1 / 17

Plan for Today: Transitology and Pacts

Plan for Today: Transitology and Pacts. Distinguish Huntington’s 2 nd & 3 rd types of transition and identify cases. Understand concept and characteristics of pacts. Critically assess transitology literature. Replacements. Regime dominated by hardliners.

alyson
Télécharger la présentation

Plan for Today: Transitology and Pacts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Plan for Today:Transitology and Pacts Distinguish Huntington’s 2nd & 3rd types of transition and identify cases. Understand concept and characteristics of pacts. Critically assess transitology literature.

  2. Replacements • Regime dominated by hardliners. • Opposition gains strength until government collapses or is overthrown. • Military support of opposition usually key. • Clean break with past. • Leaders of old regime often face nasty fates.

  3. TransplacementsExamples • Poland • Czechoslovakia • South Africa • Tunisia?

  4. Transplacements • Combined actions of government and opposition. • Government and opposition both realize they are not powerful enough to determine regime type. • Characterized by negotiations, flip-flops. • Softliners & moderates come to feel bound together by fate.

  5. Pacts in Transitology

  6. “Pact”?? “An explicit...agreement among a select set of actors which seeks to define rules governing the exercise of power on the basis of mutual guarantees for the ‘vital interests’ of those entering into it.” O’Donnell & Schmitter, p. 37

  7. Timing of Pacts • Can occur at any time, early or late in liberalizing process. • Early-stage pact includes few actors. • Most common in later stages, when both sides realize that neither can impose ideal arrangement.

  8. Characteristics of Pacts • Pacts are typically temporary arrangements. • Measures to avoid certain undesired outcomes.

  9. Characteristics of Pacts • Pacts limit the agenda of discussion among key parties. • Limited actors, no “mass” representation.

  10. Characteristics of Pacts • Pacts are an undemocratic means to democratic rule. • Small # of elite participants. • Limit accountability to wider constituents. • Attempt to control policy agenda.

  11. Characteristics of Pacts • Pacts are not necessary for democratization to occur.

  12. Typical Components of Pacts • Renunciation of violence. • Often commitment to make more pacts in future. • Procedures for regulating competition or guaranteeing benefits to actors. • Often political parties, military leaders. • These become obsolete and pacts usually break in time.

  13. Afghan Case • Bonn Agreement (Dec. 5, 2001). • Loya jirga as interim Afghan administration: • Representative, but not fully democratic. • 2002: selected transitional government to govern until elections. • 2003: negotiated and approved constitution.

  14. South African Case • May 1990: representatives of ANC and National Party met for “talks about talks” • Decided to form all-party congress (CODESA) to draft interim constitution. • 1991-92: CODESA met, included 17 parties and regional governments. • 1993: New multi-party forum (MPNP) took over negotiation of interim constitution. • April 27, 1994: First full election, interim constitution in force. • Elected parliament formed Constitutional Assembly to write final constitution. • Feb. 1997: Final constitution in force.

  15. Analysis

  16. How important are pacts for successful transition to democracy? • Some pacted transitions have later reverted to authoritarianism. • E.g. Venezuela • In other cases, no pact but apparent successful democratization. • E.g. Czechoslovakia, Baltic states • Thus, any causal impact?

  17. Analysis of Transition Model • What causes initial liberalization? Initial trigger for democratization can’t be predicted. • How do we really distinguish characters? Moderate softliner or thorough democratizer? • How to know where balance of power lies? • Is the model teleological – presupposes democratic outcome?

More Related