Abdolmajid Seifi; Naser Pourhassan
Abstract
Since the failed coup in June 2016, a series of developments have begun in Turkey that are not comparable to the post-coup era of the past decades. The purpose of this article is to analyze the nature of the government in Turkey after the coup. The main question is what is the nature of the Turkish government ...
Read More
Since the failed coup in June 2016, a series of developments have begun in Turkey that are not comparable to the post-coup era of the past decades. The purpose of this article is to analyze the nature of the government in Turkey after the coup. The main question is what is the nature of the Turkish government after the abortive coup of June 2016? The paper also hypothesizes that the developments and set of changes that Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his party (Justice and Development) have initiated in recent years, accelerated since the 2016 coup so that the nature of government in Turkey would be changed from fragile democracy into “anocracy". In this government, while some democratic institutions are in power, the symptoms of authoritarianism and the transition to anocratic government is increasing. The findings of the article show that changing 18 articles from the Turkish constitution, transforming parliamentary system into presidential, enhancing the power of the President and weakening the supervisory organizations, severe weakening of the judicial system, intense violation of human rights, particularly tough violence against Gulenists and Kurds and the widespread suppression and liquidation of government opponents at the level of the military and civilians, are the hallmarks of the emergence of anocratic government in Turkey after the 2016 coup. The data collected for the paper hypothesis were processed in a descriptive-analytical method.
naser pourhassan
Abstract
The nature of the state in Iran is one of the most controversial issues among political science researchers. Unlike new states which were established in the post-colonial era, the state in Iran has a long history, so that it is considered as the first state of history. After the end of the Second World ...
Read More
The nature of the state in Iran is one of the most controversial issues among political science researchers. Unlike new states which were established in the post-colonial era, the state in Iran has a long history, so that it is considered as the first state of history. After the end of the Second World a large part of Iranian state studies focused on the Marxist nature, especially the Stalinist, of the five socio-economic formation. Another part of the state's studies was to criticize and reject the above-mentioned views. The nature of the state in Iran is the main issue of this article. In response to the question of what is the nature of the state in Iran, the following hypothesis has been formulated:with regard to the climatic roots and ecosystem of Iran and the dominance of the Eilat (nomads ), it is possible to formulate a " dawlat -eil"(nomads- state ) for a predecessor Iran, especially from the Seljuk to the end of the Qajar Dynasty . The nomads-state, due to the identity-related, organizational, and military features of the nomads structure, also refers to the formation of the state by the supreme nomads, and includes the nomads that, without being governed, are as quasi Governments ruled over their territory. This hypothesis has been processed by the methodology of historical sociology and the analysis of the nature of the ruling states from Safavid to the end of Qajar by descriptive-analytic method.
