Turkey's geographical position, between the Middle East and Europe and at the centre of the current upheavals in the USSR and the Balkans, has led to a reawakening of interest in its international standing. Meanwhile its domestic politics are of increasing interest and Turkey seems to have become a model for Liberal Democracy in Central Asia. David Hale focuses on the role of the military in contemporary politics. He author argues that the military has behaved quite differently from its counterparts in other third world states: it has acted in some degree as a guardian of the state, committed to economic and social modernisation. The book places contemporary politics in perspective by looking at the evolution of the armed forces in Turkey from the end of the eighteenth century. The author traces the role of the military through the establishment of the Republic, the military coups of 1960 and 1980, the gradual return to civilian government of the sixties and seventies, and the military disengagement from politics of 1983 onwards. Hale is interested in the army as an actor in the political drama rather than in the professional functions of soldiers, and his historical exposition reveals much about the modern scene.

Debates about military influence on civilian government tend to be partisan and rarely pay sufficient attention to specific contexts. This paper analyses, without condemnation or justification, why and how the military exercises such influence in Turkey and whether it is likely to continue to do so. It argues that the role of the military in Turkey grows out of a specific Turkish context and is more a symptom than a cause of the country's flawed democracy. It examines the Turkish officer ethos, particularly the role of the indigenous ideology of Kemalism, and the broad, though not universal, public mandate for an interventionist role in politics. It contends that the military's influence is neither uniform nor total and that it is more effective at blocking than initiating policy; thus creating a system in which civilian authority is primary rather than supreme. It analyses the mechanisms through which the military attempts to shape policy, and demonstrates how its influence depends more on its informal authority than legislated rights or responsibilities. The paper suggests that fears of threats to national security resulting from the reforms required for EU accession have made the military more, not less, reluctant to withdraw from the political arena. It concludes that, regardless of the future of Turkey's candidacy, such a withdrawal will be a slow and gradual process, dependent more on changes in Turkish social and political culture and the perceived security environment than in the military itself.