American politics
Democracy in America
Egypt's military rule
A coup for democracy?
Feb 14th 2011, 19:30 by W.W. | IOWA CITY
EGYPT is now ruled by a gaggle of generals, which may or may not be an improvement upon rule by Hosni Mubarrak. As Daniel Larison of The American Conservative notes:
It is a measure of how strange the situation has become that many Westerners seem to be celebrating what everyone would otherwise be calling a military coup (which is effectively what it is) as a moment of liberation.
My sense is that many Westerners were celebrating because masses of Egyptians were celebrating. Perhaps it is a measure of how strange the situation has become that Egyptians have responded with delirious rejoicing to what would otherwise be called a military coup.
All the same, there are some hopeful signs. The New York Times reports this morning that Egypt's Supreme Military Council has informed certain opposition leaders of their "plan to convene a panel of distinguished jurists to submit a package of constitutional amendments within 10 days for approval in a national referendum within two months, setting a breakneck schedule for the transition to civilian rule." Whether the generals really mean it remains to be seen. But, again, there are reasons for hope. Erik Voeten, a professor of government at Georgetown, points to new research by political scientists Hein Goemans and Nikolay Marinov indicating that post-coup military rulers have become increasingly likely to make the transition to democracy. Here's the abstract from their interesting working paper:
In this paper, we use new data on coup d'etats and elections to uncover a striking change in what happens after the coup. Whereas the vast majority of successful coups before 1990 installed their leaders durably in power, between 1991 and 2001 the picture reverses, with the majority of coups leading to competitive elections in 5 years or less. We argue that with the end of the Cold War, outside pressure has produced a development we characterize as the "electoral norm"—a requirement that binds successful coup-entrepreneurs to hold reasonably prompt and competitive elections upon gaining power. Consistent with our explanation, we find that post-Cold War those countries that are most dependent on Western aid have been the first the embrace competitive elections after the coup. Our theory is also able to account for the pronounced decline in the non-constitutional seizure of executive power since the early 1990s. While the coup d'etat has been and still is the single most important factor leading to the downfall of democratic government, our findings indicate that the new generation of coups have been considerably less nefarious for democracy than their historical predecessors.
What is most captivating here is Messrs Goemans and Marinov's hypothesis that "outside pressure" has helped establish an "electoral norm" to which post-coup military regimes feel at least somewhat bound. Here's a bit more on what they have in mind in this regard:
With the end of the Cold War, the West has begun to promote free elections in the rest of the world. While elections have not always been free and fair, nine of every ten countries in the world today hold regular elections that are significantly more competitive than the forms of political contestation most of these countries had before 1990. Furthermore, Western pressure to hold elections has been felt especially strongly by the set of countries most likely to undergo a coup: countries with weak, underdeveloped economies, and with poorly developed or unstable domestic authority structures.
The authors do not look past 2001, so this study says nothing about the effect of the "democracy promotion" efforts of the United States and its allies, whether truculent or diplomatic, on the development of this "electoral norm". However, the apparently salutary effect of earlier Western pressure to hold democratic elections certainly does suggest the question Lexington explored recently: "Was George Bush right?"
(Photo credit: AFP)
About Democracy in America
In this blog, our correspondents share their thoughts and opinions on America's kinetic brand of politics and the policy it produces.
Advertisement
Economist blogs
- Americas view
- Asia view
- Babbage
- Bagehot's notebook
- Banyan
- Baobab
- Blighty
- Buttonwood's notebook
- Charlemagne's notebook
- Clausewitz
- Daily chart
- Democracy in America
- Eastern approaches
- Free exchange
- Global Leadership
- Gulliver
- Johnson
- Leviathan
- Lexington's notebook
- Multimedia
- Newsbook
- Prospero
- Schumpeter's notebook
- The World in 2011: Cassandra
Most commented
- Charlemagne: No time for doubters
- Turkey and Europe: Mr Erdoğan goes to Germany
- China's foreign policy: Setting sail for Libya
- Insurance and rights: Can same-sex bathrooms be far behind?
- America’s security commitment to Taiwan: From keystone to millstone?
- Libya: The limpet's legions
- China's pre-emptive crackdown: The people doth not protest
- Oil and the economy: The 2011 oil shock
- Macedonia's ethnic disharmony: How many building booms can one city take?
- British and American: USS Ponce
Over the past five days
Most recommended
- China's pre-emptive crackdown: The people doth not protest
- China's foreign policy: Setting sail for Libya
- Turkey and Europe: Mr Erdoğan goes to Germany
- Oil and the economy: The 2011 oil shock
- Libya: The limpet's legions
- Banyan: Taiwan's commonsense consensus
- KAL's cartoon
- A special report on feeding the world: The 9 billion-people question
- Psychiatry: Therapist-free therapy
- Insider trading: A tip too far?
Over the past seven days
Advertisement
Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
- Hong Kong too-y
- From Asia view
- Look at that
- From Babbage
Subscribe to The Economist's free e-mail newsletters and alerts.
Subscribe to The Economist's latest article postings on Twitter
See a selection of The Economist's articles, events, topical videos and debates on Facebook.
Advertisement
Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Is a coup really a coup if it is, in effect, done at the request of the people? At a minimum, it has more (initial) legitimacy than the average coup. "Deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed", and all that.
Interesting post. The point about the military coup-ness of what happened in Egypt seems overblown to me. I find it very unlikely that the Egyptian military would have taken power from a popular President or even a softly cursed one.
I do regret, though, that at the end of the path to democracy lies partisan bickering over things none of the combatants actually give a rip about. May the Egyptian people have a lively democracy with nary a Democrat and no Republicans. Then they may be blessed among the peoples of the Earth.
Bush and the Neocons are delusional enough to imagine that we can combine unconditional support for Israel with Arab democracies that are best buddies with the US.
Sure, when the Grand Mufti converts to Judaism.
"I do regret, though, that at the end of the path to democracy lies partisan bickering over things none of the combatants actually give a rip about."
Doug, that *is* democracy, ain't it, if they're lucky.
They asked for it, and I hope they get it. The more the merrier when it comes to sharing our misery.
Suckas. :-)
An aside, because my brain double-declutched on reading it: using the phrase "coup d'etats" just isn't a nice way to treat the language.
"Coups d'etat"! It's the coups which are plural!
Apologies. Carry on.
As a gesture of good will, I propose we give them the gift of our Congress. No returns accepted.
So..., this is why we still need religion. Something good to still believe in once we see what we, ourselves, are capable of.
OneA, I don't even wish our congress on us, much less our friends overseas. One the other hand, I'd probably take Mubarak at this point, so maybe it's fair.
OneAegis wrote:
" As a gesture of good will, I propose we give them the gift of our Congress."
What have the Egyptians done to you to be so mean to them as to give them our Congress and make them think that it was a gift? Egyptians should beware of One Aegis bearing gifts...
rewt and Doug make good points..
Our common understanding of what constitutes a coup d'tat does not include the military taking control with the consent of the people after popular street protests unseat the former leadership.
Having said that I am a pessimist about the likely outcomes.
With the military in control they will not easily cede power to anybody who would distance Egypt from the Israeli peace treaty and thus from direct US military aid.
Therefore if the popular democratic mandate eventually falls to a party or coalition which was intrinsically hostile to Israel, presented intractable problems to the Middle East balance of powers, or was generally less receptive to US influence in the region and Egypt....
Then look to the Egyptian military to choose stability and continued accord with the US over democratic mandates. If a democratic mandate handed too much influence to the Muslim Brotherhood for instance...One will see a very different Egyptian military to the pro-people military ones sees today.
OneAegis, don't forget to tell'em about the free shipping, and, if they call now (or not, we don't really care), we throw in Palin, absolutely free!
To all the commentators, you're right I apologize. As a fledgling democracy I don't want to poison Egypt with our Congress. I just called UPS and had them re-route the package to Iran. Hopefully they all make it there OK, the oxygen supplies were planned only for Egypt. Oh well, there are plenty of spares in there.
LaContra,
While I see your point, I think that Egypt would have to distance itself quite far from Israel before its aid would be jeopardized. Merely being becoming less friendly to Israel and hence less cooperative on matters such as maintaining the blockade on the border with the Palestine territories would probably be considered relatively minor from our point of view in the grand scheme of things, even if it makes Israel incredibly upset.
We will be celebrating until Egypt's oil transportation system falls into the hands of a hostile military government. Here is a discussion of Egypt's oil infrastructure and how it could impact the world's oil markets:
http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2011/02/egypt-how-critical-is-it-to...
Thanks US, middle east countries can become Burma.
@ Wayne: "We will be celebrating until Egypt's oil transportation system falls into the hands of a hostile military government."
If it does, then good! The sooner we get a kick to migrate away from oil so that we aren't reliant on countries ruled by unsavory characters, the better.
@LaContra
"Then look to the Egyptian military to choose stability and continued accord with the US over democratic mandates. If a democratic mandate handed too much influence to the Muslim Brotherhood for instance...One will see a very different Egyptian military to the pro-people military ones sees today."
The military is making sure that won't happen. That is why they got retired judge to draft a new Constitution. Secondly, the Muslim brotherhood, understands how the game is played, much more so than the other opposition parties.
@rewt, Doug and Lacontra: keep in mind the example of Honduras and how it was treated. An unpopular leader trying to artificially extend his mandate removed by the military with the support of the legislature and most of the population. And yet the US came down on Honduras like a ton of bricks: full aid suspension, OAS punishment, the whole shebang. In fact, the Honduras events were far less coup-like than what has happened in Egypt.
I very much hope for the best in Egypt, but lets not pretend it wasn't a military coup.
KSStein, that is a really good point! I had forgotten about Honduras.
Come on, KSStein, Honduras was a coup with all the ingredients, and the population was completely divided by it, president Zelaya enjoying the support of the most underprivileged classes of the nation (who are many). Did you forget the demonstrations against the coup during all those months?
The US suspended aid because it would have been seen as a cynical hypocrite otherwise, but it soon resumed full cooperation with the country, despite of the fact that few other countries in the world were satisfied with the way the coup masterminds had tricked the opposition into accepting a deal. The US very much supported the coup, but it had to pretend it did not.
The historical example that comes to mind is Bangladesh in 2007, when the military overthrew a corrupt but democratically elected government to general cheers. Voting was suspended and a caretaker government was appointed to root out corruption.
In the end, democracy was restored peacefully, but the Awami League (one of the corrupt political parties) won election.
Still, even when the government is democratically elected, coups d'etat can have popular support.