What really prevents "coup d'etat"-s in developed countries, or makes them very rare.

[UndertheOcean]

An example close to home : The US Department of defense . The Constitution and checks and balances have been practiced theory for more than 300 years now , but what's on paper and even historically accumulated power sharing mechanisms are never a match for bullets and tanks .

So , what prevents an institution with a monopoly (practically speaking , the police are clearly no match) on application of Force from taking over ?

I guess I can rephrase the question thus : What needs to happen to achieve a state where the Military would rather keep its hands off the Civilian government ?

Whatever that process is it needs to happen in Tunis , Libya and Egypt , hence my interest.

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. I think it has happened in Tunisia

They've had an election, and formed a government - with the Prime Minister from the Islamist party (they got more seats than others), who are not close to the military.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15830583

This writer thinks it's because the army didn't have too much power under the old regime, so they weren't able to be 'the next power'.

http://carnegieendowment.org/2011/11/03/back-to-barracks-tunisian-army-post-revolution/6lxg

[MineralMan]

2. It can't really happen in Egypt until the military isn't the government.

When that will be is uncertain.

[ieoeja]

3. Luck

The leaders of the American Revolutionary war was full of idealistic, wealthy, liberal elites who could have carved up the country in fiefdoms, but chose not to.

Washington voluntarily stepped down after two terms.

The anti-war Senator assured by a member of McClellan's staff that they were sabotaging the war effort went to President Lincoln because he considered the military's treachery worse than the Civil War.

A retired US Marine General betrayed a coup d'etat attempt in 1933.

The SAC commander in Japan refused to believe MacArthur's assertion that he had the authority to use Atomic weapons when Mac ordered him to use those weapons.


On the other hand in more recent times, two Kennedy's died while threatening the MIC. And one Carter was sabotaged by the Pentagon. I seriously wonder if both parties are chafing under the heel of the MIC, but too afraid to do anything about it. That would explain the "Super Committee" and the automatic massive military cuts when it failed. They can claim they thought the Super Committee would work and shock that it did not.