Regime change - what works?

[Philip_P]

This is from the September Atlantic Monthly. Interesting food for thought, especially now that we’re engaged in a massive nation-building effort in Iraq. I believe you have to be a subscriber to actually access the article, so I haven’t posted the link, but the link at the bottom should take you to the source for this short article, which is probably a more useful link anyway.

Gandhi Was Right
It is by now a truism that ousting an authoritarian regime is often far easier than sustaining freedom afterward. A recent study from the human-rights organization Freedom House argues that “people power,” rather than top-down reform or armed revolt, has the best chance of achieving that result. Researchers examined sixty-seven such political transitions over the past thirty-three years, and found that those countries in which regime change was brought about by nonviolent civic resistance were more likely to be “free” or “partly free” today than countries in which political elites alone had launched the transition or opposition groups had used violence to topple the government. Five of the forty-seven countries that experienced generally peaceful transitions are currently rated “not free,” compared with four of the twenty countries in which the opposition employed violence. As for Iraq’s future, the study offers no guide: only three of the transitions examined were driven by external interventions, with one state (Panama) currently rated “free,” one (Bosnia) “partly free,” and one (Cambodia) “not free.”
—“How Freedom Is Won: From Civic Resistance to Durable Democracy,” Freedom House

 

[gilliam]

Philip P:

Researchers examined sixty-seven such political transitions over the past thirty-three years, and found that those countries in which regime change was brought about by nonviolent civic resistance were more likely to be “free” or “partly free” today than countries in which political elites alone had launched the transition or opposition groups had used violence to topple the government.

Like in the Revolutionary War in the United States?

Seriously, what the US is trying to do in Afghanistan and Iraq is pretty unique.

 

[Jay74]

Ghandi was a great man, and he was the right man for the circumstance he was in. However, I shudder to thnk what the world would be like if he was the ruler of the USA or Britian, instead of Roosevelt or Churchill, during the Holocaust.

 

[Philip_P]

Gilliam - I’m not sure the American Revolutionary war is a good comparison. Comparing political transitions in the late 18th century to those of the late 20th and early 21st runs into all kinds of problems that can throw off the analysis in all sorts of ways.

Jay - Forget Ghandi. I don’t know why the Atlantic gave their blurb that title. You’ll notice I didn’t in my thread topic post. Try reading the actual Freedom House report, it’s interesting reading (if questions of democratic transition interest you).

 

[Jay74]

Philip P:

Jay - Forget Ghandi. I don’t know why the Atlantic gave their blurb that title. You’ll notice I didn’t in my thread topic post. Try reading the actual Freedom House report, it’s interesting reading (if questions of democratic transition interest you).

I did. since Gandi was in the thread, i commented on him. A great man, but not the right man for every situation.

 

[gilliam]

Philip P:

Gilliam - I’m not sure the American Revolutionary war is a good comparison. Comparing political transitions in the late 18th century to those of the late 20th and early 21st runs into all kinds of problems that can throw off the analysis in all sorts of ways.

1st group I thought of when he said: "than countries in which political elites alone had launched the transition or opposition groups had used violence to topple the government. "