This was no coup, but it comes far too close

If you’re wondering whether events in Washington, D.C., constitute a coup, Naunihal Singh, an assistant professor at the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, R.I., literally wrote the book. Published in 2014, “Seizing Power: The Strategic Logic of Military Coups” applies game theory to examine why and when attempts to overthrow governments succeed. In this Q&A, he argues that’s not happening right now – but there are worrying echoes. The interview, conducted Wednesday, has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Q: You’ve said that what’s happening in Washington is troubling but it’s not a coup. Can you explain that distinction?

A: There are three elements to a coup. There’s an illegitimate attempt to seize control of the state. Second, there needs to be force or the threat of use of force: It can’t be something that’s purely occurring through legal or constitutional means. And the third element is the actors, and that is the state security forces. It’s this that distinguishes coups from assassinations and violence that involves non-state actors. What we’re seeing here is better described as an insurrection, a violent uprising against the government. It’s sedition but it’s not a coup.

Trump’s not using any of his authorities as head of state. He’s not directing the military to seize power on his behalf. If no one was there to help him, he would be yet another old man screaming at people on the street.

So I’m less concerned about these demonstrators. I’m more concerned about the politicians who are assisting him and giving him credibility. It’s their support that we need to address. Likewise, if the police had treated this with the seriousness with which they treat environmental movements or Black Lives Matter, the demonstrators could have been contained or allowed to protest peacefully at a distance.

Q: It sounds like you’re as concerned by the abdication from action by some political figures as by the actions of the protesters.

A: If these protesters were foreign actors of some sort, or if they belonged to other movements, there would have been a very clear sense of moral outrage about this sort of behavior.

Institutions don’t function on their own. Traditions don’t re-enact themselves on their own. Even with 200plus years of thinking of ourselves as a democracy, these things can fall apart much more quickly than we think. And America was not a democracy for much of that time. We have an undemocratic tradition as well as a democratic tradition. As someone who is not a white American, and who is a proud small-d democrat, I want to see the people in elected office committed to the principles of democracy.

Q: While this isn’t a coup, it’s a profound political breakdown of some sort. What are the characteristics that allow coups to succeed, and are we seeing any of those in current events?

A: One of the things that happens in a coup is you end up creating a new understanding of authority. When a coup happens, it’s not clear who’s in charge, and the people making the coup use that uncertainty to claim they are in charge.

A lot of our social behavior depends on expectations about our behavior and that of others. These are communal understandings, and what a coup does is undermine them; it inverts them. When someone makes a coup they’re not actually using their guns; they’re saying, “We’re in charge and these people are not.”

What’s disturbing here is that when our collective agreements fray, it creates room for people to contest power, to contest who is in charge and how we treat the legitimate winner. At the end of the day you don’t take power by sitting in the White House, you take power because everyone recognizes that you have power. The Soviet Union could continue even when nobody believed in Communism as long as people believed that everyone else was going to support it.

During a coup, when plotters take over radio or TV, they don’t say, “We can win with your support.” They say: “We have already won; we beg you, for your own sakes, please stay home.” Acting as if they are in control. Part of the reason people rush to support one side or the other is that they’re afraid if they don’t a civil war might happen.