Successful and failed transitions to democracy

Abstract

This chapter studies the democratic transitions following the fall of the authoritarian rulers in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen. The chapter shows that the only successful democratisation occurred in Tunisia thanks to agreements between political actors, concessions from a dominant party and a strong and participative civil society. On the contrary, despite the Egyptian transition taking place in a similar scenario of polarisation between Islamist and secular parties as in Tunisia, Egyptian transition failed because of a lack of agreement between political forces, an exclusionary process led by the Islamists, and the interference of the army in political affairs. Democratic transition also failed in Libya, due to the lack of prior institutional architecture and of experience of party participation and political groups. Finally, the model of democratic transition that was carried out in Yemen was favourable to the achievement of democracy. It sought a broad social and political consensus for the new state before holding elections and approving a constitution, and had the involvement of the international community in the design and implementation of the transitional road map. However, empowerment of old regime elites in the transition process, the exclusion of revolutionary movements, the lack of consensus to satisfy the demands of the independence movement in the south, and antagonism between political forces and their regional backers have doomed the democratic transition to failure.

Standing still or ascending in the social media political participation ladder? Evidence from Iran

“…Regarding the electoral procedure, the ballot is candidate-based (Zaccara, 2012) and public support on the nominated candidates is rather circumstantial and not ideological (Ehteshami and Zaccara, 2013). These peculiarities in the Iranian system accounting for "limited level of pluralism", "low electoral integrity" and "inexistence of governmental alternation" better positioning the political regime under the notion of "hegemonic pluralist authoritarianism" (Szmolka, 2017).…”