In Turkey - which has a history full of coups - there are many who believe that the image of coups has undergone a great change in recent years.
We moved from the direct coups of 1960, 1971 and 1980 - when the Turkish army controlled all institutions, closed parliament and suspended the activities of political parties - to a completely different kind, called postmodern coups, which we first saw in Turkey in 1997.
The scene was set in motion by statements from anonymous senior military commanders, who were threatening to walk out of the barracks without actually having to do so, and they found the perfect way to influence the political scene without directly interfering.
During that 1997 coup - rather than taking control of institutions directly - the army coordinated with some allies in civilian political circles and NGOs, and forced the government to resign under systematic pressure from the media.
In those events, there was no apparent military coup, but everyone knew that the political conditions that forced the government to resign were arranged by the military.
Since that date, the Turkish army has not stopped interfering in politics.
The scene was set in motion by statements issued by senior military commanders who did not reveal their names, who were threatening to leave the barracks without actually having to do so, and they found the best way to influence the political scene without directly interfering.
When the presidential elections were held in 2007, the Justice and Development Party was given an opportunity to exercise governance, in accordance with the requirements of the constitution;
But once again, the army worked to obstruct the party and deprive it of its rights, by subjecting the constitution to extremist and binding interpretations, based on its influence within the Constitutional Court.
At that time, the army published a statement on the Internet in the middle of the night, and it was expected that this step would prompt the government to resign immediately, but within 24 hours of that military statement, the government issued a counter-statement adhering to the provisions of the constitution that stipulate that the army is under the authority of the government and not the other way around.
This counter-step was very surprising, because it was the first time that opposition to military interventions was publicly expressed, and the position was met with great appreciation from the Turkish street, and represented a revolution against the traditions of military intervention in political affairs.
But this did not put an end to the coup intentions, as these practices were always present, and sometimes came disguised as a response to the aspirations of the people.
Another coup attempt occurred in 2013, and it was hiding behind the protests in Taksim Square.
At first, the army seemed far from the scene, but these chaotic demonstrations later raised slogans calling for military intervention.
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with his leadership and ability to mobilize the masses, was able to block this plan.
It wasn't until 6 months later that another coup attempt occurred on December 17, using the judiciary to charge members of the government with corruption.
This scheme, which was behind it, Fethullah Gulen and his associates - judges, prosecutors, police, and media people - was once again thwarted by Erdogan with his strong personality.
Coups can happen without warning, which is what we witnessed on July 15, 2016, when soldiers loyal to Fethullah Gulen tried to overthrow legitimacy by directly controlling state institutions, but this time the putschists did not take into account the social transformations that Turkey has undergone. And the reaction of the Turkish people.
There were also other attempts to intervene militarily in indirect ways by affecting the results of the elections, but they also failed.
It is clear that the same parties that stood behind the events in Taksim Square and the failed coup attempt on July 15 are also trying to end the Arab Spring, as these moves did not come with instructions from within Turkey only, but also from abroad, specifically from the Emirates, which had Over the past years, a significant impact on the new generation of putschists in Turkey.
There are two types of political practice in the Islamic world, the first is democracy, and the second is the coups against democracy.
It is known that Tunisia is the country from which the spark of the Arab Spring was launched, and it is the stronghold in which democracy has entrenched itself and remained silent;
Therefore, the aforementioned parties paid great attention to bringing down this system, as the revolutionary forces see the steadfastness of the democratic model - which was created by the Arab Spring - as disturbing.
For a long time, it is no secret that efforts are being made to stifle the Tunisian revolution, but Tunisia remains different from Egypt, where there is no army that controls politics and the economy.
The forces carrying weapons are divided into the police and the army, and the unions that participated in the revolutionary path are difficult to convince with the scenario of Egypt and Syria.
All these factors made the hypothesis of a clear coup in Tunisia excluded, but the use of an elected president to carry out the coup shows the scale and danger of the scheme.
a coup led by a president enjoying the legitimacy of elections against an elected parliament;
It is the first assassination of the electoral process, and this cannot be in the interest of the country, or in the interest of the elected president, but rather it will seriously undermine the president's legitimacy.
No one can claim that this coup was carried out in the name of the Tunisian people or in their interest. Rather, its aim is to end the democratic experiment, and to make the Tunisian people regret their adventure to realize this dream.
The use of an elected president to assassinate democracy - on behalf of France, some Gulf states and other coup parties - shows the extent of the malice and diabolical thinking of those who planned this matter.