The Democratic Coup d'État

The Democratic Coup d’Etat opens with a simple statement of its controversial premise: “Sometimes democracy is established through a military coup.” In the ensuing 200 pages, Ozan Varol’s new book presents a nuanced examination of the factors that comprise a military coup and how it may (may) result democracy: the makeup of the military forces, the relationship between the military and the governing dictatorship, the relationship between the populace and the military after the coup. Anyone interested in the creation and maintenance of functioning democracies will find valuable insights within its pages. One of the first striking things about the book is encountering the sheer number of dictatorships in recent world history. The book is rife with examples illustrating different causes and outcomes of military coups, ranging from the recent events in Turkey to Burkina Faso in 2014, Romania under Ceausescu, Portugal in 1974, Peru in 1975, Brazil in ’45, Guatemala in ’44, and many others. But the events of the Arab Spring provide the most prominent touchstone in the book. Partially inspired by the events in Cairo in 2011, where the Egyptian military toppled of longtime dictator Hosni Mubarak following months of popular protests against the regime, the book frequently returns to this recent example of how the military may play a role in both installing and overthrowing a democratically-elected government. Varol’s description of the factors that create a military coup are fascinating. I had never before considered the difference between a “military state” and a “police state,” and how that affects civilians’ attitudes to the armed forces. Another interesting chapter analyzes how a military decides to support or crush a burgeoning democratic movement, comparing volunteer military forces to “citizen-soldiers” serving mandatory conscription and likely to have closer ties to members of a popular uprising. While reading the first sections of the book, I wondered what lessons democratic activists could learn from this history. A late chapter, “Between Scylla and Charbydis,” provides a helpful analysis. There, Varol describes the difficult passage civilians must navigate in a post-coup society: the military will demand from the new government certain “exit benefits,” such as structuring the new civilian government to grant the military greater power in domestic affairs, in exchange for handing control back to the people. If civilians wish to negotiate against the military’s demands, they will have to do so without provoking a heavy-handed backlash from the armed forces. Varol suggests civilians can take anticipatory action for these circumstances and describes bargaining positions, such as “sunset dates” that gradually reduce military involvement in politics. Subsequent chapters in the book further describe this kind of high-stakes society-wide hostage negotiation, as well as the organizing that civilian political parties must do to gain and maintain popular support and establish a balanced civil-military relationship. The book is valuable not just for its analysis of the ways militaries interact with democratic institutions, but for its description of how civilians can build democratic institutions that withstand antidemocratic forces and prevent military coups. Following foreign events like the Arab Spring from afar can be difficult, but Varol breaks down military involvement in these uprisings in clear and engaging chapters. The Democratic Coup d’Etat is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand the dynamics underlying contemporary democracy.

Ozan provides a well researched, thoroughly convincing argument. With solid examples from numerous perspectives, his title thesis becomes very difficult to refute. My only criticism is that the prose leans academic. To someone very interested in the topic, this is an engaging read. My struggle with this book is that I didn't find the fundamental thesis difficult to believe. While the examples provided were still new (to me) and interesting, I did not get to enjoy the frequent "aha" moments that I desire when reading nonfiction. If you look at a question like, "Why would a military leader willingly hand power over to the people after a successful coup?" and think "I have to learn more!" then this book is for definitely for you. It will address that, and many other thought provoking questions on the subject.

This book takes you through a well documented and riveting journey that covers coups throughout global history. The journey, and topic, seem rather timely with the current global climate as we see countries around the world edging closer and closer to authoritarian practices (or fully embracing those practices with shameless abandon).

A fantastic, well-written account supporting a counter-intuitive thesis with a catalogue of insightful historical vignettes in support. Varol combines a deep, at times first-hand understanding of the social forces that influence political and military actors in struggling states with a storyteller's wit and clarity. His book beautifully weaves together seemingly unrelated events into a coherent whole, distilling the complexities of power transitions the world over into a few common themes that support the possibility that, at times, a coup d'état is good for democracy.

Coherent writing backed by plenty of historical events. It really helped me to think from a new perspective.

This is a great book by a new author. Ozan Varol takes a very complex and nuanced topic, pulls it apart, and eloquently explains how the default conventional wisdom of assuming all coups are bad, is wrong. This is a fresh perspective, written in a compelling and accessible way, where you don’t need a political science or law degree to understand the argument.

Ozan's thesis will undoubtedly become the consensus. You'll finish the book and ask how coups d'etats could have been understood any other way. Smart and precise writing punctuated with thoughtful personal anecdotes. I am looking forward to more from this this author!

This timely nonfiction book provides an insightful introduction to a nuanced area of sociopolitical inquiry that Varol seems to have single-handedly created--that of the democratic coup d'etat. Does this sound like an oxymoron to you? Varol is counting on that. The premise of this book is that generally coups have a bad rap. We expect nothing good to come of them. By using many historical examples and drawing from literature and pop culture, Varol effectively argues that contrary to the bad taste in our collective mouth, coups can and have ushered in some semblance of democracy on occasion. Interestingly, Varol lays out some ground rules for what kinds of coups qualify and which do not. For example, Varol asserts that "a coup can be democratic only if it topples an authoritarian government." He explores the potential interests and motivations of military actors compellingly. Varol employs an authoritative (pun intended) and thoughtful tone in the book. At times, I grew tired of the many counterarguments he explores. He often considers what the reader might be thinking while reading and I found myself feeling slightly patronized by what I perceived to be a bit of condescension. Varol takes great care to reserve the right to add nuance to every defined word or piece of his argument. However, this being an academic endeavor and Varol being a law professor, that approach comes with the territory. What kept me reading was how Varol expertly weaved together historical events into narratives that were both engaging and persuasive. I recommend this book to anyone interested in world history, democracy, current affairs, or politics.

Although I often feel compelled to reject out-of-hand any claims that militaristic revolution can engender increased political freedom, I found many of Ozan Varol's arguments compelling and, by the end, found myself agreeing with many of the conclusions. I thought it was surprisingly helpful to note the general academic skepticism and negative attitudes among intellectual elites regarding any political or social gains instigated by the armed forces. Obviously, another excellent sticking point is that one could probably not have chosen a more poignant time in human history to have written this work. Not only does Varol draw from several historical and recent examples, but he succintly distills their relevance to his arguments and the broader discussion in an unbelievably accessible manner. I can't think of a single time during the entire process where I was unable to follow the author's train of thought. I also felt that the author's use of popular culture and media portrayals painted a believable picture of the distorted realities many have come to blindly accept as gospel truth. Additionally, as mentioned above, the arguments gave me a chance to refine my own thinking on the subjects involved. Having run the gamut of classic philosophy and political science works in college, I found the discourse extremely interesting and practically useful in making sense of the modern international socio-political environment.

Varoll asks a question - the answer to which is contrary to many entrenched views. Can a military coup be an instrument of democratic advancement? The books advances its arguments through very detailed research and answers this bedrock question. This part of the book is interesting for anyone with an interest in how and why democracy might take root. But this isn't the most interesting part of the book. Beneath the scholarly exterior there lurks the shadow of an author who is willing to engage difficult subject matter in a way that is contrary to our expectations. In this way it reminded me of someone like Malcolm Gladwell or the "freaky" duo of Levitt and Dubner. It makes a claim that we might all like to resist thinking about - might a strong military have to step in to right a domestic wrong? At least in the case of a coup overthrowing a dictator the answer seems to be...it depends but often...yes. The work flirts with a military solution to domestic problems and for now, narrows its subject matter to what is perhaps a laudable conclusion. In this, the work is successful. However, the reader should be forewarned - the text is capital "D" Dense. It is likely to be inaccessible to anyone without a formal education and even then its surface matter is probably most appreciated by someone with a deep interest in the evolution of democracy in societies. I think in this way the text does a disservice to its more interesting themes. The risk of being turned off by the at times "stodgy" tone to absorb the more interesting material is great. However, it is for sure worth a read to anyone who is willing to give it a chance and look beyond its ivory veneer. What lurks below is worth it.

The Democratic Coup d’Etat opens with a simple statement of its controversial premise: “Sometimes democracy is established through a military coup.” In the ensuing 200 pages, Ozan Varol’s new book presents a nuanced examination of the factors that comprise a military coup and how it may (may) result democracy: the makeup of the military forces, the relationship between the military and the governing dictatorship, the relationship between the populace and the military after the coup. Anyone interested in the creation and maintenance of functioning democracies will find valuable insights within its pages. One of the first striking things about the book is encountering the sheer number of dictatorships in recent world history. The book is rife with examples illustrating different causes and outcomes of military coups, ranging from the recent events in Turkey to Burkina Faso in 2014, Romania under Ceausescu, Portugal in 1974, Peru in 1975, Brazil in ’45, Guatemala in ’44, and many others. But the events of the Arab Spring provide the most prominent touchstone in the book. Partially inspired by the events in Cairo in 2011, where the Egyptian military toppled of longtime dictator Hosni Mubarak following months of popular protests against the regime, the book frequently returns to this recent example of how the military may play a role in both installing and overthrowing a democratically-elected government. Varol’s description of the factors that create a military coup are fascinating. I had never before considered the difference between a “military state” and a “police state,” and how that affects civilians’ attitudes to the armed forces. Another interesting chapter analyzes how a military decides to support or crush a burgeoning democratic movement, comparing volunteer military forces to “citizen-soldiers” serving mandatory conscription and likely to have closer ties to members of a popular uprising. While reading the first sections of the book, I wondered what lessons democratic activists could learn from this history. A late chapter, “Between Scylla and Charbydis,” provides a helpful analysis. There, Varol describes the difficult passage civilians must navigate in a post-coup society: the military will demand from the new government certain “exit benefits,” such as structuring the new civilian government to grant the military greater power in domestic affairs, in exchange for handing control back to the people. If civilians wish to negotiate against the military’s demands, they will have to do so without provoking a heavy-handed backlash from the armed forces. Varol suggests civilians can take anticipatory action for these circumstances and describes bargaining positions, such as “sunset dates” that gradually reduce military involvement in politics. Subsequent chapters in the book further describe this kind of high-stakes society-wide hostage negotiation, as well as the organizing that civilian political parties must do to gain and maintain popular support and establish a balanced civil-military relationship. The book is valuable not just for its analysis of the ways militaries interact with democratic institutions, but for its description of how civilians can build democratic institutions that withstand antidemocratic forces and prevent military coups. Following foreign events like the Arab Spring from afar can be difficult, but Varol breaks down military involvement in these uprisings in clear and engaging chapters. The Democratic Coup d’Etat is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand the dynamics underlying contemporary democracy.

Ozan provides a well researched, thoroughly convincing argument. With solid examples from numerous perspectives, his title thesis becomes very difficult to refute. My only criticism is that the prose leans academic. To someone very interested in the topic, this is an engaging read. My struggle with this book is that I didn't find the fundamental thesis difficult to believe. While the examples provided were still new (to me) and interesting, I did not get to enjoy the frequent "aha" moments that I desire when reading nonfiction. If you look at a question like, "Why would a military leader willingly hand power over to the people after a successful coup?" and think "I have to learn more!" then this book is for definitely for you. It will address that, and many other thought provoking questions on the subject.

This book takes you through a well documented and riveting journey that covers coups throughout global history. The journey, and topic, seem rather timely with the current global climate as we see countries around the world edging closer and closer to authoritarian practices (or fully embracing those practices with shameless abandon).

A fantastic, well-written account supporting a counter-intuitive thesis with a catalogue of insightful historical vignettes in support. Varol combines a deep, at times first-hand understanding of the social forces that influence political and military actors in struggling states with a storyteller's wit and clarity. His book beautifully weaves together seemingly unrelated events into a coherent whole, distilling the complexities of power transitions the world over into a few common themes that support the possibility that, at times, a coup d'état is good for democracy.

Coherent writing backed by plenty of historical events. It really helped me to think from a new perspective.

This is a great book by a new author. Ozan Varol takes a very complex and nuanced topic, pulls it apart, and eloquently explains how the default conventional wisdom of assuming all coups are bad, is wrong. This is a fresh perspective, written in a compelling and accessible way, where you don’t need a political science or law degree to understand the argument.

Ozan's thesis will undoubtedly become the consensus. You'll finish the book and ask how coups d'etats could have been understood any other way. Smart and precise writing punctuated with thoughtful personal anecdotes. I am looking forward to more from this this author!

This timely nonfiction book provides an insightful introduction to a nuanced area of sociopolitical inquiry that Varol seems to have single-handedly created--that of the democratic coup d'etat. Does this sound like an oxymoron to you? Varol is counting on that. The premise of this book is that generally coups have a bad rap. We expect nothing good to come of them. By using many historical examples and drawing from literature and pop culture, Varol effectively argues that contrary to the bad taste in our collective mouth, coups can and have ushered in some semblance of democracy on occasion. Interestingly, Varol lays out some ground rules for what kinds of coups qualify and which do not. For example, Varol asserts that "a coup can be democratic only if it topples an authoritarian government." He explores the potential interests and motivations of military actors compellingly. Varol employs an authoritative (pun intended) and thoughtful tone in the book. At times, I grew tired of the many counterarguments he explores. He often considers what the reader might be thinking while reading and I found myself feeling slightly patronized by what I perceived to be a bit of condescension. Varol takes great care to reserve the right to add nuance to every defined word or piece of his argument. However, this being an academic endeavor and Varol being a law professor, that approach comes with the territory. What kept me reading was how Varol expertly weaved together historical events into narratives that were both engaging and persuasive. I recommend this book to anyone interested in world history, democracy, current affairs, or politics.

Although I often feel compelled to reject out-of-hand any claims that militaristic revolution can engender increased political freedom, I found many of Ozan Varol's arguments compelling and, by the end, found myself agreeing with many of the conclusions. I thought it was surprisingly helpful to note the general academic skepticism and negative attitudes among intellectual elites regarding any political or social gains instigated by the armed forces. Obviously, another excellent sticking point is that one could probably not have chosen a more poignant time in human history to have written this work. Not only does Varol draw from several historical and recent examples, but he succintly distills their relevance to his arguments and the broader discussion in an unbelievably accessible manner. I can't think of a single time during the entire process where I was unable to follow the author's train of thought. I also felt that the author's use of popular culture and media portrayals painted a believable picture of the distorted realities many have come to blindly accept as gospel truth. Additionally, as mentioned above, the arguments gave me a chance to refine my own thinking on the subjects involved. Having run the gamut of classic philosophy and political science works in college, I found the discourse extremely interesting and practically useful in making sense of the modern international socio-political environment.

Varoll asks a question - the answer to which is contrary to many entrenched views. Can a military coup be an instrument of democratic advancement? The books advances its arguments through very detailed research and answers this bedrock question. This part of the book is interesting for anyone with an interest in how and why democracy might take root. But this isn't the most interesting part of the book. Beneath the scholarly exterior there lurks the shadow of an author who is willing to engage difficult subject matter in a way that is contrary to our expectations. In this way it reminded me of someone like Malcolm Gladwell or the "freaky" duo of Levitt and Dubner. It makes a claim that we might all like to resist thinking about - might a strong military have to step in to right a domestic wrong? At least in the case of a coup overthrowing a dictator the answer seems to be...it depends but often...yes. The work flirts with a military solution to domestic problems and for now, narrows its subject matter to what is perhaps a laudable conclusion. In this, the work is successful. However, the reader should be forewarned - the text is capital "D" Dense. It is likely to be inaccessible to anyone without a formal education and even then its surface matter is probably most appreciated by someone with a deep interest in the evolution of democracy in societies. I think in this way the text does a disservice to its more interesting themes. The risk of being turned off by the at times "stodgy" tone to absorb the more interesting material is great. However, it is for sure worth a read to anyone who is willing to give it a chance and look beyond its ivory veneer. What lurks below is worth it.

This fascinating book by Ozan Varol is expanded from an article he published in 2013 – an article which was apparently somewhat controversial in comparative constitutional law scholarship circles, and beyond. It was even denounced by the president of Turkey! The thesis that so startled and disturbed is simple: sometimes – not always, obviously, but sometimes – a military coup can be the precursor to the development of stable democratic institutions, in a country that didn't have them before, or that has suffered under years or decades of authoritarian dictatorship. The conventional wisdom is that militaries, when they involve themselves in politics to the extent of overthrowing a government, are "more inclined to install a dictator than to restore or build a democratic system," as Richard Heinberg wrote in a recent piece. "That’s because," Heinberg opines, "the military itself, in virtually every nation, has an authoritarian internal structure." Varol argues that this view is a vast over-simplification. Marshaling numerous examples from various periods of history and regions of the world, he shows that military coup-makers, more for reasons of pragmatic self-interest than due to idealism or altruism, often prefer to hand over power to democratic, civilian governments, after a transition/stabilization period of a few years. He explores in detail various factors that seem to increase the likelihood of this course of events (as well as why it works sometimes, but ends up in shambles other times), and on the other hand, what factors lead to the opposite: the post-coup establishment of a long-term military dictatorship. It's a fascinating book, if you're interested in theories about authoritarianism, democracy, and governance; relations between civilian and military institutions; comparative political science; politics; political history; military history; and the like. Varol is a brilliant guy (he likes to call himself a "rocket scientist turned law professor"; as a student at Cornell, he worked on one of the Mars Rover missions), but he wears his intellect lightly. His writing style is accessible, conversational, and a pleasure to read. And the book is sprinkled with interesting stories. Breezy, easy-to-follow accounts of coups and coup attempts in Portugal, Turkey, Egypt, Brazil, colonial America, ancient Greece, 17th Century England, and elsewhere, illustrate the points Varol makes. This is a book intended for general readers as well as students of the subject; it's not dry or academic in tone at all. Definitely worth reading if you think you might be interested in the subject!

By questioning the consensus that coup d'etat's are by definition adverse to democracy and democratic institutions, the author, Ozan Varol, argues that conventional wisdom isn't always correct and, when left unquestioned, can hinder our ability to fully understand history and other world events. In this well researched book (using examples from the Roman Republic to the Arab Spring of the last few years) Ozan Varol makes the case that in certain instances a military coup can lead to democracy. Here Varol, expanding on his original article which generated a lot of interest and controversy in the academic community, writes an accessible and interesting book that covers a not-so accessible topic: the formation of democracies across time, regions and cultures and the interplay that the military (specifically, military coup d'etats) has had and may have in the future on such processes and institutions. This book is a must read for anyone interested in public policy, especially given the expansion of military and non-democratic influences in recent years across our glob, and for any readers with a bent towards understanding how a contrarian view can result in new ways to view and analyze our world (how we got here and where we're headed).

This book is clearly a well-researched and intricate read. Varol does an excellent job of painting an elaborate picture of both his research and his own experiences as he watches history unfold. While this is not just a bit of light reading, it truly makes the reader think critically and consider Varol's hypothesis, found plainly in the first paragraph of the book: "Sometimes democracy is established through a military coup." I like that the thesis of such a dynamic book is stated from the get go; no guessing or reading between the lines, and it puts the reader in a position from which they can more clearly understand the more difficult parts of the points being made. Varol, a Turkish-born law professor, brings forth an interesting perspective as he questions different coups throughout history and the world. Although I wouldn't call it an easy read, The Democratic Coup d'Etat strikes the perfect balance of being both entertaining and informative (and really any militaristic book that quotes Bob Dylan songs MUST be good). From Napoleon's time to the birth of America, to the Egyptian National Democratic Party, there is something for history and military buffs of all walks of life.

An excellent book. Varol begins with a strong thesis: Military coups can lead to democratic (or, at least, more democratic) outcomes. He then proceeds to cover most of the angles and counter-arguments inherent in his thesis, recognizing that his argument runs against the grain of popular legal and political-science thinking. (A good thing, in my opinion.) Two further observations: First, I appreciate that Varol's thesis is relatively narrow. He is not trying to write the final chapter on military coups or transitions to democracy, projects that would be futile and necessarily incomplete. Rather, he focuses on democratic transitions precipitated by military coups, explaining why they are not only possible, but have historical precedent. Second, Varol writes in an accessible prose and avoids the typical academic throat-clearing assault of language. The book should be of interest not only to lawyers, political theorists, military strategists, and behavioral economists, but to anyone interested in learning more about the way governments and societies behave.

This book seems to be one of the big fruits of a contrarian and productive mind. It challenges basically the dominant view on coups, and nuance it with a clear and simple thesis: “Sometimes democracy is established and enforced through a military coup.” The book is definitely a right choice for readers who are interested in democracy, politics, and history. Due to the necessity of supportive examples for the thesis, the book provides a substantial amount of examples from history. It puts the reader in a journey both between countries and in different periods of history. The spectrum of examples is so broad that this same book talks about the difference between Brutus and Cassius, Nasser and Naguib, 1960 coup and 1980 coup of Turkey. After that travel in time and in geography, you become convinced by the book’s abstract conclusions which are based on concrete examples. I think that the book is particularly valuable because of its analysis in depth of coups and military. The book gives the necessary background information on characteristics of this significant political actor and examines its interactions with other political actors. With respect to the author’s style, I can definitely say that although written by a law professor, the book stands in a point far away from an ordinary law article which may be sometimes painful to penetrate. The transitions are smooth and the structure is easy to follow. In really enjoyed reading it and I am looking forward to read future books of the author.

As someone who's had a hard time finding books about history and politics to be accessible or compelling, I can say that this book is a refreshing read. Varol takes a comprehensive look at successful (and unsuccessful) coups, answering questions such as: what form of military is likely to attempt a democratic coup; what political and social circumstances lead to a successful democratic coup; and, once the military has successfully seized power, why would it turn that power over to a democratic government. The ultimate conclusion of the book takes a commonly held assumption (i.e., that coups serve only to benefit authoriarianism) and turns it on its head--sometimes coups are an effective means of achieving democracy. A great read for anyone interested in history, politics, or simply thought-provoking ideas.

This book challenges some of the common narratives concerning military coups, and brings valuable nuance and realism to the literature on democratization. Through insightful historical analysis, the author demonstrates that, in certain circumstances, a military coup can be a natural first step in the transition from authoritarianism to democracy. At the same time, the author avoids applauding coup makers writ large or romanticizing the military as a singular, altruistic institution. Part history lesson, part political theory, and part personal narrative, this book is at all times a good read and is accessible to anyone interested in the subject matter. Highly recommend.

I had the distinct pleasure of reading this book before it was released and am excited to read it again now that it has been published. Ozan Varol, a law school professor by trade, managed to write a thoughtful, thoroughly researched book without the tedium and boredom of most scholarly works written by lawyers and law professors. Varol presents a convincing counter-intuitive and counter-mainstream argument, backing it up with considerable research and doing so in an interesting fashion.

Comparative politics may not be everyone's idea of a leisure reading genre, but "The Democratic Coup d'État" could very well change your mind. This book would be equally at home in a university library or your bedside table. Varol's accessible prose brings a thought-provoking and thoroughly researched work of political science to life, exploring the relationship between militaries and democratic transitions throughout history.

The Democratic Coup D'etat is a wonderful look into the preconceptions we have about military coups and the way that they affect political transitions in the world. Professor Varol's book offers a unique perspective on both the political and social ramifications of military coups as an instrument of governmental change. This book was both fascinating, and a fun read, that delves into political and military history in order to better understand the role of military coups throughout history.

"Great book and provides excellent examples of world history. Very easy to read for a non expert and easy to follow. I appreciate the style of rhetoric and made it so all levels of education, intellect, and comprehension can follow and thoroughly understand."