How NOT To Stage A Military Coup

by Kudakwashe Kanhutu

The best treatise on how NOT to stage a military coup has to be what was written by General Heinz Guderian in his autobiography - Panzer Leader. In enumerating the reasons why he declined to join the failed coup plot against Hitler in 1944, he tells us that nothing should be left to chance in the planning. Panzer Leader is a great book to read itself, but below, is just an excerpt relating particularly to what the plotters did wrongly in 1944 - essentially everything: 

“In the first few weeks I was fully occupied in getting the machine in running order again. I had no time to spare for the contemplation of other problems. Matters which today seem important to the men involved in them, I hardly noticed. I was so busy that I was quite unaware of the day-to-day happenings other than those at the front. My new colleagues and I worked late into the night in our efforts to save the front. 

What were the actual results of the attempt to assassinate Hitler on July 20th?

The man who was to be killed was in fact slightly wounded. His physical condition, not of the best beforehand, was further weakened. His spiritual equipoise was destroyed for ever. All the evil forces that lurked within him were aroused and came into their own. He recognised no limits anymore. 

If the assassination was intended seriously to affect Germany's governmental machine, then the most important officials of the Nationalist-Socialist regime should also have been eliminated. But not one of those was present when the bomb exploded. No plans had been made for the removal of Himmler, Goering, Goebbels or Bormann to name only the most important. The conspirators made no attempt to ensure they would be able to carry out their political plans in the event of the assassination succeeding.... 

.... From every point of view the results of the attempted assassination were frightful. For myself I refuse to accept murder in any form. Our Christian religion forbids it in the clearest possible terms. Apart from this religious reason, I must also say that neither the internal or external political situation was conducive to a successful coup d'etat. The preparations made were utterly inadequate, the choice of personalities to fill the principal roles incomprehensible. The driving force had originally been Dr. Goerdeler, an idealist who believed the coup d'etat could be carried out without the assassination... 

Dr. Goerdeler had also decided on the choice of the majority of the people destined by the conspirators to hold office in the new government. He had drawn up lists of names in this connection which, through his own carelessness, fell into the hands of the Gestapo. The character of Colonel-General Beck, who was to have been Head of the State, I have already described at sufficient lengths. His behaviour on 20th July proved that my previous opinion of him was correct. Field Marshal von Witzleben was a sick man. He hated Hitler with a burning hatred, but lacked the determination necessary to carry out a military putsch in such critical and difficult circumstances..."

Notes:

Passage taken from Panzer Leader, the Autobiography of General Heinz Guderian - master of the Blitzkrieg and father of modern tank warfare - commanded the German XIX Army Corps as it rampaged across Poland in 1939 (and France in 1940).

General Heinz Guderian, Commander German 19th Army Corps. Picture Credit: Wikipedia.

The Tight Embrace Between Terrorism And The Electronic Media?

Participating at the 13th International Terrorism and Electronic Media Conference in Sofia, Bulgaria.

by Kudakwashe Kanhutu.

Sofia, Bulgaria.   

It is quite the intractable problem for humanity through the ages isn’t it, that good and bad exist so proximately that they are, in fact, two sides of the same coin. Flip the coin this way and the good side faces you, flip it again and there is every chance that it’s the bad side that faces you. Technology and innovation espouse this metaphor most emphatically, as every piece of technology ever invented to aid humanity positively, can also be used to harm humanity. Case in point, at the dawn of Terrorism, Dynamite, whose primary purpose was to make mining and construction easier, was quite the God sent for anarchist terrorism – the power that had previously been the preserve of States, became easily available to individuals. It is, therefore, humanity’s lot that every advantage comes with a disadvantage, every opportunity creates vulnerability. 

Indeed, it’s a very thin line that separates good from bad in almost every aspect of human affairs; free speech can easily stray into hate speech, explaining issues can be misconstrued as glorifying them and, that last example is especially pertinent to the Media and Terrorism sphere. There seems to be a tight embrace between Terrorism and the Media. As Terrorism is said to never be aimed at its victims, but at its audience, the Media tends to always be, perhaps unwittingly, the “megaphone” of Terrorism. If the above premise holds, there is even a tighter embrace between Terrorism and the Electronic Media. Technology and Innovation have democratised the Media space, and various actors, including the Terrorists themselves, now have their own “megaphones.” Technology can now be used equally to glorify the good as well as the bad. 

This conundrum is exactly what the International Academy of Television and Radio (IATR ) wants to appraise every year. They hold an annual conference to survey exactly what the relationship is between Terrorism and the Media, especially Electronic Media. There is no shortage of guidelines as the United Nations’ various bodies have discussed the issue ad infinitum. The IATR conference is a chance to discuss what these guidelines mean in practice. It is attended by journalists, civil society, academics, and government officials, who all then exchange views on what the field looks like to them. It’s a chance to discuss each other’s concerns and constraints which culminates in an outcome document. 

While the duty of every responsible citizen is to contribute to the well-being of society, for example by not glorifying Terrorism, the discussions at this year’s 13th International Conference in Sofia Bulgaria, leaned more towards the governments’ worldview, to the exclusion of the legitimate concerns of those who tend to resort to Terrorism. I suppose it was inevitable that the discussion would turn out like this, because as I said above, saying Terrorists have legitimate concerns could be easily be misconstrued as sympathising with them, and can even land one in prison. I got the impression however, that the gathering is open to new ideas. What is needed at next year’s conference, is more people from the critical schools of thought who will challenge the gathering if it falls too much on the side of establishment mentality. The networking value of the same event is great, in that it can create a just-below-government consensus, that can then inform policy, even among governments that are antagonistic towards each other.

13th International Terrorism and Electronic Media Conference.

Bulgarian Defence Minister Krasimir Karakachanov at the Conference.

Bulgarian Defence Minister Krasimir Karakachanov at the Conference.

Discussing the current state of terrorism and electronic media with delegates from Croatia, Serbia and Romania. 

Stjepan Mesić, the last President of Yugoslavia before dissolution, the Syrian Ambassador to Bulgaria, the President of the Serbian Parliament and various other attendees.

Stjepan Mesić, the last President of Yugoslavia before dissolution.

Stjepan Mesić, the last President of Yugoslavia before dissolution.