My Turkish friend told me the Turks have been aware of attempts of destabilize their country. It was mostly the general population that came out and stopped the military coup.
The Turks don't want another Syria or Libia where western backed rebels have made those places no-go countries. Turkey at least has a very friendly and thriving tourism eco system.
Yet they voted the same type of guy/party who ru(i)ned syria or libia to power?
And enough of that evil western/jew outsiders scapegoats conspiracy theory's to avoid the realization that a whole culture produces failing governments on a regular basis.
Those rebels are mainly backed up by local powers- Saudi arabia, Iran and yes turkey.
Something in these cultures is unable to keep institutions and democracy alive.
And the scapegoats all sound so old, shall i list them? The western media, decadence, capitalism, socialism, christianity, judaism, budhism, sports, TV, music, the internet the list of evildoers is endless. They where all eliminated in experiments, and the evidence is there, that they are not the things holding these societys back.
Why not for once, own these mistakes and realize all those creepy crawly's from outside are just fleas biting a already diseased dog.
And yes, its everywhere the same symptom, in every country that becomes islamic. And the deflection-method that the social reality produced by a cultural system are not connected to the very system, has gone out of the window too by the way.
Here is the question wanting a answer:
What in these culturs undermines institutions to work correctly?
What destroys the ability of judges to oppose governments?
What creates this wish to go back towards a perfect time- and time where the lack of modern medicine would have killed half of those wishing back to these times?
What undermines the concept of a human live being sacred?
I hate cheering for the military here, but they released turkey back into democracy several times. Islamic dictators did this nowhere.
<edited to be less inflamatory.. i really want this discussed>
Poverty, lack of education, and lack of opportunity would be my trio of undermining traits. It's a lot harder to convince someone with a 9-5 job, a family and a mortgage to overthrow the government.
If we think of this as Islamic nationalism, it fits the pattern where things get really bad for common people, and someone rallies them against a perceived other in order to consolidate his own power.
Be wary of anyone who wants to blame an out-group for your economic issues, be it Muslims, Mexicans, infidels, Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, etc. (Why I'm afraid of Trump).
I think sitting at our cushy desk jobs in the west it is hard to empathize with the real hardship people have been experiencing in that region for a long time.
I have no knowledge of the causal direction here, honestly. I think there's an assumption by some vocal pundits that it's Islam -> holy war -> poverty.
I don't think that's clear. More likely it's poverty -> malleable population -> some cause promises to make things good again (Like they were in the caliphate, like they were in any fabled past) -> people believe it and fight for it. There's historical precedent for this.
(Which of course exacerbates the poverty because of wanton destruction of capital/infrastructure, people not being able to leave home, intelligentsia flight, etc). Eventually you get some version of an autocracy. The type of autocracy is to some extent irrelevant, although theocratic autocracies appear to be disproportionately brutal...
Other parts of the world had the same loop and broke out of it. Money exists, and even poverty is not universal to the region.
Why is there no middle-eastern- tiger state?
Lack of Education is unconvincing, the Internet is now available for 20 years. Education is in parts of the region actively rejected as western influence.
Late-Medieval Peasants where poor. Yet, in the citys the Renaissance could happen. There is not even this "aristocratic" attempt for improvement by "showing off" intellectual achievements or art showing in Saudi Arabia. No "big familys" trying to outdo one another with the fame of there universitys. And they could have done so.
Israel is a relatively rich middle-eastern democracy. Jordan should probably count too (it has its problems, yes, but so do most of the tiger states). Qatar too, to a much lesser extent and esp. if you prioritize wealth/stability over democracy per se. And Saudi Arabia is at least stable and wealthy, if not ticking off the other boxes.
But it's also worth pointing out that outside of the west and regions where the local population was so thoroughly decimated as to make the population effectively European (e.g., US and Canada), free market secular democracies are pretty rare.
Actually Iran and Turkey would be on my list for close but not yet "Tiger States"-
Israel falls under "displaced, but Europe", even in the DVD-Release market.
I know some pretty awesome Pakistani programmers- but they all left there home-country to live somewhere else. They had some "doing well" family background though.
If poverty eats it all, via corruption, would it help to help founders in these states to hide there (relative) "wealth", and the existence of there company/products? Could IP be protected from illegal seezing of governments, by market pressure?
Is that even possible - a stealth startup?
Depressing as hearing people in the British Empire wondering why Indians don't like freedom.
Ironically, anyone who googles "Rojava" or "north kurdistan democracy" will discover people far ahead of the western powers in terms of democracy. Absolutely fundamental to understanding Turkey.
I fell for the romantics of the revolutionary underdog early on in my life. By now i know, they will be corrupt and evil if they get to power- they just cant be it - yet.
The Kurd's will build another formidable dictatorship once there first state is really officially established, and the outside pressure is gone. There are power hungry psychopaths in every society, and not having plans for institutions that keep those at bay and busy will allow them to gain control.
Everyone can be a saint without woman and vine available.
There is a theory that Erdogan was aware of something like this and was prepared, let the military faction walk into honeytrap. Its a theory, but the purges that will happen in turkey, god bless them!
That's a very complicated honey trap to set up. And it's a failure on both the accounts that elected leaders should protect its people before things escalate and secondly elected leaders aren't supposed to set up trap like this in the first place.
I'm probably lacking in imagination, but I don't understand why it has to be complicated. Under the right circumstances, it would just entail to NOT act upon intelligence about an impending coup attempt? Just check that you have support from other key parts of the military, then wait.
To engineer something like that, yes, that sounds very complicated. But to see an opportunity rise and grab it, does not sound impossible. It's plausible, I'd say. I look forward to watch the documentary in 30 years... ?
Leaders democratically elected or otherwise are people seeking power, in general the democratic leaders do not cross a line, but Erdogan has proven he is not your "normal" elected leader.
Nobody benefits from a failed coup like Erdogan, he now has the license to make Military in his image and the last pillar of secularism in Turkey is Kaput!
The coup failed, at least in part, because either the plotters and their allies were deluded about getting support from the population, or they had simply failed to prepare the ground by promoting secularism in the population. The other side of the coin is that the population sees secularism as the hallmark of a military that is co opted by liaisons with NATO and foreign intelligence agencies.
I see this latter failure as a general failure throughout the way the West interacts with Islamic nations. We've allowed secularism to become a tarnished brand, associated with military strong-men, instead of promoting it as the way to rights and education for women and freedom from religious totalitarianism.
The general feeling on reddit seems to be of pro-coup. However many have highlighted that coups are long processes and haven't been positive in the long run at least in the middle east.
That's probably a risk in every coup attempt, though to be fair the results of this one failing probably won't be worse now than they would have been in centuries gone by.
Ataturk must be rolling over in his grave. It's a damned shame that the coup didn't succeed - Turkey has been one of the few reasonably successful Muslim countries at Westernizing, brought about because of the colossal failures of the old Ottoman Empire. Erdogan's backsliding into the same theocratic-tinged islamist government is especially troubling for a NATO member, and one that is slated to join the EU eventually.
I hope that the EU will stop all proceedings on this now that it's crystal clear Turkey cannot be a candidate. You can't have an EU country that can't even govern itself as part of the EU. Turkey is neither free nor stable. It's arguably not even in Europe. If the coup had succeeded, maybe it could eventually have been a country worthy of EU membership, but I'm pretty sure Erdogan is not going to lean back towards liberty after these incidents and make the country even worse. Not to mention the extreme unpopularity of this idea in Europe.
Firstly, this wasn't a coup attempt organised by all military, only a fraction.
What would a coup solve actually? Does it change people's mind? It is this kind of disrespect to voters which gave rise to popularity of Erdogan in his political life. People are not sheep(sometimes) and they get angry if their choice in polls affected in dirty ways.
For the most of the people in Turkey, this wasn't about the Erdogan. This coup attempt was about democracy and freedom. Most people doesn't think everything is roses, they only think coup would be the worst.
One more thing I noticed is that some people in the world seems that they don't have any disgust for a coup. Turkey has a long history of coups and elder people have told many stories about them. I think that brings some education.
I would read Hett's analysis of the fire and subsequent investigation; there's excellent reason to think that van der Lubbe was not acting alone -- or perhaps not even involved in setting the fires themselves -- and plenty of circumstantial and physical evidence tying the SA and Goebbels to the fire. And, regardless of who set the fire, the Nazis had planned for the institution of emergency rule upon the first pretext; the key elements of what would become the Reichstag Fire Decree were set out weeks before the fire, as Göring would later acknowledge.
Some political analysts are saying that this coup was staged by Erdogan to get rid of the remaining opposition.
Basically the theory is that there was a very weak plan in effect that the government knew about, and helped move it along (to get it started). While being completely prepared to deal with it.
Could also be a hybrid: anyone in power in Turkey who pisses off enough people would expect a coup at any point, and therefore not only protect against it, but have a few ideas on how to greatly benefit. Like Saddam Hussein after failed coups.
Erdogan's faction seems to be tightening their grip, but they didn't have to stage the coup in order to know to exploit it. as the saying goes, "never let a crisis go to waste"
I haven't read that article, but it's zerohedge and so should be taken with a generous pinch of salt.
In the age of the internet, you can't simply act when the leaders are outside the country. It's far too easy to rouse the populace from wherever you are. You have to have physical possession of the political leadership -- ideally the top 3-5 people (as many top folks as the average person could easily identify with)
For a NATO-trained military, this was a horrible coup. It was so bad that I seriously wonder if it's not a false flag operation. I doubt it, but I wonder.
The NATO allies have a real mess on their hands. If the people of Turkey truly support an endless reign of a single party that's slowly causing more and more destabilization in the region, and is purging the courts and military of educated, secular actors? This is about as bad as it gets long-term. Turkey is slowly ditching Attaturk.
Oddly, because of the coup failure, assuming we have a Chavez-style "democracy" now, the only recourse for social change is assassination. So there'll be a bloody purge, and then social change, when it does happen (from either outside or inside factors), will be much more bloody than this simple coup this time around would have been.
This is all kinds of bad. Very sad for the people of Turkey.
Even the though the Title is a bit more strong, the coup in turkey would be successful if the entire army acted in unison, its a faction of army that acted and they do not have good allies outside of it.
There are multiple factors here.
This is article does wear some rose colored glasses given the info sec background of the author about the prominence of cyberpower (he may have a point, but that is not primary point of failure).
Coups are possibly in modern day, take a look at Egypt.
The medium that seems to have been most effective in getting people into the streets was the public address systems of mosques. The traditional call to prayer involved a muezzin in a minaret (that's what minarets on mosques are for). But now mosques use a PA system, often with considerable audio power. That's available for other purposes.
Great article from Grugq. He's main focus is opsec if you don't know who he is.
I agree with most points and I'd say that simply cutting power to major cities in Turkey during this event could have changed the outcome. It would have provided a total communication blackout which would have neutralized social or 'cyber' as he calls it and would have created fear (more than pre internet because we're so reliant on it) which would have put the military in a position to 'restore order'.
Considering it was the response of the people that was a large factor in the coup failing, there's a lot of people here wishing the Deep State (a name which was coined to describe the situation in Turkey) succeeded, against the will of the people.
But on other days, people here are concerned about interlinked security and military liaisons constituting a Deep State in their own countries, limiting autonomy and democracy.
Have you considered that the rise of Islamism is in part caused by the fact that secular military and security services in Islamic countries were coopted to some degree, and that religious-based politics is harder to subvert in that way?
What's sauce for the Turks is sauce for the Swedes. The Deep State in Sweden seems to make their security services and at least some prosecutors an arm of the US hunt for Assange. If you would support greater autonomy among US allies, so they behave less like vassals, it's hard to support the Deep State in Turkey.
Anyway, the Deep State has proven to be brittle, unreliable, and prone to blowback.
Sometimes with big political events one sees something that just does not sit right with one's overall understanding of events. If the events were a movie or teevee series you would consider these things to be flaws in the plot.
Initially I was open to the idea that the coup was what the mainstream media said it was, however, the internet has opened me up to the idea that the whole thing was staged. This analysis better fits my earlier private observation that things weren't quite what they seemed to be.
So, my thinking is that the new internet medium (new for coups) will work against the 'President' because word on the street will be that he faked the coup. This word on the street will be spread by internet and messenger chat. If this becomes all pervasive then the 'President' really does end up getting himself killed, his regime completely overthrown, game over. I also believe he is one of those leaders that the U.S. can let go of, Turkey may be NATO but the leader is interchangeable.
Don't underestimate his supporters unwillingness to hear anything that doesn't align with their beliefs.
He went against his best ally at the time, the fallout was both sides having their secrets made public by the other. However, he increased his votes in the next election as his supporters, with his leadership created a nation-wide "OMG he's being framed please ignore all the evidence saying otherwise" campaign.
He is also missing a university diploma without which he can't be the president and the one he has used till the news broke has been shown to be fake (dates, signature and department do not match). The government's TV channel removed all the videos of him talking about his university days and no news channel other than the ones who are labeled as "conspiracy theorists" dared to publish anything about it.
And some of my friends still ask me if I want to go back to Turkey...
So? It's not surprising that the internet played a significant role in the coup. It plays a significant role in everything.
The only evidence I see here of "cyberpower" stopping the coup is Erdogan having given a statement via FaceTime on television. Yes, that's amusing to see, but it doesn't tell us anything about coups.
Right, but cutting power completely might take weeks to reconcile, exposing your faction to painful, expensive, irrecoverable levels of sabotage, even if you do clip a serious opponent's wings doing so.
It might be a move interpreted in ways so politically costly, that you'd only trade a serious opponent in the short term, for an inertia of lasting public resentment that creates larger enemies down the road.
But, break some eggs and make an omelet. What do I know?
How does the wifi work? How does the internet work? By electricity, and buildings that run using electricity. My router can run from a battery, but if my ISP isn't working, or if the fibre cabinet is out of power....
This article (1) calls it "an attempt to grab the reins of a complex society with the almost quaintly antediluvian tactics of seizing the state television station and rolling some tanks on to the streets. It is as if the plotters had never heard of social media"
so what would be modern coup tactics? The medium article mentions that there are more communication channels that need seizing in order to be effective.
My concern with this coup is that the results of it failing are going to be worse for the Turkish people than if it had succeeded.
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/4t4ke5/pro_erdogan_is...