I'm waiting for that in a political debate. "With my new proposal the people will have more time. More time to....(pauses for dramatic effect)... Join me on Raid Shadow Legends!"
Turkey is the only country I can think of where the military cracks down on authoritarian populism and then restores democracy as the country stabilizes. Usually military coups just seize power and reestablish elections when they can rig it in their favor.
Does it weird anyone else out that there's been less time between the fall of the Ottoman Empire and this coup (40 years) than between this coup and present day?!
Not even 40 years; 36 years, 6 months and 28 days. The Republic was founded on 29.10.1923. The coup was on 27.05.1960. Most generals were born in the Ottoman Empire and some generals fought in WW1 and the Turkish War of Independence.
As a Turk, this video is accurate. It's a still a discussion in Turkey. Liberals and Islamists (of course) thinks it was a disaster. Seculars and Nationalists thinks it was necessary.
Turkish Armed Forces was not already in tune with Adnan Menderes because of his attempts to found an authoritarian administration and his rhetorics to incite relatively conservative people. In addition, Adnan Menderes wanted to be in relation with SSCB, because the Marshall Aid provided by the Us had been stopped, which made the Us annoyed and caused the Us approved the coup requested by Turkish Armed Forces.
It happened... Norway executed its prime minister after ww2, together with 50 other politicians... france executed 10,000 of its people with very little or no trial within one year after ww2. western countries generally exact a much more heavy penalty for treason, compared to the east...
About the Turkish Communist Party, he is now good friends with the Greek Communist Party. The two sides had cooperative activities, and he is the ruling party in a Turkish city. about the Korean War, all countries that provided troops to the United States in the Korean War get. benefited. In addition to Turkey, Ethiopia also So do 。Japan did not provide troops for the United States in the Korean War and the Korean War, but the United States has always loved Japan, which is really great love
Exactly, that is what kemalists still think like that in Turkiye :)) but the problem is whenever you took action against those religious ppl in power, it creates more symphaty for them and gradualy they increase their popularity among the public and you end up with leaders like erdogan.
"a veneer of democracy is presented" not true... the main problem in turkey was threefold: 1) the "democratically elected" governments in turkey had a tendency to turn dictatorial.. 2) they sometimes can attempt dangerous foreign policy adventures.. 3) they are invariably corrupt and very nepotist.. the soldiers effectively put limits on 1) and 2) but rarely interfered with 3).. I grew up in 70's and 80's. it was completely free to criticize the government. There was a complete freedom of opinion and complete freedom of press.. The elections were open and free.. Prime ministers were generally the butt of the jokes.. Then, in 2000's the effect of the army is zeroed out.. Today, you cannot criticize the prime minister, or the ruling party. Many journalists cannot even produce negative news.. Even wikipedia was banned for a period..
I wonder to what extent America was really involved. They certainly got wind of it and let it happen, at the very least. Was that soviet loan really a threat to NATO, given Turkey's commitment to the west ?
In those days, secular and kemalist officers made up the majorty of the army and there was no need the interference of the Us, because Turkish Armed Forces had enough power to take action, they were only suppose to take an approval from the Us. As for the loan, it was a major problem for the Us, because amid the tension of the cold war, every single positive step into Sscb, esspecialy a step taken by a country like Turkey that has a strategic location in the region, was unacceptible for the Us.
Its good to see a episode about '60 coup in Turkey but this video is pretty amateurish for a channel like yours. Super poor pronunciations, unrelated newspaper images etc. Hope to see better episodes from you! Keep your work, just polish it as much as possible.
@@SitzPinkler Depends on if you are considering their "general area" as the middle east or Europe. Compared to middle eastern countries it is super stable. But not so compared to Europe. In terms of the republic. (Since obviously they have an authoritarian in power).
@What Aboutism Idk about that , and funny you say that because Turks copy and import my culture, y’all wanna be the US so badly it’s cute 😂 just stop using our things oh yeah you can’t
Soviets were never really an actual threat to Turkey, they even helped us (massively) during the independence war and quickly agreed on an eastern border free from conflict. When our govt started getting into the American orbit the soviets obviously got nervous and they acted accordingly. everyone who contributed to Turkey's puppet position in the US sphere is and was a traitor. Wish we joined up with the yugos in the neutralist bloc or maintained friendly relationships with USSR.
Yugoslavia detonated after immense military build up. Turkey was no diffrent, without allies country would get destroyed. Being with ussr meant total isolation from the rest of the world and subjected to its ire. Remember no communist state got away without pain from USSR. The best situation of communism in Turkey was a coup without major help from russia and staying within arms length. The eventual collapse of trade due to embargo would be avoided. However i am not sure how much Turkey could survive even while being in the smae ideology.
@@yuzbasivolkan86 Turkey would be nothing without the United States lol. They provided crucial crucial protection against Soviet aggression. As for Menderes, I only talked about religion. The man has its achievements and failures. Don't tell me the Kemalists were a better option hahaha.
16:18 "The former Minister of Foreign Affairs and the former Minister of Finance were hanged to death." Sounds much more extreme than the usual, "Hanged to discomfort."
Great documentary about 1960 coup, however as a Turkish person, your pronunciation of ‘c’ letter in Turkish names had jarred my ears :) ‘Cemal’ or ‘Celal’ not with ‘c’ as in ‘cell’ but with ‘j’ as in ‘jazz’
@@EdMcF1 that is true. In Turkish, every ‘k’ letter is hard as ‘c’ in cake, and every ‘c’ is pronounce as ‘j’ as in ‘jar’. There is no exemption for any letter in Turkish to pronounce differently from one another. However as I understand, you seem to be confused with Kemal and Cemal. These are two different names with completely different meanings(these names rooted from arabic), not the same names with different letters :)
Wait, he says more than CHP as the English “c”? That jarred my ears and I’m not Turkish, I just lived there two years and are used to hearing the Turkish parties pronounced with the Turkish alphabet. 🤦🏻♀️ Now I’m deciding if I should stick around and listen to the rest….
@@EdMcF1 Kemal is always spelled Kemal, you can’t spell it “Cemal”, that’s a totally different name that is usually spelled “Jamal” (not exactly cause the pronunciation is still different due, but closer) in English. You would never see Atatürk’s name spelled differently, his name is Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, never Cemal. So it’s not something the English did, it’s simply how it’s spelled.
Aside from some forgivable pronunciation mistakes and mismatching newspaper images and the issue discussed I can fairly say that this is a very good not-so-detailed simplified but not superficial documentary for people who is not familiar into the topic. Some notes about the coup and the people: - Turkesh, the announcer of the coup latterly dissented by the main group in junta and sent into exile in India as ambassador. He found a party and was the political victims of the 1980 coup - First free elections after the coup in 1961 (it was not in 1965 as in the video) Justice Party, descendant of Democrat party became second party with just %2 difference with CHP. Two fighting brothers had to make a coalition after the coup. In 1965 Justice party Come to power alone - President Bayar who was last prime minister of Ataturk tried to commit suicide on the coup night when he saw the tanks in front of presidential palace but saved by junta members - Prime minister Menderes also tried to commit suicide on his detention days in yassiada - A year after the coup, a constitutional referandum was held which the intention was justify the coup and the coupists. %60 of the votes was "yes" despite making a propaganda in favor of "no" was illegal - National Unity Committee had 38 members and they appointed their leader Gursel as president. 6 years later he had stroke then taken to US for treatment but decided that it's better a president should die in his own country. After arrival to Turkey a group of specialist doctors made a report for him that implies he is not able to be a president anymore. The number of the committee was: 38. He was in coma for 7 months and died a year and a half before the end of his term
Hey Cold War! I really love your channel! Could you please some about the 1956 Georgian Demonstrations or the 1978 Tbilisi Riots? That would be great! Thanks.
Adnan Menderes reminded me of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan, both governments overthrown under similar circumstances, both were executed by the military.
@@tezcanuyank3446 I feel it's a bit the opposite in that case- Menderes was a conservative but courting better relations with the USSR, overthrown by a secular, pro-West military. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had more progressive and secular leanings, perhaps center-left, and possibly was engaging with improving relations with the USSR (at least some people claim), overthrown by a conservative, Islamist military, with substantial Western backing.
I think however that Bhutto was back then on the ride side of history while Menderes was in my view on the wrong side of history. After Bhutto shariah came to Pakistan after Menderes democracy came back to Turkey
@@EdMcF1 And the opposition from a nation seeing its democracy before its eyes unilateraly overthrown by some colonels that were already suffocating the state from doing its job to keep Myanmar being their backyard, free to pillage and selling out to the Superpower next door as a colony.
The 1960 constitution that had been published by the junta was perhaps the most democratic consitution of Turkey, and yet one of its publishers, Alpaslan Türkeş, founded the far-right ultranationalist and neo-facsit party of MHP which played a key role in the politcal violence of the '70s. This video is a great demonsration of the political unstability that has plagued the country ever since its birth.
Seems like a lot of extremes on both ends. From Stalinist communists to neo-fascists. It seems it takes year and years to develop the stability of a country such that the parties are willing to respect operating under the framework of a democratic republic. In stable democracies, there is still a left and right spectrum of parties but it is limited in its extremism as all parties respect the *type* of government. It is a shame how in many countries have to deal with parties/leaders that immediately want to go authoritarian no matter their spot in the political spectrum.
The most interesting fact is that the 1961 Constitution, prepared by the Junta, is the most democratic constitution in the history of Turkey. (with the help of civilian professors)
Most people have no idea of the political scene in Turkey. The Ataturk revolution was of elite intellectuals. These came from the Army's Young Turks. When the Republic was formed Ataturk made his officers choose either military or civil life. The majority of the Turks were under educated, often illiterate and devout Muslims. Menderis got his support from this majority who were used to and expected strong leaders and had no democratic desires. Those who stayed in the military supported the Kemalist Republican and democratic ideals and exerted much power in country. When Menderis went too far, they removed him, banned his party, hung him and created a new constitution with more safe guards. Demeral, who was part of the banned party, renamed it and became Prime Minister. When he started taking anti democratic action, the military deposed him, banned his party and put him under house arrest. Since Demeral hadn't had anyone killed, he wasn't hung. Eventually Demeral renamed the party and became Prime Minister again. As if this wasn't enough, the whole scenario repeated again, except this time put term limits on prime Minister and president. When Demeral renamed the party for the third time, he maxed out as Prime Minister and then as President. After a while the current Erdogan took power and he went after the Kemalist Gauardian elements as 1st priority. There was no one to with power to oppose him.
Military did not depose Demirel for being authoritarian. Contrarily, he got couped two times since military found him "too soft" to contain political violance at that time
You said that the Muslims are ignorant, but I speak as a Turk (I am not an enemy of Atatürk). Atatürk is perhaps the most deified historical figure at the moment.You will understand when you come to Turkey, you hear this word a lot, for example. Atatürk is the greatest person There are even those who worship Atatürk's statue. In fact, according to them, there is not even a fault of Atatürk. They praise Atatürk one day, but on days like the conquest of Istanbul or the victory of Manzikert, there is not so much praise. For example, they say that women were given the right to be elected, but even then there was no election, isn't it illogical, and there are those who try to make Atatürk a Muslim, whereas Atatürk himself says that he is not a It is protected by law. It was a problem for a while to criticize Atatürk, when you criticize you are treated like a traitor.
