Dunn and Englebert Chapter 5 - Regime Types Across the Spectrum

Dunn and Englebert Chapter 5

Regime Types Across the Spectrum

(Review provided by İlyas Akça and Şeyma Erdevir

Chapter 5 Overview

Studying Africa in terms of democracy and democratic consolidation provides us with abundant and diverse theoretical perspectives. Since most African countries were colonized and subdued by the West, their democratic constitutions and institutions carry the traces of the decolonization process. Yet, the democratization of Africa is highly fluctuated rather than stable because “formal democratic institutions proved incompatible at the time with the rise of personal rule and neopatrimonialism” in African countries (Dunn and Englebert, 2019). Personal rulers have led to the unjust distribution of resources and use the power of these resources against their opponents. Besides, a single party, single candidate, and a single ruler system have consolidated authoritarianism. Besides authoritarianism, neopatrimonialism has undermined the democratic consolidation process in Africa in the sense that people were represented by someone but these representatives are not based on elections, citizenship, or political preferences but identity and elites that have not any interrelation with sub-level of society in the communal system.

           According to Freedom House, African countries got dramatically low grade which is 6 in democracy scale ranging from 1indicating “perfectly democratic” to 7 indicating “completely authoritarian”. Even if there are some exceptional democratic countries, most of the countries striving to transition to democracy have been impeded by coups. Fortunately, in the Cold War era, there have been significant democratization improvements in many African countries but these improvements have not been endured because China has occurred as a significant actor in the international arena. The USA which is the most pro-democratic country in the world decreased its attention to the democratization of Africa through excusing security concerns of itself due to the implied China threat. Nevertheless, democracy has unsteadily continued to spread into African countries. According to Freedom House’s 2005-2008 data, in contrast to eastern and central African countries, western and southern African countries have experienced improvements in democratic governance; but sometimes, these improvements have been interrupted by serious bloodshed and violence.

           African countries have been affected by some problems in the way of democratization. Income is one of the underlying factors complicating the process. Although income is a significant indicator of democracy, this situation is not completely compatible with African countries because there have been democratic African countries such as Benin and Cape Verde even though they had a very low-level of income. Income has not played a crucial role in the democratization process but the consolidation process of democracy. Countries that are rich in terms of mineral resources have been more likely to be authoritarian because the wealth of resources have caused them to protect governments’ interests and fund for their “internal security”.

Ethnic diversity is another factor that is expected to negatively affect the democratization process in African countries but it has no significant correlation with African countries because they have experienced various types of government ranging from authoritarianism to democracy even though ethnic diversity has always been part of African countries.

“Big Man” politics is another factor. African countries have firmly tied to their cultures; therefore, they tend to have a system that is related to “paternalism” and “personal rule” rather than fair elections. Even if there are rulers that came to office through elections, they have gradually transformed into authoritarian rulers because of “Big Man syndrome” like in Côte d’Ivoire. Shortly, the cultural structure of African countries induces rulers not to be democratic.

Finally, conflict is another factor. Although scholars argue that conflict leads to strong and democratic states, since this argument is made by taking European countries into account, we cannot generalize it to African countries. In contrast, in African countries, the conflict has resulted in undermining “the quality of political institutions, degree of elite cohesion, and civil-military relations” (Dunn and Englebert, 2019) which are the key parts of democratization and its consolidation.

 

While African politics has a common feature of neopatrimonialism, there are also differences between regimes and within regimes over time. Neopatrimonial regime is the name given to the form of the regime, where the leader has unlimited power to use the resources of the state, on the other hand, s/he uses this power to favor his/her relatives. So much power is concentrated in the hands of the personal ruler who puts himself above the laws. The main feature that distinguishes this regime from other dictatorial regimes is that the leader intentionally undermines state institutions and keeps potential danger to his/her sovereignty away. Neopatrimonialism might be considered as opposed to democracy but there is no explicit evidence that neopatrimonialism prevents the improvement of survival of democracy. Also, some scholars argue that it even advances democracy and development. Within the case of Africa, neopatrimonialism paved the way to create different types of transition. Thus, we might claim that the nature of pre-existing regimes has a certain impact on the nature of the transition to democracy. So, African transitions arise from fiscal crises rather than reformist characteristics within the regime.  Those who suffer declining living standards are the same people who are kept outside of the circle. There emerge a crisis of legitimacy that leads to the rise of protest. The essential features of neopatrimonialism such as exclusion and producing its chronic fiscal crisis are the main factor in rising discontent as well. Punishing insiders who challenge the rulers by converting them outsiders is very common in African politics and former regime insiders often become leaders of many opposition movements. Unfortunately, despite transitions to another regime neopatrimonialism finds ways to endure but in the consolidation process, it might encounter serious opposition also. To understand African politics, firstly we might be informed of the variations in regime types from region to region. This variation also prompts diversity in foreign relations. While some African countries engage in foreign relations to seek the patronage of rich countries, offering diplomatic allegiance and strategic benefits; some others engage in for more materialistic intentions such as exchanging resources. In the changing conditions of the international arena, those countries experienced shock differently. The aftermath of the Cold War was a remarkable example of the vulnerability of different regimes to new conditions. As Europe and the US started to focus more on its security issues, the influence of China increased in Africa after the Cold War.

Moreover, African politics in practice is a little bit more complicated than theoretical assumptions and data. Either unfinished initial democratic reforms or the progressive erosion of initially successful transitions have resulted in hybrid regimes in Africa. In hybrid regimes, regular elections are held but generally, these are manipulated to the interests of incumbents; some civil and political liberties are granted but their exercises are more or less repressed; the ruling party tends to dominate opposition parties. There are two subtypes of hybrid regimes: semi-democratic and semi-authoritarian. Semidemocracies ‘’allow for changes in party dominance and the alternation of the presidency.’’ In a semi-authoritarian regime, in contrast, leaders 'do the absolute minimum to democratize’’ and ‘’ do not allow for genuinely competitive elections.’’ Liberia, Malawi, Senegal, and Tanzania are examples of the former category; and Angola, Burkina Faso, Kenya, Rwanda are examples of the latter one. Finally, African democratic experiments, like democratic and political experience rest of the World, do not have a strong security base. Indeed so, a growing commitment to democratic ideals in Africa does not imperceptible.