A Republican Congressman recently claimed that the former US President Richard Nixon was “framed” by the “deep state” in the Watergate scandal, with Vice President J D Vance comparing Nixon’s treatment with “what the same groups of people, the same institutions, tried to do to Donald Trump,” reported The Wall Street Journal.Although these arguments are dismissed by some as baseless, it draws attention to the idea of “deep state”. What is it? Does it refer to a covert network of forces, including a state’s official military and intelligence agency? Or is it about the power of the unelected over civilian governance? The idea of ‘deep state’ Deep state is largely seen as a result of an interplay between formal and informal institutions in a state. Its members are said to form a covert network and operate behind the scenes, influencing various facets of governance. The term is traced to the Turkish derin devlet, which literally translates as “deep state”. It is said to have been coined in the 1970s by Turkey’s then Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit to acknowledge the existence of “secret paramilitary operations working within the government”.However, the existence of a secret, shadowy network is not a new idea, nor is it specific to Turkey. It has been discussed in the context of various states, particularly the authoritarian regimes. But there is no universally accepted definition of ‘deep state’, and scholars broadly converge on certain features.For instance, political scientist Ben Margulies writes that a deep state usually involves some sort of “formal, bureaucratic institution, and almost always centre in some way around the state’s coercive arms – the military, the police, intelligence services, internal security or counterintelligence agencies, and so on.” Informal networks and unelected power In the context of Turkey, researchers often refer to an array of “informal networks radiating out beneath these services, encompassing partisan militias, other paramilitaries, and organised crime,” Margulies adds. Story continues below this adFor instance, a 1996 car accident in Susurluk, a small town in northwestern Turkey, was seen as exposing the state-mafia connections, notes Mehtap Söyler in The Turkish Deep State: State Consolidation, Civil-Military Relations and Democracy (2015). The accident involved notable figures, including a parliamentarian, a police officer, and a wanted killer and drug trafficker on the Interpol’s Red List. In addition, the idea of ‘deep state’ is discussed with reference to a number of countries, including Egypt and the US. In the context of Egypt, former President Hosni Mubarak is said to have built the shadow bureaucracy that makes up the country’s “deep state” (al-dawla al-‘amiqa).Following the 2011 uprisings, ‘deep state’ (the bureaucracy, military, security services) was frequently invoked to explain the control exerted by the “unaccountable, unelected elites over elected or civilian officials”. Notably, ‘deep state’ and military-industrial-complex are also seen as interconnected terms. Mehtap Söyler in Informal institutions, forms of state and democracy: the Turkish deep state (2011) argues that “in deep states, the military-industrial complex is either ruled by a too powerful executive branch or by military men in their multiple guises as ‘an industrialist, a merchant, a financial investor, and a rentier.”Story continues below this adBureaucratic autonomy and democratic accountability Interestingly, ‘deep state’ has been used by the Trump administration to claim that a secretive network of governmental and nongovernmental officials is working against the President. But many civil servants have reportedly felt that Trump’s style of government excludes them from decision-making. This tension raises a larger question about the role of unelected officials in democracy. It may be noted here that American political scientist Francis Fukuyama argues that the US does not have a “deep state”, but an “administrative state” – complex civil service operating at different levels to provide services to citizens – which he describes as “highly transparent”. Elected leaders delegate authority to bureaucrats to keep the government running. But Fukuyama argues that liberal democracy should balance bureaucratic autonomy against the need for democratic accountability. Therefore, the more important question to be asked in the context of ‘deep state’ is whether the unelected officials exercise power in a transparent manner or form secretive networks operating beyond the control of formal institutions. Send your comments to ashiya.parveen@indianexpress.com.Story continues below this adClick Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for August 2026. Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.