This term paper shall take a deeper look at the military regimes in Turkey and Greece. For a better understanding of the historical background an overview over the military regimes in point 2 of the term paper is inevitable. After that in point 3 – the main part of the paper – a comparative analysis is carried out whereby at first the theoretical framework is pointed out before it comes to the actual comparison.
My analysis focuses on the military regimes that were evoked by coups d’état in both countries. With limitations to space I only draw attention to the last military regimes in both countries, meaning the junta in Greece from 1967-74 and in Turkey from 1980-83. Those timeframes are to be compared in this term paper. In the following part 4 I will also draw my attention to the role of the military in Greece and Turkey today, how the perception of the military changed and the role it is taking in the current society with regard to its power and influence.
This will lead to a final estimation in the last part of the term paper.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Historical overview of the military regimes
2.1 Greece 1967-1974
2.2 Turkey 1980-83
3.The comparative analysis
3.1 The theoretical framework
3.1.1 Civil-military relationships by Nordlinger and Janowitz
3.1.2 Types of military regime by Nordlinger, Clapham and Philip
3.2 The practical analysis
3.2.1 General findings – Similarities and Differences
3.2.2 Application of the Theories
4. The role of the military today
4.1 In Greece
4.2 In Turkey
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This paper examines and compares the military regimes in Turkey and Greece, focusing specifically on the juntas that seized power through coups d'état: the Greek regime from 1967–1974 and the Turkish regime from 1980–1983. The primary research objective is to analyze these historical periods through established theoretical frameworks of civil-military relations to determine the regimes' characteristics and to evaluate the contemporary role of the military in both nations.
- Historical evolution of military intervention in Greece and Turkey.
- Application of theoretical models (Nordlinger, Janowitz, Clapham, Philip) to analyze regime types.
- Comparative analysis of political, economic, and institutional impacts of military rule.
- Evaluation of current civil-military relations and the shift toward democratic consolidation.
- Assessment of the military's influence on contemporary national security and political strategy.
Book Excerpt
3.2.1 General findings – Similarities and Differences
Although the conditions in both countries are unique some remarkable parallels can be seen. Both countries directly before the coups d’état faced a difficult situation economically as well as politically. The people in both nations were unsatisfied. Extremists on both sides of the political spectrum resorted to murder and other forms of violence. There was considerable public unrest with almost daily demonstrations, strikes, and riots in both countries and both junta leaders had the intention to end the anarchy that developed in the countries. Prior to the coups, political leaders hardly attempted to repress this antidemocratic behaviour.
Nevertheless while the Turkish people were welcoming the military intervention the Greeks were looking at it with mixed feelings although many profited from the economic boom which occurred from 1967 – 1972.
It is mentionable that in both countries the US was in a way supporting the regimes. Of course this was due to their own interests with Turkey being an important NATO ally and Greece who was in a perceived danger of a communist threat. The US wanted to prevent the countries to fall under Soviet rule.
In both countries the use of torture as a mean for repression was commonly used. There were numerous complaints made by Human Rights Organisations like Amnesty International. Individual's rights were limited. Free elections were suspended. Martial law, censorship, arrests, beatings, torture, and killings are all part of the juntas.
The juntas closed down all political parties and banned their leaders from political life. In Greece leading politicians had been arrested and were held incommunicado by the conspirators.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the scope of the paper, focusing on a comparative study of the military regimes in Greece (1967–74) and Turkey (1980–83) and their contemporary roles.
2. Historical overview of the military regimes: Provides the historical context, conditions, and background of the military juntas in both Turkey and Greece.
3. The comparative analysis: Establishes a theoretical framework using models of civil-military relations to analyze the specific nature, findings, and practical applications regarding the military regimes.
4. The role of the military today: Examines the development of the military's position in Greece and Turkey, analyzing their current relationship with civil society and the state.
5. Conclusion: Summarizes the key findings, highlighting the similarities in intervention and the differing paths toward democratic consolidation in both countries.
Keywords
Military regime, Civil-military relations, Turkey, Greece, Coup d'état, Junta, Guardian regime, Democratization, National security, Political autonomy, Military intervention, Civil control, Cold War, Kemalism, Human rights.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper provides a comparative study of the military regimes in Turkey and Greece, specifically analyzing the juntas that emerged in Greece between 1967–1974 and in Turkey between 1980–1983.
Which specific themes are addressed?
The core themes include historical background, the application of theoretical civil-military control models, the comparison of junta characteristics, and the contemporary role of the military in both societies.
What is the central research objective?
The objective is to understand how these regimes functioned, how they can be categorized using political science frameworks, and how their legacy influences current civil-military dynamics.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author employs a comparative analysis method, applying established theoretical frameworks from scholars like Nordlinger, Janowitz, Clapham, and Philip to empirical historical data.
What does the main body of the paper discuss?
The main body evaluates the historical context, presents the theoretical framework for analyzing military regimes, executes a practical comparison of the two cases, and discusses the shift toward modern democratic control.
Which keywords define this work?
Key terms include military regimes, civil-military relations, guardian regimes, Turkey, Greece, coups d'état, and democratic consolidation.
How does the author categorize the Turkish military regime of 1980–1983?
The author identifies the 1980–1983 Turkish regime as fitting into the "guardian" category, characterized by the intent to resolve national crises and return power to civilian leadership after constitutional changes.
What is the main finding regarding Greece's military regime?
The author argues that the Greek junta does not fit perfectly into one ideal type, but falls somewhere between a "guardian" and "ruler" regime, given its longer duration and the transformative impact it had on the Greek monarchy.
How is the military's role in modern Greece described?
In modern Greece, the military is described as being subordinated to the government and incorporated into civil society, focusing on issues like social objectives and environmental protection, fitting a liberal-democratic model.
What differentiates the Turkish military's position today from that of Greece?
Unlike in Greece, the Turkish military still maintains a level of "double authority" and significant political influence through the National Security Council, even while the country pursues reforms to meet EU standards.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Master of European Studies Susanne Voigt (Autor:in), 2007, Military regimes in Turkey and Greece - A comparative analysis, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/84955
