In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

219 Notes Chapter 1 1. Personal interview by the author, Athens, 3 September 2004. 2. Kenan Evren, Kenan Evren’in Anıları, vol. 1 (Istanbul: Milliyet Yayınları, 1990), 546. 3. Theodore A. Couloumbis, A Professor’s Notes: The Greek Junta Phenomenon (New York: Pella Publishing, 2004), 27, 30. 4. Personal interview by the author, Ankara, 22 September 2005. Demirel’s party was banned and could not run in the 1983 elections. 5. On comparative historical analysis, see James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer , eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). 6. More information on the field research can be found in the appendix. 7. One of the earliest categorizations of military interventions was done by Samuel Huntington, who attributed different kinds of military interventions to the level of socioeconomic development in a given country. According to him, in oligarchic societies, radical soldiers establish “breakthrough coups”; in middle-­ class societies, soldiers and their “moderator coups” are arbitrators between different social groups; and in mass societies , guardian soldiers stage “veto coups.” Similar assumptions were made by Samuel Finer, who argued that levels of intervention, ranging from “influence” to “supplantment ,” depended on the levels of political culture. Both scholars, influenced by modernization theory, made valuable hypotheses; however, they did not systematically analyze their classifications by beefing them up with in-­ depth case studies. Moreover, they did not study military interventions from an objective point of view, and they showed tendencies to hail the ones that occurred in underdeveloped countries. Huntington, for instance , explicitly argued that “reform coups” were signs of progress and modernization. See Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968); Samuel P. Huntington, “Patterns of Violence in World Politics,” in Changing Patterns of Military Politics, ed. Samuel Huntington (New York: Free Press, 1962), 17–­50; S. E. Finer, The Man on Horseback: The Role of the Military in Politics (Boulder : Westview, 1988). Another modernization theorist who welcomed military interventions in developing nations is Lucian W. Pye; see his “Armies in the Process of Political 220 • Notes to Pages 5–6 Modernization,” in The Role of the Military in Underdeveloped Countries, ed. John J. Johnson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962), 69–­89. 8. Slightly different than categorizing military coups based on their duration, Eric Nordlinger and Alfred Stepan classified the roles of the militaries based on the extent of their power and their political and economic objectives. Although many scholars have readily applied their concepts to various countries, the reasons for the differences between “moderator,” “guardian,” or “ruler” militaries were not comparatively studied. See Eric Nordlinger, Soldiers in Politics: Military Coups and Governments (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1977); Alfred Stepan, The Military in Politics: Changing Patterns in Brazil (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971). 9. This should not mean that earlier scholars did not deal with the question of civilian control of the armed forces. Indeed, Huntington and Janowitz pioneered this literature in the late 1950s and early 1960s. See Samuel Huntington, The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-­ Military Relations (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1957); Morris Janowitz, The Professional Soldier: A Social and Political Portrait (New York: Free Press, 1960). 10. For examples of works that focus on the civilian control of the armed forces in new democracies, see Alfred Stepan, Rethinking Military Politics: Brazil and the Southern Cone (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988); Wendy Hunter, Eroding Military Influence in Brazil: Politicians against Soldiers (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1997); David Pion-­Berlin, ed., Civil-­Military Relations in Latin America: New Analytical Perspectives (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001); Thomas C. Bruneau and Scott D. Tollefson, eds., Who Guards the Guardians and How? Democratic Civil-­ Military Relations (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2006); Zoltan Barany, The Soldier and the Changing State: Building Democratic Armies in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012). 11. Samuel Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991); José M. Magone, The Politics of Southern Europe: Integration into the European Union (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003), 8–­10. 12. On selection bias, see Gary King, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba, Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 129–­32. 13. For examples, see the following volumes: Guillermo O’Donnell, Philippe C. Schmitter, and Laurance Whitehead, eds., Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Southern Europe (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins...


Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.