continuity and Change in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 1964, p. 136-60.
• 16. Jenkins JC, Kposowa AS. The Political Origins of African Military Coups. Ethnic Competition, Military Centrality, and the Struggle over the Postcolonial State. International Studies Quarterly. 1992;36(3):271-91. DOI: 10.2307/2600773.
• 17. Taylor B. Politics and the Russian Army: Civil-Military Relations, 1689-2000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511615719.
• 18. Kebschull HG. Operation “Just Missed”: Lessons From Failed Coup Attempts. Armed Forces & Society. 1994;20(4):565-79. DOI: 10.1177/0095327X9402000405.
• 19. Flanagin J. What is a coup?, [online]. Quartz. 16 July 2016. Available at: https://qz.com/733907/what-is-a-coup [Accessed: 15 April 2021].
• 20. Evin A. Changing Patterns of Cleavages Before and After 1980. In: Heper M, Evin A (eds.). State Democracy and the Military in Turkey in the 1980s. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter; 1988, p. 201-15.
• 21. Kaase M, Marsh A. Political Action. A Theoretical Perspective. In: Barnes S, Kaase M, et al. Political action: mass participation in five Western democracies. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications; 1979, p. 1-607.
• 22. Finer SE. The man on horseback: the role of military in politics. London: Pall Mall Press; 1962.
• 23. Alagappa M. Coercion and governance: the declining political role of the military in Asia. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 2001.
• 24. Darke P, Shanks G, Broadbent M. Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems Journal. 1998;8:273-89. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2575.1998.00040.x.
• 25. Yin RK. Discovering the Future of the Case Study. Method in Evaluation Research. Evaluation Practice. 1994;15(3):283-90. DOI: 10.1177/109821409401500309.
• 26. Frequency of Coup Events from 1945 to 2019, [online]. Available at: https://clinecenter.illinois.edu/project/research-themes/democracy-and-development/coup-detat-project-cdp/freq-table [Accessed: 13 April 2021].
• 27. Aytar V. Daha Karanlık bir Geleceğe Doğru mu? Terörle Mücadele Kanununda Yapılan Değişiklikler. TESEV. 2006.
• 28. General Buyukanit appointed early to head up Turkish Armed Forces, [online]. Available at: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/general-buyukanit-appointed-early-to-head-up-turkish-armed-forces-4849109 [Accessed: 12 April 2021].
• 29. Turan I. Unstable stability: Turkish politics at the crossroads? International Affairs. 2007;83(2):319-38.
• 30. One million Turks rally against government, [online]. 2007. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-president-idUSL2910950920070429/ [Accessed: 13 April 2021].
• 31. Buyukanit: Cumhuriyeti korumak siyaset degil gorev. Milliyet. 2006.
• 32. Büyükanıt’tan Önemli Mesajlar, [online]. 2 October 2006. Available at: https://www.amerikaninsesi.com/a/a-17-2006-10-02-voa8-88017502/848722.html/ [Accessed: 14 April 2021].
• 33. ‘Buyukanit’tan ‘en ust duzey’ vurgusu, [online]. 2006. Available at: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/buyukanittan-en-ust-duzey-vurgusu-5185268 [Accessed: 10 April 2021].
• 34. Büyükanıt: Ülkeyi Kimse Bölemez, [online]. 2007. Available at: http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/400027.asp [Accessed: 10 April 2021].
• 35. 300,000 Protest Islamic Hue of Turkish System, [online]. 2007. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/world/europe/15turkey.html [Accessed: 11 April 2021].
• 36. Türk Genelkurmay Başkanlığı 27 Nisan 2007 tarihli basın açıklaması, [online]. 2007. Available at: https://tr.wikisource.org/wiki/T%C3%BCrk_Genelkurmay_Ba%C5%9Fkanl%C4%B1%C4%9F%C4%B1_27_Nisan_2007_tarihli_bas%C4%B1n_a%C3%A7%C4%B1klamas%C4%B1 [Accessed: 12 April 2021].
• 37. Debate on meeting absurd: Büyükanıt, [online]. Available at: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/debate-on-meeting-absurd-buyukanit-11873110 [Accessed: 10 April 2021].
• 38. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Başbakanlığı basın açıklaması (28 Nisan 2007), [online]. 2007. Available at: https://tr.wikisource.org/wiki/T%C3%BCrkiye_Cumhuriyeti_Ba%C5%9Fbakanl%C4%B1%C4%9F%C4%B1_bas%C4%B1n_a%C3%A7%C4%B1klamas%C4%B1_(28_Nisan_2007) [Accessed: 11 April 2021].
• 39. Taylor Ch. A Secular Age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2007.
• 40. Polat RK. The 2007 parliamentary elections in Turkey: Between securitization and desecuritization. Parliamentary Affairs. 2009;62(1):129-48. DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsn039.
• 41. Heper M, Guney A. The military and the consolidation of democracy: The recent Turkish experience. Armed Forces & Society. 2000;26(4):635-57.
• 42. The European Commission. Turkey 2007 Progress Report. 2007.
• 43. Sarigil Z. Civil-Military Relations beyond Dichotomy: With Special Reference to Turkey. Turkish Studies. 2011;12(2):265-78.
• 44. Ulucakar M, Çağlar A. İki Farklı Sivil-Asker İlişkileri Modelinin Analizi: Türkiye Örneği. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi. 2017;14:41-57. DOI: 10.33458/uidergisi.513504.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MEiN, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2022-2023).