No. Erdogan called for people to take to the streets, and within an hour, the airport and bridge were filled with thousands of people waving flags. (From pictures, all male.) That's popular support. The military is not attacking the crowds. The military presence was apparently not that big, concentrating on a few key spots.

A coup has to succeed within the first few hours. Control must be established before opposition mobilizes. If the coup drags on, it fails. Failure is either a loss or a civil war.

Suggested reading: "Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook"[1]

[1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/0674737261

Turns out that it wasn't entirely, or even mostly. Erdogan's call that did it. The mosques turned on their call-to-prayer PA systems and ordered their followers into the streets.

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/15/turkey-low-flying...

Also, not all people protesting on the streets are protesting for Erdogan, lots of them are simply protesting against a military coup that is trying to overthrow an elected government (whether they like this particular government or not).

While it sounds like a joke coming from Erdogan, with his "ambivalent" relationship to democracy, asking the people to go to the squares and streets is asking them to defend a democracy.

Sadly, either outcome still leaves Turkey less democratic and less stable than before. As it currently seems, Erdogan is going to have more power than ever before with all his adversaries purged from the military.

It's disturbing that leaders (political or religious) would put their constituents in harms way.

I keep reading that Erdogan is popular, but I also read that he was elected with only 13% of the vote.

> It's disturbing that leaders (political or religious) would put their constituents in harms way.

Like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r73p95I-eE

Or like in any military force, unless there was coercion going on here.

It's one thing to bring a military force to a battle. It's another thing entirely to call out unarmed civilians to deter a military force.

In both cases, the core of the matter is exposing oneself to danger for some higher cause.

He was elected with 51.8% of the vote, with a 13.4% lead over his competitor. The 13% of the vote thing is pure misinformation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_presidential_election,...

> put their constituents in harms way.

Such is the way of leaders throughout history. For instance, Rev. Dr. King deliberately had teenagers get assaulted with dogs, water cannon, and truncheons as a tactic for getting media attention.

Gonna need a source for that.

Hmmm, it occurs to me that I don't actually have a good introductory source for someone new to learning about the US civil rights movement of the 50s/60s.

What should they have done (additionally)?

E.g. take out/over all civil communication infrastructure, such as ISPs, cellular networks, phone landlines? Then enforce the curfew with actual deadly force (since they are not a police force with riot gear...)?

Two trucks and a few soldiers lined in a row like ducks. A tank sitting alone.

If the coup you're executing results in civilians being able to seize a tank and police having soldiers in custody, the coup lacked the overwhelming ingredient and swift execution that would paralyze and kill any hope of resisting.

It needed to be clear that the deal was sealed to morally crush anyone willing to resist and make them understand that it's done and they'd better line up with the winning party.

Civilians seizing a tank means they sized the military presence and said "Meh.. we're going for it anyway".

An example of a well executed coup: The Algerian coup in 1965. Algerians woke up in the morning and found tanks in the streets of the capital, but it wasn't the beginning of the coup. It had already taken place. Tanks didn't really surprise because Gillo Pontecorvo was shooting "The Battle of Algiers" during that period and also used tanks (one of the greatest movies. Music by Ennio Morricone).

The President was seized in his bed during the night, they woke him up and he was made prisoner for 15 years (liberated by the subsequent President after Boumédiène's death). The coup's instigator had the control of the Army and Intelligence before.

There are many people who don't know there was a coup in 1965.

but military knows it can't easily get away killing civilians.

You're very right! This is precisely why they must avoid a situation where civilians think they have a chance.

Imagine you're one of 20 soldiers guarding a bridge.

4 people come to cross. They look at you, see that you're 20 and don't like those odds, they won't even attempt to cross. But even if they get funny ideas, you can scare them more easily. But even if they're determined, the number of civilians each one of you has to shoot is small: 1 civilian for every 5 soldiers. You can manage. You can direct your shots to be non lethal. You have time to aim and all.

Now imagine it's a thousand people. The civilians look at you, size you up, and they like those odds. They know some of them are going to die overrunning you, but almost no one thinks they will be the one. This makes them go for it.

What's your perspective? You're in a dilemma: you don't want to betray the mission to interdict that bridge, that's for sure. But let's say you're willing to shoot, the deal is the following: if you start shooting, you better not be overrun because once you go that path there's no turning back. This puts you in a corner into thinking "What if they still don't stop" and the number of people each one of you has to shoot on average is huge: 50. 50 civilians for each one of you. In a very limited time frame. You're not in a war zone, most of them are unarmed, and you could know or be related to some of them.

So, do you go on with the mission? Do you shoot everyone? Do you start shooting but then stop shooting? But when you do, you'll be captured, and you'll be captured after killing many civilians..so you failed to interdict the bridge and failed not to kill citizens. It's not like you dropped your weapons before there were any civilian casualties.. Which you can't do either because you have a mission.

This is one of the situations where anything half-assed becomes a blood bath and a "victory" à la Pyrrhus..

Contrast that with a military presence strong enough that sends a signal loud and clear to the civilians they'd better not mess with you because there's no chance they could succeed. Dissuasion to avoid a bloodshed.

Here is a chart that describes the practical steps: https://embed.gyazo.com/4324b66e1a3045ad63349061a76f4756.png

According to that illustration, the coup plotters missed the crucial step of breaching the president's residence and capturing him. They completely mistimed the coup when the president was on vacation outside the country. Now he has been able to rally support against the coup and his supporters are on the streets protesting against the army

You might be speaking too soon.

The media is reporting his plane landed at an airport a few minutes ago, so if it is in the hands of the military then he will be captured.

Time like this though, don't believe anybody or anything you hear, including me.

He was reportedly on holiday in Turkey in Marmaris, so maybe they did not know where he was or did not have the man power to capture him.

I wonder how it would have played out if they had captured him. I can even imagine that more people would have protested.

Deliberately timing coups for when the standing leader is on vacation is actually not all that uncommon, because it makes it possible to contain them under pretense of normalcy. E.g. Gorbachev in 1991, where they basically locked him up in his Crimean residence.

Its funny how Putin and Erdogan were meeting a couple of days ago. Maybe Erdogan was warned and took "a vacation"?

It was widely noted in the media that France closed its Turkish embassy (on "security fears") two days prior to this. It certainly makes you wonder if the word didn't get out.

It's important to remember that those "security fears" were in reference to Bastille Day.

Where is that chart from, from the book mentioned a few comments above?

Update: Ok, yes, found it via Image Search: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-how-to-execute-a-coup-2...

Capture the Prime Minister and President. The coup leaders failed to do that.

Yes. That's coup d'etat 101: capture political leaders and secure them. Only then can you move on to the next step.

If this thing goes south -- and I fear it will -- the backlash will be severe. Not a good thing for the future of Turkey.

> If this thing goes south -- and I fear it will -- the backlash will be severe. Not a good thing for the future of Turkey.

Especially considering he has been a tempered authoritarian before the coup. Now they will respond by expanding authority. Leaders like that always do.

Hopefully that will further lead to support of the coup end goals which had some legitimacy. The only problem is that Erogdan has many hardline islamic fanatics who will take to the streets and help maintain his power.

But those military gained access to aircrafts, bombs and their activation systems, which they used to bomb the parliament and seemingly many other targets in Ankara and Istambul. Makes you wonder how safe is Europe.

> The only problem is Erdogan has many hardline islamic fanatics to help m...

Ahem, really, how safe is Europe if, for example, France decided that we have an Islamisation/integration problem, and started massively revoking visas from Mediterranean regions? How would Turkey / Turkey military dissidents with access to such weapons react?

So maybe yes, maybe it should be made clear that military people in Turkey should follow orders and only orders, or be subject to martial law.

I wish it were that simple.

The problem is that Turkey is not changing up civilian control. They've had Erdogen for what? 13 years? That's not a healthy system. That's a system where one bunch is running the tables. Such systems always lead to much worse than military coups. Anybody checked out Venezuela lately?

There's probably been some support for IS coming from Turkey, although not from the military. Turkey is a NATO member and nuclear. They're in the middle of a really tense and unstable region.

All of this is bad. Really bad. And now we'll get 10x more of it.

I do not support military coups if a civilian government is functioning and changing up the dominent parties and leaders every so often. Everybody gets a turn. I don't see that in Turkey. I see a country headed either towards internal or external crisis. Perhaps both.

There's also another point: the vast majority of citizens in a country may want to have leaders and policies that destroy it. That's their right. If that's where Turkey is headed, NATO alliance members need to think about how to adapt accordingly.

You win ;)

As a side note, French presidents were elected for 7 years x2, which makes 14 years for Mitterand (1981-1995) and 12 for Chirac (1995-2007). But at least PMs change and they can't renew again.

Exactly. Look for a full-scale purge of the military, which might include punishing/shooting a lot of people who had nothing to do with anything.

It could take Turkey back 110 years. Very sad.

Venezuela's coup that ousted Chavez, and had the people reinstate him, might be a fair comparison. The returning leader will have a carte blanche for future politics.

Most successful coups kill the national leader right at the start.

Apparently there was a bomb placed at the hotel where Erdogan was vacationing, but he had already left by the time it went off.

That turned out to be a lie from Erdogan.

sucker news!

Videos of tanks turning back away from angry mobs are spreading. Even if it failed, at least bloodshed seems avoidable.

The coup didn't succeed.

Not all the military units have given up, and this could still turn into a bloody mess. But the attempt at a quick middle of the night takeover failed.

> The military is not attacking the crowds.

There are reports to the contrary:

* https://www.yahoo.com/news/turkey-military-opens-fire-crowds...

* "Opening live fire from helicopter" (Google translation) video https://twitter.com/Havrekhshaeta/status/754050251909193728?...

* Parliament bombed, police officers killed https://twitter.com/NPR/status/754109568851017729

* Video of bombing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP7JLKqB2yY

* Video from inside parliament when bomb hit https://twitter.com/Conflicts/status/754108677292982272

Foxtrot Alpha has ongoing aggregation:

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-turkish-military-has-de...

Uh, wasn't some wannabe tinpot dictator or other found shot with that at his side while trying to use it? Doesn't bode well for its success...

If you haven't internalized whatever working principles you are using enough that you can stop keeping the handbook at your side, you're probably not ready to carry out a coup. However well chosen those principles are for the task...

I wouldn't be so sure about Erdogan losing power.

Erdogan has an extreme amount of support within the country not just from the people but from the Turkish intelligence services & military aswell. A lot of people have elevated him to the same level as Ataturk.

I'm about 80% sure Erdogan will manage to retain power from just what I know about Turkish politics - which isn't a lot to be honest.

Early days right now but seems like the coup forces have advantage but that's largely because a lot of the soldiers don't realize that it's not the Generals who approved this but rather some lower level colonels.

Once, the soldiers find out they're defying the generals then they'll likely back down and Erdogan will retain power.

But once again - very early days.

EDIT: Grammar - I typed the comment way too fast.

Tangential, but why do people support Erdogan? From what I hear he's a terrible leader and moving towards a full dictatorship.

I think in the west we only see Turkey as Istanbul which happens to be the extremely liberal part of Turkey.

The rest of the country is far more conservative so they don't see the clamping down on various freedoms as being a problem and on top of the Erdogan has actually really done a good job of developing the poorer regions of Turkey which were rife with high unemployments and low prospects. On top of that people believe he's raised Turkey's importance on the world stage.

Another reason why I'm about 90% he'll win now that the opposition political parties have just come out against the coup - which if you know anything about Turkey is HUGE. These parties have literally called for Erdogan to be jailed but right now they're supporting him.

I don't even know what to make of that. I'm shocked.

What I readwas that those parties have said to Not go on the streets, but that erdogan-fans misread that (maybe intentionally) and tweeted about it, and retweeted, etc. Erdogan said to go on the streets.

It is all a mess with propaganda, stress and confusion everywhere

I not sure that's right.

I was talking about HDP who have posted this on their official twitter:

"There is no way other than embracing democratic politics."

Source: https://twitter.com/HDPgenelmerkezi/status/75408082363312537...

If the military takes over, then the opposition parties will loose power as well. It's also in their own interest to oppose to coup.

In fact, anyone who likes democracy should be opposed to it

If you like democracy, you can't exactly be in favor of Erdogan either. Not to mention what will likely happen, if the coup fails.

In the long term, this coup succeeding is probably the best option for democracy.

Indeed. There is a difference between democracy and liberal democracy.

This is not about being a liberal democracy at all.

If voters don't have the opportunity to get a truthful look at the society they live in and the people who would like to be elected, their votes are meaningless.

You need freedom of speech and a free press to get that perspective. A democracy without freedom of speech and a free press is no democracy at all but a facade hiding an authoritarian state.

They came out against the coup once it became obvious that the coup was going to fail.

Economic improvement. Under Erdogan, Turkey has gotten considerably richer, no particular thanks to him but the same tide that lifts a farmer out of poverty keeps his islamic government afloat while making a mockery of Ataturk.

> Tangential, but why do people support Erdogan?

Why do people support Trump?

"Make Turkey strong again" is quite the essence of why people love Erdogan.

In fact, replace Turkey with any country in the world and one of their historical strongman leader figures will come to mind...

Lots of people will support dictator whose dictates they favor over democracy where they might lose, especially if they fear democracy means compromise with our subjugation to people who wish them harm.

Democracy is an abstract ideal that people are less likely to support when it seems to threaten more basic and immediate physical need for themselves or those emotionally close to them.

Sky News is interviewing a Turkish journalist right now, live (http://news.sky.com/story/live-turkish-army-says-taken-power... ). She says she supports democracy, not Erdogan, and that she's appalled that a small number of soldiers can take that away from Turkey. She's also appalled that a NATO member has to deal with military coups...

edit: the interview has just ended. I hope the clip can be found, because what this woman was saying was very interesting.

Not a Turkish journalist. She's a member of AKP, the party Erdogan founded. I'm appalled that Sky News would air such a biased source.

The Turkish military is good for democracy. This isn't true for other countries.

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't understand she belonged to the same party. It certainly puts her opinions in perspective.

I'm not appalled Sky News let her speak, however. As someone outside Turkey myself, I'm not sure how censoring the opinions of any of the sides involved would help or be in any way unbiased reporting. I'd understand if you said it would be even better if Sky News also interviewed someone who supported the coup.

The majority of people who support Erdogan are simply opportunists. They don't actually care about him. He has managed to maintain power and influence mostly by bullying and bribing people and illegally detaining or otherwise silencing those who speak against him. We're about to see just how resilient his house of cards is.

So he is like Chavez? I hope the country does no end up like Venezuela.

That would explain why the military just bombed the intelligence HQ...

Too early to call, but I'd put my money against the coup succeeding:

Al Jazeera - "Turkey 1st army commander Umit Dundar on TV says army does not support coup". Assuming he's fully in charge there, that represents 120,000 army personnel.

Also the opposition party is anti-coup and plenty of people are on the streets (presumably) in support of the government.

Right: either the coup loses quickly or Turkey enters an extended civil war, with the military divided against itself. There's still enough military support for the coup to bomb the parliament building into dust as I write this comment.

Its not even clear yet who the sides are. Erdoğan released a statement that Gülen supporters (a religious group) were behind the coup, while the military seems to be claiming it is a secular coup, and has not named a leader behind it.

Lots of background in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12104221

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan used the Gulen movement as allies to gain power. However, once in power, Erdogan turned on Gulen, attempted to purge his followers from the police and judiciary, then used the movement as a "fifth-column" type scapegoat.

secularism in Turkey was born at the point of a bayonet. [..] Turkey's government is both secular and democratic, due to the founding father of Turkey, Kemal Ataturk. While Ataturk was a brutal dictator, he also used that power to rebuild a Turkish national identity, secularize the government, and eventually transition to democracy.

As many news sources have pointed out, the military sees itself as safeguarding the vision and (secular) state structure of Ataturk, and regularly purges the government when its leaders violate Ataturk's premise.

So it is most likely that the coup is secular in nature, and it is Erdogan's spin that is blaming Gulen.

I agree with GP. Erdogan is clearly trying to create confusion. If it really was a small faction, things would be under control by now.

The both can be true.

I think the coup is related to the recent position of Erdogan towards Russia.

This. Turkey apologized to Russia, and normalized relationships with Russia and Israel. Also their Foreign minister talked about mending ties with Syria - Assad's Syria.

All this happened in the space of a few weeks. It was such an about-face from their past postutring. I guess this puts things in context.

This assumes Erdogan is rational or that he would be quite concerned with the lives of those going outside (something which could be true, but his dealings with earlier uprisings give me doubt). Mass protests against the coup (even if Erdogan is on the winning hand) could solidify his support and give a signal to the military that future coups might not be succesful.

His moves certainly show that he doesn't care about anyone but himself and his power. When he arrested parts of the military during their coup practices he created this situation of violence. If he stepped down as more rational PMs did when given hints, he would be living in luxury but in house arrest or exile. The other path is a smaller less official coup, and that ends in his death and longer term instability from the poor and unpredictable transfers of power without the legitimacy of the generals..

He's sending them out to die perhaps, in his name. Is he out there? Not a nice move.

He's apparently cut off the state TV channel that was taken over by the military and was announcing a curfew too. Sending people out to perhaps die indeed.

> Anyone have a take on how successful this is likely to be?

I'm pretty sure at this point it will likely fail, Erdogan will retain power and will have carte blanche. Similar to Chavez when the people put him back in power.

Its likely a very dark future for Turkey in the form of a civil war or total collapse of secular power.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36809083

> He was seen surrounded by cheering supporters, saying in a live TV speech that the coup attempt was an "act of treason" and the army must be cleansed.

Starting with the cleansing of the Army, likely.