Coup d'état

'stroke of state'),[1] or simply a coup, is typically an illegal and overt attempt by a military organization or other government elites to unseat an incumbent leadership.

[11][12][13][14] In what is referred to as "coup-proofing", regimes create structures that make it hard for any small group to seize power.

[25] What may be its first published use within a text composed in English is an editor's note in the London Morning Chronicle,1804, reporting the arrest by Napoleon in France, of Moreau, Berthier, Masséna, and Bernadotte: "There was a report in circulation yesterday of a sort of coup d'état having taken place in France, in consequence of some formidable conspiracy against the existing government."

In the British press, the phrase came to be used to describe the various murders by Napoleon's alleged secret police, the Gens d'Armes d'Elite, who executed the Duke of Enghien: "the actors in torture, the distributors of the poisoning draughts, and the secret executioners of those unfortunate individuals or families, whom Bonaparte's measures of safety require to remove.

In what revolutionary tyrants call grand[s] coups d'état, as butchering, or poisoning, or drowning, en masse, they are exclusively employed.

Other measures may include annulling the constitution, suspending civil courts, and having the head of government assume dictatorial powers.

[37] The term putsch ([pʊtʃ], from Swiss German for 'knock'), denotes the political-military actions of an unsuccessful minority reactionary coup.

[2] A number of political science datasets document coup attempts around the world and over time, generally starting in the post-World War II period.

A 2023 study argued that major coup datasets tend to over-rely on international news sources to gather their information, potentially biasing the types of events included.

[59] A third 2016 study finds that coups become more likely in the wake of elections in autocracies when the results reveal electoral weakness for the incumbent autocrat.

[62] One study found that coups are more likely to occur in states with small populations, as there are smaller coordination problems for coup-plotters.

A 2017 study found that autocratic leaders whose states were involved in international rivalries over disputed territory were more likely to be overthrown in a coup.

The authors of the study provide the following logic for why this is:Autocratic incumbents invested in spatial rivalries need to strengthen the military in order to compete with a foreign adversary.

The imperative of developing a strong army puts dictators in a paradoxical situation: to compete with a rival state, they must empower the very agency—the military—that is most likely to threaten their own survival in office.

[14][contradictory] In what is referred to as "coup-proofing", regimes create structures that make it hard for any small group to seize power.

[87] Succession rules are believed to hamper coordination efforts among coup plotters by assuaging elites who have more to gain by patience than by plotting.

[87] According to political scientists Curtis Bell and Jonathan Powell, coup attempts in neighbouring countries lead to greater coup-proofing and coup-related repression in a region.

[91] A 2019 study in Conflict Management and Peace Science found that personalist dictatorships are more likely to take coup-proofing measures than other authoritarian regimes; the authors argue that this is because "personalists are characterized by weak institutions and narrow support bases, a lack of unifying ideologies and informal links to the ruler".

[93] Some scholars have posited that the recruitment of foreign legionnaires into national armies can reduce the probability of military coups.

The dataset is small, so statistical significance varies depending on the model used, as of 2017[update]; debate will end if data on more coups makes the pattern clear.

[4][5][100][101][102][103][99] The post-Cold-War increase in the chances of post-coup democratization may partly be due to the incentives created by international pressure and financing.

[100] Legal scholar Ilya Somin believes that a coup to forcibly overthrow a democratic government might sometimes be justified.

Commenting on the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt, Somin opined, There should be a strong presumption against forcibly removing a democratic regime.

But that presumption might be overcome if the government in question poses a grave threat to human rights, or is likely to destroy democracy itself by shutting down future political competition.

[5][102] 2016 research suggests that increased repression and violence typically follow both successful and unsuccessful coup attempts.

[99] However, some tentative analysis by political scientist Jay Ulfelder finds no clear pattern of deterioration in human rights practices in wake of failed coups in post-Cold War era.

If it starts the mass killing of elements of the army, including officers who were not involved in the coup, this may trigger a "counter-coup" by soldiers who are afraid they will be next.

To prevent such a desperate counter-coup that may be more successful than the initial attempt, governments usually resort to firing prominent officers and replacing them with loyalists instead.

[113] A 2016 study shows that the international donor community in the post-Cold War period penalizes coups by reducing foreign aid.

[115] A 2017 study found that negative international responses, especially from powerful actors, have a significant effect in shortening the duration of regimes created in coups.