The Third Republic (1980–)

  • Ersin Kalaycioğlu
Part of the Middle East in Focus book series (MEF)

Abstract

The coup of September 12, 1980 was the last of the three coups that deeply influenced the substance and style of politics and governance in contemporary Turkey. Both the 1971 ultimatum and the 1980 institutional military coups were carried out by the military as “corrective measures” to remedy the ills of the coup of the young officers in 1960. The trial and sentencing to death of the Chief of General Staff of the Armed Forces, General Rüştü Erdelhun in 1961, and the purges of 4,500 officers in 1960–1961 left an indelible ominous mark in the minds of all officers who came to serve as the commanders of the Turkish military forces afterward1 providing a model of action for the military command to follow after the coup.

Keywords

Europe Syria Drilling Turkey Tated 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Numan Esin, “13 Kasim 1960 Ogusu Üzerine Birkaç Söz,” in Suna Kili (ed.), 27 Mayis 1960 Devrimi, Kurucu Meclis ve 1961 Anayasasi (Istanbul: Boyut Kitaplari, 1988): 265–269.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ersin Kalayaoglu, “The Turkish Political System in Transition: Multi-Party Politics in the 1980s,” Current Turkish Thought vol. 56 (Fall, 1985): 16.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ergun Özbudun, Contemporary Turkish Politics: Challenges to Democratic Consolidation (Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner, 2000): 58.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kenan Evren, Kenan Evren’in Anilan 3 (Istanbul: Milliyet Yaymlari, 1991): 362.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kenan Evren, Kenan Evren’in Anilan 2 (Istanbul: Milliyet Yaymlari, 1991): 119, 338–390.Google Scholar
  6. 10.
    Ersin Kalaycioglu, “1960 Sonrasi Türk Siyasal Hayatina Bir Baki: Demokrasi, Neo-Patrimonyalizm ve Istikrar,” in Üniversite Ögretim Üyeleri Dernegi (ed.), Tarih ve Demokrasi: Tank Zafer Tunaya’ya Armagan (Istanbul: Cem Yaymevi, 1992): 98–110.Google Scholar
  7. 15.
    Ali Çarkoglu and Emre Erdogan, “Fairness in the Apportionment of Seats in the Turkish Legislature: Is There Room for Improvement?” New Perspectives on Turkey no. 19 (Fall 1998): 102.Google Scholar
  8. 16.
    Erol Tuncer, Osmanh’dan Günümüze Seeimler: 1877–1999 (Ankara: Toplumsal Ekonomik Siyasal Arastirmalar Vakfi (Tesav) Yaymlari, 2002): 105.Google Scholar
  9. 17.
    Metin Heper, “Introduction,” in Metin Heper (ed.), Local Government in Turkey: Governing Greater Istanbul (London: Routledge, 1989): 1–11.Google Scholar
  10. 18.
    Ersin Kalaycloglu, “Decentralization of Government,” in Metin Heper and Ahmet Evin (eds.), Politics in the Third Turkish Republic (Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford: Westview Press, 1994): 87–100.Google Scholar
  11. 20.
    Ersin Kalaycioglu, “The Motherland Party: The Challenge of Institutionalization in a Charismatic Leader Party,” in Barry Rubin and Metin Heper (eds.), Political Parties in Turkey (London, Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 2002): 54–55.Google Scholar
  12. 23.
    Üstün Ergüder, “Changing Patterns of Electoral Behavior in Turkey,” Bogazifi University Journal nos. 8–9 (1980–1981): 45–47.Google Scholar
  13. 25.
    Ersin Kalaycioglu, “The Shaping of Party Preferences in Turkey: Coping with the Post-Cold War Era,” New Perspectives on Turkey no. 20 (1999): 74; and Özbudun, Contemporary Turkish Politics 76.Google Scholar
  14. 26.
    Ali Çarkoglu, “The Turkish Party System in Transition: Party Performance and Agenda Transformation,” Political Studies XLVI (1998): 544–571; and Özbudun, Contemporary Turkish Politics 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 27.
    Ersin Kalaycioglu, “Elections and Party Preferences in Turkey: Changes and Continuities in the 1990s,” Comparative Political Studies, vol. 27, no. 3 (October 1994): 415;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kalaycioglu, 1999, “The Shaping of Party Preferences,” 57–59.Google Scholar
  17. 28.
    Barry Rubin and Metin Heper (eds.), Political Parties in Turkey (London, Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 2002): passim;Google Scholar
  18. and Sabri Sayan and Yilmaz Esmer (eds.), Politics, Parties and Elections in Turkey (Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002): passim.Google Scholar
  19. 46.
    Yilmaz Esmer, Devrim, Evrim, Statüko: Türkiye’de Sosyal, Siyasal, Ekonomik Degerler (Istanbul: TESEV Yaymlan, 1999): 85–94.Google Scholar
  20. 47.
    Sule Kut, “Soguk Sava§ Sonrasmda Türkiye’nin Balkan Ülkeleriyle Îli§kleri,” in Ismail Soysal (ed.), Çagdas Türk Diplomasisi: 200 rilhk Süreç (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1999): 390.Google Scholar
  21. 49.
    Nazmi Akiman, “Türk-Yunan ili§kilerinin Degerlendirilmesi,” in Ismail Soysal (ed.), Çagdas Türk Diplomasisi: 200 rilhk Süreç (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1999): 582.Google Scholar
  22. 59.
    Kemal Kirisçi, “The Future of Turkish Policy Toward the Middle East,” in Barry Rubin and Kemal Kirisçi (eds.), Turkey in World Politics: An Emerging Multiregional Power (Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002): 97.Google Scholar
  23. 63.
    Hasan Cemal, Kürtler (Istanbul: Milliyet Yaymlan, 2003): 72.Google Scholar
  24. 69.
    James C. Davies, “Toward Theory of Revolution,” American Sociological Review, vol. 27, no. 1 (February 1962): 5–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 74.
    Kemal Kirisçi and Gareth Winrow, The Kurdish Question and Turkey: An Example of Trans-State Ethnic Conflict (London, Portland, Oregon: Frank Cass, 1997): 91–103.Google Scholar
  26. 78.
    Gareth Winrow, “Turkey and the Newly Independent States of Central Asia and the Transcaucasus,” in Barry Rubin and Kemal Kirisçi (eds.), Turkey in World Politics: An Emerging Multiregional Power (Boulder, London: Lysine Rienner Publishers, 2002): 173–188.Google Scholar
  27. 79.
    Hakan Bingün, “Türkiye ve Güney Katkasya iliskileri,” in Ismail Soysal (ed.), Çagdar Türk Diplomasisi: 200 Ytlltk Siireç (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1999): 599–600.Google Scholar
  28. 82.
    Ersin Kalaycioglu, “Türkiye’de Siyasal Kültür ve Demokrasi,” in Ergun Özbudun, Ersin Kalaycioglu, and Levent Köker (eds.), Türkiye’de Demokratik Siyasal Kü1tür (Ankara: Türk Demokrasi Vakfi Yayrnlan, 1995): 65–66.Google Scholar
  29. 89.
    Patrick Seale, The Struggle for Syria: A Study of Post-War Arab Politics 1945–1958 (New Haven, London: Yale University Press, 1986): 11–15.Google Scholar
  30. 91.
    Aydin G. Alacakaptan, “Surir Asan Akarsulanmiz Dicle ve Firat’m Arap Komsulanmizla Büyük Sürtüsmelere Neden Olmalan Beldentileri Abartilidir,” in Sabahattin Sen (ed.), Su Sorunu, Türkiye ve Ortadogu (Istanbul: Baglam Yaymlari, 1993): 460.Google Scholar
  31. 92.
    Çagri Erhan, “Türk-Suriye iliskilerinde Firat Suyunun Paylasimi Sorunu,” Mülkiyeliler Birligi Dergisi, XXI, no. 199 (May 1999): 43.Google Scholar
  32. 100.
    Gürel Tüzün and Sibel Sezer (eds.), World Summit on Sustainable Development Johannesburg 2002, National Report: Turkey (Ankara: The Ministry of Environment and the United Nations Development Programme, 2002): 109.Google Scholar
  33. 101.
    Taner Baytok, Bir Asker Bir Diplomat: Güven Erkaya-Taner Baytok Söylerisi (Istanbul: Dogan Kitapçilik, 2001): 248–258.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ersin Kalaycioğlu 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ersin Kalaycioğlu

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations