On July 15, a botched attempt to stage a military coup in Turkey to oust the elected government of President Tayyip Erdogan dejected and disgruntled the touts of a military coup in Pakistan. Some Pakistanis claim that they watched on TV a Sheikh Rasheed of Turkish version sitting on a tank heading for parliament in Ankara. The fate of the tank is known; however, the fate of the rider is not yet known. The Move on Pakistan must be ruing the day it invested millions of rupees in making and displaying flexi posters on main roads in selected cities inviting the military blatantly to take over Pakistan. What happened in Turkey was seen with interest in Pakistan because of the shared thread of military coups in both the countries. Turkey has a history replete with four martial laws –1960, 1971, 1980, and 1997. Interestingly, a military coup has failed in Turkey, but four justifications to the miscarriage are given in Pakistan to attenuate the intensity of embarrassment the failure has brought along for the touts of a military coup. The first justification is that the coup was planned and staged by only a section of the Turkish military. However, this is mostly the case. The modern day coups are not planned in a Corps Commander meeting, but in a close association or a clique. Moreover, coups are executed by a section of the military followed by the rest of the military. For instance, in Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf and three of his colleagues planned the military coup in 1999, primarily under the fear that a commission could be set on waging the Kargil war without the approval of the sitting government. Second, the Turkish coup was disorganised, and that was why it failed. However, meticulous organisation was visible when the coup makers met their initial targets of seizing key government buildings in Ankara and Istanbul, and capturing the Turkish chief of army staff. It was the unexpected resistance offered by people in the streets that turned the coup turtle. If the coup had not been resisted, the coup would have not only been representative of the whole army but it would also have been declared well-organised. Third, only a small number of officers and soldiers were involved. However, the number of arrested soldiers is more than two thousand. Similarly, about 30 colonels and six generals have been arrested. Fourth, only about 10 to 20 thousand people took to the streets, while the rest of Turkey stayed at home. However, the coup makers surrendered only when they were overwhelmed by the number of people. Perhaps, the section of the military that staged the coup must have been told that the Turk would distribute sweets if the military took over the government. Now the same section must be thinking that they were hoodwinked by the touts who have now suddenly turned into democrats. This might be the last attempt in Turkey where the chapter of military coups appears to be closed for good. However, related to Pakistan, at least nine messages have come from Turkey. The first message is that it is instinctive of the military to begrudge democracy. Notwithstanding President Erdogan’s elected and popular government — the status that was known to coup-makers — the military, even if it was just one of its sections, tried its best to overthrow the government. Second, the military carves ruses to justify its illegal and unconstitutional actions as per given need to befool people, and the same justifications are later violated. Through the Peace at Home Council, a section of the Turkish military staged the coup for “reinstating constitutional order, human rights and freedoms, the rule of law and the general security,” and then during the coup process it violated the same. Third, the whole military is not required to get activated to stage a coup. Instead, modern military coups are planned, and executed by a section of the military deployed in or near the capital. Fourth, unarmed civilians can halt the advance of the military and can make it refrain from toppling the elected government. It is not the gun that is more powerful; it is the will of the people that reigns supreme. Fifth, the age of staging military coups through occupying the state TV station to block communication between the government and people is over. In the presence of alternative means of communication, President Erdogan addressed the Turkish audience via a video calling service app on the smart phone, and asked them to take to the streets to defy any hint of the martial law. The link established between a political leader and people is a key to sabotaging a coup. Sixth, it is not that the status quo is always detested, and people necessarily yearn for a change delineated by coup-makers. Instead, it is that people may opt for resisting the change adversely affecting their lives. More than 200 Turkish people lost their lives in Ankara and Istanbul to protect the status quo and avoid the change. Seventh, it is the yearning of people for democracy that matters. What political leadership has done for people is one thing, and what association people have forged with democracy expressed through an elected government is another thing. The proximity of Turkey to Europe, and the aspirations of the Turk to join the European Union left a great impact on them to fight for democracy. Eighth, a failed military coup is forsaken by the counterparts of military in society. In Turkey, the Peace at Home Council was not working in isolation, and it was in touch with society to rally like-minded people. When the anti-coup people took to the streets, the pro-coup people could not find courage to neutralise them. The touts of the military coup went in hiding, or perhaps quickly donned the attire of democratic people. Ninth, the “third empire” of every country has its own limitations. Unfortunately, the Turkish third empire has been humiliated in the streets of Ankara and Istanbul. The writer is a freelance columnist and can be reached at qaisarrashid@yahoo.com