What is a military coup definition in history. How is a coup different from a revolution? If there's a coup

What determines the stability of this or that regime? From the severity of the ruler or the abundance of freedoms, economic indicators or patience among the population? It's hard to say for sure.

Coup d'état has plagued mankind for centuries. As a rule, they happen in Asia, America and Africa. Rulers who are overthrown by the people or by the military face long-term emigration at best.

the site remembered in which states over the past 15 years the power has changed in a completely non-democratic way:

Residents of Kyrgyzstan do not tolerate dictators and get rid of conceited rulers as soon as possible. This was the case in 2005, when President Askar Akayev resigned, and this happened in 2010, when Kurmanbek Bakiyev fled the country.

The low standard of living, the unwillingness of the government to overcome difficulties in the economic and social sphere, confrontation of clans within the republic - these and other factors hastened the end of the Bakiyev era. It all started with the April riots in Talas. Protests then broke out in Bishkek and other cities. The opposition in the capital seized administrative buildings and a television center, the authorities tried to resist, but the people's anger turned out to be stronger. In what happened, a number of observers saw the hand of Moscow.

Bakiyev has since lived in Belarus, where Alexander Lukashenko took him in. And in Kyrgyzstan, immediately after the coup, a referendum was held, as a result of which the country turned into a parliamentary republic.

In the wake of the "Arab Spring" power in Egypt has changed twice. Hosni Mubarak, who ruled the country for 30 years, resigned himself under pressure from the opposition. Since then, he has been endlessly judged. Either for the execution of demonstrators in Cairo's Tahrir Square, or for corruption. But his successor, Mohammed Morsi, had to take power in 2013 by force.

The first democratically elected president after the revolutionary events appointed his associates sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood to important government posts, and was going to expand his powers by inviting the people to amend the constitution.

Morsi was replaced by Abdul Fattah Al-Sisi, former defense minister

He failed to improve his economic situation. Ordinary citizens and the military were dissatisfied with him, who, with the approval of the opposition, eventually overthrew the Islamist regime. Morsi was replaced by Abdul Fattah Al-Sisi, a former defense minister.

By Egyptian standards, Mursi is now an ordinary criminal

Muhammad Morsi

By Egyptian standards, Morsi is now an ordinary criminal. Several cases are being investigated against him, he has already been sentenced to a long prison term for suppressing a rally of his opponents, and on one of the charges he even faces the death penalty.

Without civil war in Libya, a coup in Mali most likely would not have happened. In 2012, the Tuareg tribes, famous among other things for the destruction of the mausoleums in Timbuktu, began an armed struggle to create their own state on the territory of Mali.

The inability of government forces to resist the nomads led to the seizure of power by the military. In March 2012, they took the presidential palace, the local television building and the barracks with soldiers by force. The regime of President Amadou Toumani Touré was overthrown.

Without the war in Libya, the coup in Mali most likely would not have happened

So far, the state has not been able to return to normal life. Over the past three years since the uprising, the World Bank, which provided economic assistance, African and European countries turned away from Mali. The UN authorized a military operation. In the northeast of Mali, the Tuareg nevertheless created their own state, Azawad, unrecognized by anyone in the world.

Manuel Celaya returned home

The former leader of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, had every chance to sit in the highest place until the end of his term. But he did not want to leave the presidency. Decided to change the constitution to stay in this position for another 4 years. The left-wing policy of the government, friendship with the Venezuelan colleague Hugo Chavez, and besides, the referendum forced the Supreme Court, the military and parliament to intervene in the situation. In June 2009, on the eve of the vote, soldiers blocked Zelaya in presidential palace, arrested, taken from the capital to an air base and forcibly sent by plane to Costa Rica. The head of the local parliament, Roberto Micheletti, became the interim ruler.

In the autumn of the same year, the dismissed president returned to his homeland in the hope of restoring his powers and spent several months in the Brazilian embassy. Rallies of his supporters were dispersed with rubber bullets and tear gas. Celaya left the country again. He voluntarily moved with his family to the Dominican Republic. Meanwhile, presidential elections were held in Honduras. Zelaya came from exile in the spring of 2011, talked to the new leader and delivered an address in which he spoke a lot about political reconciliation and the development of democracy.

In 2002, the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was ousted from power. True, only for two days. The opposition action on April 11 ended with the death of several protesters, after which the generals called for the resignation of the head of state, and in the evening of the same day tanks appeared at the Chavez residence.

The Venezuelan leader was sent to military base the island of Orchila, from where he managed to convey a note to his supporters at large and inform them: he did not renounce power.

Hugo Chavez was removed from power in 2002

Meanwhile, a transitional government was set up in Caracas. The head of the association of entrepreneurs, Pedro Carmona, assumed the powers of the president and signed a number of decrees, including the dissolution of parliament and the suspension of the constitution. The new authorities managed to enlist the support of several states, for example, Colombia and El Salvador. But already on April 13, the Miraflores Palace was again surrounded by thousands of citizens. This time by those who supported the ousted leader. The temporary rulers were overthrown. And the next day, Hugo Chavez returned to the capital and again took the presidency.

In November 2017, it will be one hundred years since the event that began to be called the October Revolution took place in Russia. Some argue that it was a coup d'état. Discussions about this continue to this day. This article is intended to help you sort out the problem.

If there's a coup

The past century was rich in events that took place in some underdeveloped countries and were called coups. They took place mainly in African and Latin American countries. At the same time, the main state bodies were seized by force. The current leaders of the state were removed from power. They could be eliminated physically or arrested. Some managed to hide in exile. The change of power happened quickly.

The legal procedures provided for this were ignored. Then the new self-appointed leader of the state addressed the people with an explanation of the lofty goals of the coup. In a matter of days there was a change of leadership government agencies. Life in the country continued, but with its new leadership. Such revolutions are nothing new. Their essence is in the removal from power of those who are endowed with it, while the institutions of power themselves remain unchanged. Such were the numerous palace coups in the monarchies, the main instruments of which were the conspiracies of a narrow number of persons.

Quite often, coups took place with the participation of the armed forces and law enforcement agencies. They were called the military, if the change of power was demanded by the army, which acted as the driving force behind the changes. At the same time, some high-ranking officers supported by a small part of the military could be the conspirators. Such coups were called coups, and the officers who seized power were called the junta. Usually the junta establishes a regime of military dictatorship. Sometimes the head of the junta reserves the functions of leadership of the armed forces, and its members occupy key positions in the state.

Some coups later led to a radical change in the socio-economic structure in the country and, in terms of their scale, took on a revolutionary character. The events that took place in the past century in some states, which were called coups, may have their own characteristics. Thus, political parties and public organizations can be involved in them. And the coup itself can be a means of usurping power by its executive branch, which assumes all power, including representative bodies.

Many political scientists believe that successful coups are the prerogative of economically backward and politically independent countries. This is facilitated by a high level of centralization of government.

How to build a new world

Sometimes a society finds itself in a situation where for its development it is necessary to carry out fundamental changes in it and break with the state that exists. The main thing here is a qualitative leap to ensure progress. It's about about fundamental changes, and not about those where only political figures change. Such radical changes affecting the fundamental foundations of the state and society are called revolution.

Revolutions can lead to the replacement of one mode of economy and social life by others. Thus, as a result of bourgeois revolutions, the feudal way of life changed to capitalist. Socialist revolutions changed the capitalist way of life to the socialist one. National liberation revolutions liberated peoples from colonial dependence and contributed to the creation of independent national states. Political revolutions make it possible to move from totalitarian and authoritarian political regimes to democratic ones, etc. It is characteristic that revolutions are carried out in conditions when the legal system of the overthrown regime does not meet the requirements of revolutionary transformations.

Scientists who study revolutionary processes note several reasons for the emergence of revolutions.

• Some of the ruling slabs begin to believe that the head of state and his entourage have much greater powers and opportunities than representatives of other elite groups. As a result, the dissatisfied can stimulate the indignation of society and raise it to fight against the regime.
• Due to the decrease in the receipt of funds at the disposal of the state and elites, taxation is being tightened. Decreases allowance officials and the military. On this basis, there is discontent and speeches of these categories of state workers.
• There is a growing resentment of the people, which is supported by the elites and is not always caused by poverty or social injustice. This is a consequence of the loss of position in society. The discontent of the people develops into a rebellion.
• An ideology is being formed that reflects the demands and moods of all strata of society. Regardless of its form, it raises people to fight against injustice and inequality. It serves as the ideological basis for the consolidation and mobilization of citizens who oppose this regime.
• International support, when foreign states refuse to support the ruling elite and begin cooperation with the opposition.

What are the differences

1. A coup in a state is a forceful replacement of its leadership, carried out by a group of people who have organized a conspiracy against it.
2. Revolution is a powerful multifaceted process of radical transformations in the life of society. As a result, the existing social system is destroyed and a new one is born.
3. The organizers of the coup aim to overthrow the leaders of the state, which happens quickly. Usually a coup does not have significant popular support. Revolution involves profound change operating system public administration and social order. The revolutionary process takes a long time, with a gradual increase in protest moods and the expansion of mass participation. Often it is headed by a political party that is unable to obtain power legally. This often ends in bloodshed and civil war.
4. A coup usually does not have an ideology that guides its participants. The revolution is carried out under the influence of class ideology, which changes the consciousness of a significant part of the people.

In Russian, an illegitimate change of power can be described in different terms.

Academician Viktor Vinogradov, in his book The History of Words, argues that in the Russian literary language the word “coup” in the meaning of a change of power began to be used from the end of the 18th century, when it semantically approached the French word révolution (“reversal, rotation” and at the same time “revolution, coup d'etat). As the scientist writes, it was especially widely used in the language of the Decembrists, who began to use the "coup" as a complete synonym for "revolution". The new meaning of the word was reflected in the Dictionary of the Russian Academy of 1822: “A coup is an unexpected and strong change in affairs and circumstances. The French coup shook the entire foundation of the state.

The very word "revolution" began to be widely used after the French Revolution of 1789. Although, according to some sources, the borrowing of this word occurred even earlier from Polish(rewolucja). In particular, it is mentioned in the documents of the well-known diplomat of the time of Peter the Great, Baron Pyotr Shafirov.

The word "rebellion" came to us from the Polish bunt ("mutiny, uprising"), which, in turn, goes back to the German Bund ("union"). For the first time it is mentioned in the Nikon Chronicle of the 16th century: "Aki in the ancient rebellion."

Another borrowed German term was "putsch" (Putsch), originating from the Swiss dialect and meaning "blow", "collision". The word began to be used after the Zurich Putsch of 1839, when peasant unrest led to the self-dissolution of the cantonal government. However, it became widespread only in the 20th century. In particular, the “beer putsch” in Germany in 1923 and the “August putsch” in the USSR in 1991 entered history.

Among those close in meaning to "coup" are the words "mutiny", "distemper", "uprising". With regard to the latter, the Brockhaus-Efron dictionary notes that, although the uprising "denotes active resistance to the established power, carried out en masse," it is not aimed at overthrowing it, but "aims to resist it in the person of its organs in a separate specific case."

Until the 19th century it was widely used Old Slavonic word“sedition”, which was mentioned in the letters of the XIII-XIV centuries and defined by the dictionary of Pamva Berynda (1627) as “rozruh”, The word “Maidan” was the last to add to the Russian revolutionary vocabulary. By its first meaning, this word of Turkic origin denotes a city square. However, after the events on Maidan Nezalezhnosti in Kyiv in 2004 and 2014, it is increasingly used as a synonym for the "color revolution".

What are coups

A coup is usually understood as a sharp change of power in a state in violation of existing legal norms and with the use or threat of violence.

In a narrow sense, coups include actions to seize power committed by a group of individuals within the ruling elites. For example, in the days of monarchies, palace coups were widespread, during which close associates overthrew the monarch. Period Russian history XVIII century between the death of Peter I and accession to the throne of Catherine II even went down in history as "the era of palace coups." Their later counterpart can be called party coups associated with reshuffles within the ruling party elite. In the 20th century, military coups were most widespread, during which a group of military personnel, usually of high rank, came to power in the country. The regime they establish is usually called a military dictatorship. There were especially many military coups in the second half of the century, mainly in the countries of Africa and Latin America.

A broader interpretation also includes revolutionary upheavals in which the masses are involved. They often end with a change in the political system.

A separate category is the so-called self-coups, which are understood as the usurpation of all powers in the country by one branch of government (usually the executive). Sometimes President Boris Yeltsin's actions to disperse the Supreme Soviet in 1993 are cited as an example of such a coup.

Finally, in Lately there are various hybrid forms of coups. For example, the military who overthrew the ruler transfer power to the opposition or other representatives of the current government, or the military explain their actions by the implementation of the decision of the Parliament and the Supreme Court.

The specifics of the 21st century are the “color revolutions” in the post-Soviet space and the “Arab spring” in the Middle East and North Africa, as a result of which the opposition comes to power on the wave of popular protests. Most often, cases of a change of power as a result of a military invasion of external forces (for example, the operations of the international coalition in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s) are not classified as coups.

Revolutionary tendencies

According to Kommersant's estimates, since the beginning of the 21st century, state leaders have been removed from power 38 times in an illegitimate or not entirely legitimate way.

Over the past 45 years, almost two hundred upheavals and revolutions have taken place in the world. If in 1970-1984 there were an average of six to seven cases per year, then in 1985-1999 - four, and since 2000 - an average of two per year. Among the fragile regions of the world, sub-Saharan Africa leads by a significant margin, accounting for almost half of all such incidents. Revolutionary activity in Latin America was at a high level in the 1970s and early 1980s, but then came to naught. Asia's third place was largely secured by Thailand, which entered the top 5 countries where coups occurred most often. During the reporting period, there were seven of them, and since the beginning of the 1930s - 19. In addition, the last decades have been marked by the expansion of geography due to the inclusion of Oceania and the countries of the former USSR in the list.

As it turned out, in most cases of violent change of power, the military played a leading role. In addition, several other trends can be traced in the upheavals of recent decades. It is not uncommon for leaders who came to power as a result of a coup to subsequently repeat the fate of their predecessors. This is especially true in African countries. There are also cases when the leaders who seized power left and later returned to power in a democratic way. For example, Olusegun Obasanjo, who ruled Nigeria in the 1970s as a military dictator, was elected in legitimate elections in 1999. In 2006, he returned to power in Nicaragua former leader Sandinista National Liberation Front Daniel Ortega.

Many deposed leaders in their homeland are waiting for criminal prosecution. Sentences can be harsh, up to death penalty. The example of Egypt is noteworthy in that there are simultaneous trials against Hosni Mubarak, who was overthrown during the Arab Spring, and his successor Mohammed Morsi. However, courts in such cases often take place in absentia, because the defendants have found asylum abroad. As practice shows, for most of the overthrown rulers, the decision to leave the country immediately after the overthrow turned out to be not an extra precautionary measure.

But the current heads of state should go abroad as rarely as possible, because putschists can take advantage of their absence. This mistake cost power to the leader of Mauritania, Ould Taye, who went to the funeral of the Saudi king, the head of the Central African Republic, Ange-Felix Patasse, who was absent for a summit of African states, and Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who participated in the UN General Assembly in New York. Although there are doubts about the latter: a number of media reported that the prime minister knew about the impending coup and went on a foreign tour with 114 suitcases on board.

Ordered to set aside

The military often plays a critical role in changing power through unconstitutional means. Since 1970, they have led or taken part in more than 70% of all coups.

Most often, the highest-ranking military men become putschists. In particular, 45 generals were included in our rating. The highest rank among the conspirators was Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachon, who established sole military rule in Thailand in 1971.

Military personnel of the middle and junior command staff are also prone to such adventures. We can recall, for example, Muammar Gaddafi, who led a military coup in Libya with the rank of captain, after which he was promoted to colonel and retained this rank for the rest of his life. Or Colonel Jean-Bedel Bokassu, who seized power in the Central African Republic and soon proclaimed himself emperor. Juntas of "black colonels" staged coups in Greece in the 1960s and Cyprus in the 1970s.

For almost half a century, there have been two coups organized by sergeants in the world. In 1980, a group of 16 military men led by Desi Bouters seized power in Suriname. These events went down in history as the "conspiracy of sergeants." That same year, Master Sergeant Samuel Doe seized power in Liberia in a bloody coup that killed President William Tolbert and executed members of the government. However, the conspirator did not remain a sergeant for long - having headed the Council of National Salvation, he made himself a general.

Authors-compilers of the guide: Anna Tokareva, Olga Shkurenko, Maxim Kovalsky
Photo: Reuters, AP, Kommersant, Zuma
Design and layout: Alexey Dubinin, Anton Zhukov, Alexey Shabrov, Korney Krongauz
Managing editor: Kirill Urban, Artem Galustyan

STATE COUP- a sudden illegitimate change of government undertaken by an organized group to remove or replace legitimate authority. Coups are fraught with bloodshed, although they are bloodless, and can be carried out by military or civilian forces.

The fundamental difference between a coup and a revolution is that the latter is carried out as a result of protest actions (and in the interests) of a significant group of people that make up a significant part of the country's population and leads to a radical change in the political regime, which is not prerequisite for a coup. In Russian, a number of foreign concepts are also used to refer to this phenomenon:

Putsch(from German putsch) The German word "putsch" came into use after unsuccessful attempts at a coup d'état in Germany ("Kapp putsch" in 1920 and "beer putsch" by A. Hitler in 1923). However, as the researchers note, this concept has a more negative evaluative character and is mainly applied to attempts to seize power that are discredited in public opinion (for example, the State Emergency Committee in Russia).

Junta(from Spanish Junta - board, association) is a common designation for a military government that came to power as a result of a coup (for example, the Pinochet junta).

In modern times, the nature of coup d'état has undergone some changes. The coup of 18 Brumaire, 1799, when Napoleon Bonaparte overthrew the Directory and came to power at the head of a provisional government, is considered a classic. Changes in the constitution and political system are carried out while maintaining the old legal forms or gradually creating a new parallel constitution. There is even such a term as " creeping coup d'état”, when an illegitimate change of power does not occur overnight, but according to a scenario extended in time, as a result of multi-step political machinations. In any case, the goal of legitimizing the new government is achieved, which is trying in every possible way to disown accusations of usurpation and present itself as a defender of "true" democracy against its enemies.

In the 20th century the theory of "coup d'état" was considered in the works of the classics of Marxism-Leninism, becoming part of their revolutionary strategy. The greatest contribution to the comparative historical study of the technique of the coup was made by the Italian Curzio Malaparte in the book coup d'état technique(1931). In it, he proves that in a modern mass society in the conditions of a social crisis, a complex overbureaucratized infrastructure of state administration makes it easier for a political minority to seize power with the skillful use of special coup technology.

In the modern world, the so-called "banana republics" - small and, as a rule, corrupt, economically underdeveloped states of Latin America and Africa, are especially famous for the instability of their political regimes and numerous successful and unsuccessful coup attempts. Military coups have even become a kind of business for some mercenary firms selling their services to opposing sides in the world's hot spots (for example, in 2004 alone there were two attempted armed coups in the Republic of the Congo). Among modern heads of state, the largest "long-livers" who came to power as a result of a coup are President Muammar al-Gaddafi, who overthrew the monarchy in Libya (1969) and Pakistani President Pervez Musharaff, who deposed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (1999). One of the most recent coups was the military coup in Mauritania in 2005, which ousted the president, who in turn came to power illegally in 1984.

A coup d'état or its attempt is an indicator of the existing instability, distortions in internal development society. He speaks about the weakness of democratic institutions and the underdevelopment of civil society, about the unsettled mechanisms for the transfer of power by legal means. In general, history shows that even a successful coup d'état, as a rule, is fraught with long-term negative consequences for the whole society, is an artificial attempt to overtake or slow down the evolutionary development of the country and often leads to human casualties and repression, as well as a boycott by the world community.

Mikhail Lipkin

Coups and revolutions are always carried out with the aim of introducing fundamental changes in the existing state of affairs. However, the ongoing processes are not the same in essence. How is a coup different from a revolution? Let's try to figure this out.

Definition

coup d'état- forced replacement of the current leadership, carried out at the initiative of an organized group of people.

Revolution- a powerful process that entails radical transformations in the life of society up to the complete destruction of the old social order and its replacement with a new one.

Comparison

In both cases, dissatisfaction with the established order is manifested. However, the difference between a coup and a revolution can already be seen in the goals pursued. The main intention of the instigators of the coup is to overthrow those who are at the helm of the state. At the same time, forces are involved to seize the centers of concentration of power and to physically isolate the leaders who have been acting up to this point. As a rule, everything happens quickly with the preliminary creation of a conspiracy.

Meanwhile, such a situation is not associated with global changes in the structure of society, while the goal of revolutionary actions is a deep qualitative transformation of the existing state system. If the efforts of Protestants are aimed at reorganizing the political regime, such a revolution is called, accordingly, political. When it comes to changing the entire social order, grandiose events are classified as a social revolution.

The whole revolutionary process takes a long time. First, unrest arises within the state, the cause of which is the infringement of the rights of people belonging to certain strata and classes of society. The process is developing, its dynamics is growing, the atmosphere is heating up more and more. The logical conclusion is the revolution itself, often accompanied by bloodshed and the transition to civil war.

So, revolution is a much larger phenomenon. It is a movement of large popular masses, constituting a considerable part of the entire population of the country. The coup is not backed up to the same extent by popular support. A limited number of people are involved in its planning and implementation. Sometimes the process is led by a political party that fails to break through to power in the traditional way - through elections.

What is the difference between a coup and a revolution other than that? The fact that the latter occurs under the influence of the formed class ideology, capable of completely changing the consciousness of people. A revolution, however, like a riot or insurrection, falls somewhat short of class ideological principles. In this respect, it is much simpler.