Civil Military Relations Comparison Between Turkey And Egypt Before And After Arab Spring

The Arab Spring, a wave of protests and uprisings that swept across the Middle East and North Africa beginning in late 2010, profoundly reshaped the political contours of the region. Among the most significant transformations were those concerning the intricate relationship between civilian governments and their respective militaries. Examining Turkey and Egypt, two nations with historically powerful military establishments, offers a compelling comparative study of how these dynamics shifted. While both countries experienced seismic political events, their paths diverged, revealing distinct patterns in the military's influence on governance, the strength of civilian institutions, and the trajectory of democratic development.

Historically, the Turkish military has occupied a unique position as the self-proclaimed guardian of the secular republic established by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. For decades, the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) acted as a powerful political player, intervening directly or indirectly through coups in 1960, 1971, and 1980, and orchestrating a "post-modern coup" in 1997 that led to the resignation of an Islamist-led government. This tutelary role was enshrined in the constitution, granting the military significant influence over national security policy and a perceived mandate to protect secularism and state integrity. However, the rise of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, beginning in 2002, initiated a gradual process of civilian ascendancy. Through a series of reforms, often framed within the context of EU accession, the government curtailed the TSK's formal political powers, reduced its economic footprint, and brought military appointments and budgets under greater civilian scrutiny. By the eve of the Arab Spring, the Turkish military's overt political influence had considerably waned, though its institutional prestige remained high.

Egypt's experience presented a different, albeit equally entrenched, military-dominated order. Since the 1952 Free Officers Movement that overthrew the monarchy, the Egyptian military has been the central pillar of the state. Its influence extended far beyond national defense, permeating economic life through vast business holdings and shaping political succession and policy. The regime of Hosni Mubarak, which came to power in 1981, was fundamentally a military-backed autocracy, with presidents and key ministers drawn from the military ranks. Unlike Turkey, there was no constitutional framework for military tutelage, but rather a deeply ingrained practice of military centrality. The Egyptian military's primary concern was maintaining its institutional autonomy, economic privileges, and its role as the ultimate guarantor of state stability, often at the expense of genuine democratic reform. The pre-2011 era in Egypt was characterized by a civilian political elite largely subordinate to, or co-opted by, the military establishment.

The Arab Spring dramatically altered the landscape in both countries, though the outcomes varied. In Turkey, the initial protests of 2013, often referred to as the Gezi Park protests, were largely directed against Erdoğan's government, not the military. The TSK remained largely on the sidelines, a testament to its diminished political role. The subsequent attempted coup in July 2016, however, marked a profound turning point. Blamed on followers of Fethullah Gülen, the coup attempt saw elements of the military attempting to seize power. The government's successful suppression of the coup, with widespread popular support and the TSK's decisive loyalty to the elected leadership, fundamentally reshaped civil-military relations. It led to a massive purge within the armed forces, the arrest and prosecution of thousands of officers, and a significant restructuring of the military's command and control. This event, paradoxically, solidified civilian control, albeit under an increasingly authoritarian Erdoğan presidency, by decisively breaking the military's capacity for independent political action and reinforcing its subordination to the elected government. The military's political influence was not merely reduced; it was effectively neutralized as an autonomous political actor.

In Egypt, the Arab Spring's impact was more direct and tumultuous. The 2011 uprising forced Mubarak's resignation, but power initially passed to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF). The military thus transitioned from being the hidden power behind the throne to the overt rulers of the country. This period saw the military attempting to manage the transition while preserving its core interests. The subsequent election of Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2012 created a period of intense friction between the newly elected civilian government and the entrenched military establishment. The military, wary of losing its privileged position under an Islamist president, ultimately intervened in July 2013, overthrowing Morsi in a popular-backed coup. This event ushered in the era of Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, a former general and defense minister, who became president in 2014. Under Sisi, the military's role in Egyptian society and politics has expanded dramatically. It has regained its position as the ultimate arbiter of power, controls a significant portion of the economy, and plays a central role in national security and infrastructure projects. Civilian institutions remain weak, and the military's autonomy and influence are arguably greater now than they were under Mubarak, solidifying a new form of military-backed authoritarianism.

Comparing these trajectories highlights critical differences. Turkey, despite its authoritarian drift under Erdoğan, has achieved a decisive subordination of the military to civilian authority, largely driven by internal political reforms and the decisive failure of the 2016 coup attempt. The military is no longer a primary political actor, though its loyalty is still crucial to the regime. Egypt, conversely, saw the military reassert its dominance after a brief period of civilian experimentation. The Arab Spring did not lead to greater civilian control; instead, it facilitated a more overt and expansive military role in governance, economy, and society, creating a system where the military is not just a guardian but the primary engine of the state. The implications for democratic governance are stark: in Turkey, the challenge is the concentration of power in the executive, not military interference; in Egypt, the challenge is the fundamental dominance of a non-accountable military institution over all aspects of the state and society.

The current state of civil-military relations in Turkey is one of firm civilian supremacy, though this supremacy is exercised within an increasingly illiberal democratic framework. The TSK is professionalized and focused on its defense mandate, with its political ambitions curtailed by past failures and purges. In Egypt, the military, under Sisi, has consolidated its position as the dominant force, controlling the state apparatus and economy. Civilian political life is heavily circumscribed, and the military's institutional interests are paramount. The Arab Spring, therefore, served as a catalyst for divergent paths: in Turkey, it ultimately contributed to the military's withdrawal from politics; in Egypt, it facilitated its re-entrenchment and expansion of power. Understanding these contrasting evolutions is key to grasping the varied outcomes of the region's democratic aspirations and the enduring power of military institutions in shaping state trajectories.