Main Menu
User Menu

Military history website

Turkey (TUR)

Articles

About the shoot down of a Turkish F-4 Phantom

The aggravated situation in connection with the unrest in Syria has taken on a new dimension in recent days, when the Syrian Air Defense ( PVO ) shot down a Turkish F-4 Phantom II. Turkey is requesting consultations in the North Atlantic Alliance under Article Four of the Washington Treaty. The whole situation remains quite confusing, so the sekuriťáci.cz portal tries to give at least a rough summary of events and outline possible scenarios for what actually happened.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process

The bachelor's thesis " Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian Modernization Process: Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and Reza Shah Pahlavi " deals with the issue of Turkish and Iranian modernization in the interwar period and compares political practices in the modernization of these two Muslim states. The aim of the work is to use a comparative method to clarify the reasons why modernization was successful in the first case and not in the second. The work is based on a comparison of the initial conditions for the start of reforms and continues with an analysis of the key themes of both modernizations. These topics are mainly the roles of nationalism, secularization reforms, socio-economic reforms and westernization. Last but not least, the work deals with the nature of the regime and focuses mainly on the role of leaders Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and Reza Shah Pahlaví.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 10. The fall of Reza Shah Pahlaví

The Shah's regime became increasingly despotic over time. At the beginning of the government, Reza Shah had considerable public support across sections of society. The urban stratum of the merchants of the base, the intelligentsia, and the bureaucratic apparatus became the support of the regime. Unlike Turkey, Iran became a military regime, where the military not only acted as a law enforcement officer, but also intervened in civilian administration. . The Shah's policy has shown signs of despotism since the 1930s, which was reflected especially in relation to the opposition.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 2. Theoretical concept of modernization

Based on Shils' classification of modernization regimes, Atatürk's Turkey and Iran by Reza Shah Pahlaví are often classified as modernization oligarchies. These are characterized by a strong authoritarian government and certain elements of pluralist parliamentarism, which are, however, only formal. The precondition for the modernization oligarchy is the existence of a strong elite, with an effective tool for maintaining stability, especially the military components, which are often part of this elite.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 3. Access to power and legitimacy

Since the comparison of initial conditions is decisive for assessing the results of political and social transformation, I will deal in this chapter with a comparison of the rise to power of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and Reza Khan. I will try to clarify here the circumstances in which the actors of the coup came to power and, in particular, how they justified their legitimacy. Although these are coups, the question of legitimacy is essential for the maintenance of regimes.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 4. The nature of regimes

In order to assess the reforms themselves, it is necessary to determine the type of government from the point of view of the holders, which will help to clarify the way in which the reforms were implemented. Both regimes were an authoritarian government led by a charismatic leader. However, the systems differed in the type of formal political establishment ( republic versus constitutional monarchy ) and, above all, in the way power was exercised. Unlike Reza Shah, who exercised power directly or through the established cabinet of ministers, Atatürk ruled through a party he founded, which became a monopoly party. The nature of the regimes also differed in the degree of authoritarianism. Atatürk's regime was undeniably authoritarian, but allowed for broader political participation than the Shah's dictatorship.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 5. Nationalism

In both countries, the period of modernization is inextricably linked to Turkish and Iranian nationalism in its current form. Both nationalisms are characterized by nationalist rhetoric, an emphasis on language policy with the demand for a unified language and the pursuit of national unity, even at the cost of suppressing ethnic minorities. Both Atatürk and Reza Shah based their legitimacy primarily on the principle of nationality. In both states, it is a period of nationalism, or a period of so-called national revival, as defined by Ernest Gellner.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 6. Secularization

In the secular wave of Muslim states in the 1930s, Turkey and Iran were the leading states of secularization. The nationalist modernists of the Islamic world saw Islam as a reason for backwardness and were inspired by the Western model of separation of church and state, in which they saw the basis of progress. Originally a Western thesis about the negative effect of Islam on material progress, it spread in Muslim intellectual circles at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 7. The role of the army

One of the biggest differences between Turkish and Iranian modernization is the way the regime is maintained, or the role of the military in the reform process. This factor illustrates well the extent to which the change in society has been imposed by force and the real level of political participation.
In Turkey, there has been talk of a civilian government since 1923, in contrast to Iran, where the military has played a key role a) as a proponent of modernization, b) as a tool for maintaining the regime.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: 8. Economic modernization and industrialization

The idea of modernization is based on the theory of all-round human progress, the most visible and tangible result of which is economic development, technological innovation and economic growth, which presuppose later development in the cultural and political spheres. Reformers of the first half of the twentieth century therefore saw the modernization of the state economy and industry as one of the goals of their efforts. The tools for achieving economic prosperity varied from movement to movement, but their common denominator was industrialization. After the First World War, both Turkey and Iran relied on similar economic conditions, mostly from agrarian countries with relatively backward agriculture and an unfavorable economic situation.

Comparison of the Turkish and Iranian modernization process: Introduction

The issue of modernization of Muslim states is a separate topic of the theory of modernization. The specific nature of modernization processes in Islamic countries at the beginning of the twentieth century stems mainly from two facts. Firstly, all these states were confronted with the question of the position of Islam in the political system arising from the historical tradition, and secondly, in this area it is also a period of the emergence of nationalism and nation-states. Turkey and Iran, together with Egypt, were among the first countries in the region to embark on a modernization process and whose reforms have to some extent become a model for other countries.

Geopolitics in Central Asia

Central Asia is an important region, both militarily and economically, in which the great powers are showing increasing interest. The collapse of the USSR resulted in the independence of the five Central Asian republics, which naturally began to seek new allies and partners in the international system. The involvement of world and regional powers did not take long, and the region soon gained a distinctive name: the New Balkans. The strategic position, the rich raw material base, as well as the ethnic and religious composition are motives that continuously contribute to the intensification of the rivalry between the main international players in Central Asia.

Messages from Damascus

They called him a "faceless terrorist." Before Osama ibn Ladin claimed responsibility for the September 11, 2001 assassination, the US secret services judged that he, Imad Mughniya, was to blame. Until then, he held the lead in the number of Americans killed in Islamist assassinations around the world. On Tuesday, February 12, his earthly pilgrimage, followed by a great speck of human blood, ended. Whatever one treats, one also lacks. In Damascus, he was killed by a bomb blast located in his off-road Mitsubishi.

Ottoman army in the 16th century

Under the leadership of the Ottoman sultans, a powerful force emerged, which gained the stamp of invincibility and for a long time influenced European warfare. Its successes forced the Habsburgs to develop new tactical formations and greatly accelerated the transition of European armies to more modern firearms.

The army as the guardian of democracy? The case of Turkey

Today, the army, and especially in our country, is often perceived as an element in society almost superfluous, or no attention is paid to it at all. We are not very exceptional in this, because there is no positive opinion in the Western world about the army, which is actively interfering in the political life of the country.

The army as the guardian of democracy? The case of Turkey: 1. The army and democracy

The Army and Democracy A key element for this work is to describe the role of the military in society. Here we can distinguish between the classical concept of its position and functioning, which reflects standard democratic systems and a more activist concept, which reflects the experience of developing countries in particular. We will deal with both theories in this chapter, however, both are important for this work. If we want to examine the EU's disputes with Turkey over the status of the military, we can look at this conflict as a clash of the two theories. Finally, in this chapter we will focus on non-governmental forms of military control.

The army as the guardian of democracy? The case of Turkey: 4. Turkey and the EU

Turkey and the EU One of the main reasons for the change behind the change in the position of the Turkish army in society was the influence of the European Communities ( EC ) on Turkey. Turkey was more pro-Western, but mainly thanks to Mustafa Kemal's legacy, it became a country that strongly favored Western democracies. It can be said that today these units have a very long history in terms of common relations. In the following chapters, we will discuss in more detail the various phases of Turkey's relations with the EC / EEC / EU and the impact of these relations on the Turkish army and its position.

The army as the guardian of democracy? The case of Turkey: Conclusion

Conclusion One of the reasons for the strong position of the army in Turkey has its historical roots in the Ottoman Empire, where the army was a very important part of society at the time. This historical factor helped the military maintain a strong position in modern Turkey. The second and no less important reason was the role that the army played in the establishment of Turkey. Under the command of Mustafa Kemal, it was the army that ensured the creation of the new state. During his reign, the army gained almost complete sovereignty over the state apparatus. In Turkey at this time, and even later, the army was not placed under civilian control. The army maintained this almost complete sovereignty throughout the 20th century.

The army as the guardian of democracy? The case of Turkey: Introduction

Today, the army, and especially in our country, is often perceived as an element in society almost superfluous, or no attention is paid to it at all. We are not very exceptional in this, because there is no positive opinion in the Western world about the army, which is actively interfering in the political life of the country.

The influence of Turkish-Armenian relations on the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Introduction Even before the final disintegration of the Soviet Union, riots began to grow in the Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan, at the heart of which was the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute. This mountainous territory is appropriated for historical and ethnic reasons by both the Azerbaijani and Armenian nations. The declaration of an independent Republic of Azerbaijan and Armenia in 1991 exacerbated the conflict to such an extent that a several-year war broke out, at the end of which Azerbaijan was militarily defeated and Armenia took control of almost a fifth of Azerbaijan's territory.

The influence of Turkish-Armenian relations on the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

2. Characteristics of Turkish-Armenian relations The events in the Ottoman Empire at the end of the 19th century became a significant milestone in the formation of Turkish-Armenian relations. In 1882, 1.125 million Armenians lived here, making up 17.5% of the population, and according to the constitution, they had the status of a self-governing nation under Ottoman sovereignty.

The influence of Turkish-Armenian relations on the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

3. Impact of recent events on the development of the region and on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict Around 2009, it was assumed that the best way to normalize Turkish-Armenian relations and thus resolve the stalemate in the South Caucasus would be to strictly separate the issues at stake. Armenia and Turkey were to establish diplomatic relations and open a common border without any further conditions, especially those related to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the events of 1915. The whole process was to concern only Turkey and Armenia, other states were not to be involved indirectly.

The influence of Turkish-Armenian relations on the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Conclusion The Nagorno-Karabakh dispute turned out to be an ethnic conflict in which Karabakh territory is claimed for historical and cultural reasons by two countries, namely Azerbaijan, in whose territory the region is located, and Armenia, whose nationality is now the majority of inhabitants of Karabakh. Both sides are trying to prove their former presence in Karabakh by using different interpretations of history.

The influence of Turkish-Armenian relations on the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Even before the final disintegration of the Soviet Union, riots began to grow in the territory of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan, the core of which was the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute. This mountainous territory is appropriated for historical and ethnic reasons by both the Azerbaijani and Armenian nations. The declaration of an independent Republic of Azerbaijan and Armenia in 1991 exacerbated the conflict to such an extent that a several-year war broke out, at the end of which Azerbaijan was militarily defeated and Armenia took control of almost a fifth of Azerbaijan's territory.

Water conflicts in the Middle East

Water is a basic necessity of life, it is a condition for the functioning of the economy but also of society as a whole. It is therefore the perfect embodiment of the term strategic raw material. Ensuring its supply is therefore a priority for every state, and this priority comes to the fore, especially in regions where there is a shortage of water. One such region is the Middle East…

Topics

Subcategories

Industry

Military Objects

Fortifications

Museums

Budget

Our budget for 2021 : 85.000,- CZK Income so far : 18.944,- CZK

♡ Donate

Looking for new colleagues!

Our web armedconflicts.com / valka.cz keeps looking for new colleagues, who are interested in military history and are willing to join our ranks, to help with content, coordination and control, administration tasks and other. Please join us and help us create content for others as well as for ourselves :)

Join us!