Shaping of the Transformation of Authoritarian Regimes: The Role of Different Actors
Essay
Shaping of the Transformation of Authoritarian Regimes: The Role of Different Actors By Cholpon Kenesh
___________________________________________________________________________
The Arab Spring has assured the world yet again that authoritarian regimes, later or sooner, will face social explosion. While the new information technology and widespread access to the Internet were catalysts during the uprising in Arab countries ravaged by electoral fraud, corruption and economic deterioration, a big role also belonged to internal actors rather than external players.
Despite some changes in the number of countries such as Kyrgyzstan, Tunisia and Egypt, we have to admit the fact that authoritarian regimes in the world are still resistant and durable. The number of countries which are considered to be “full democracies” in the world still remains very low, being applicable to just 25 countries; 53 countries are rated as “flawed democracies”. According to an EIU report issued in 20111 52 countries remain authoritarian and 37 states are considered “hybrid regimes”. This means that more than a third of the world’s population still lives under authoritarian rule.
Today the situation is getting more complicated due to the serious economic crisis in the United States and in Europe: both centers of gravity in the West as beacons of democracy, concentrating on their social-economic problems, have currently seem to have less say in the world’s affairs and especially in challenging of authoritarian regimes due to a less both tangible and intangible power. In the same way, western NGOs like NED (National Endowment Democracy, New York) are now less powerful due to a limited resources and funds. Until there might be a reverse in the situation, we will face not only less leverage from the West, but also more active role from authoritarian regimes like China and Russia when they are challenging the US, for example by issuing their own annual reports about human
Shaping of the Transformation of Authoritarian Regimes: The Role of Different Actors By Cholpon Kenesh
___________________________________________________________________________
The Arab Spring has assured the world yet again that authoritarian regimes, later or sooner, will face social explosion. While the new information technology and widespread access to the Internet were catalysts during the uprising in Arab countries ravaged by electoral fraud, corruption and economic deterioration, a big role also belonged to internal actors rather than external players.
Despite some changes in the number of countries such as Kyrgyzstan, Tunisia and Egypt, we have to admit the fact that authoritarian regimes in the world are still resistant and durable. The number of countries which are considered to be “full democracies” in the world still remains very low, being applicable to just 25 countries; 53 countries are rated as “flawed democracies”. According to an EIU report issued in 20111 52 countries remain authoritarian and 37 states are considered “hybrid regimes”. This means that more than a third of the world’s population still lives under authoritarian rule.
Today the situation is getting more complicated due to the serious economic crisis in the United States and in Europe: both centers of gravity in the West as beacons of democracy, concentrating on their social-economic problems, have currently seem to have less say in the world’s affairs and especially in challenging of authoritarian regimes due to a less both tangible and intangible power. In the same way, western NGOs like NED (National Endowment Democracy, New York) are now less powerful due to a limited resources and funds. Until there might be a reverse in the situation, we will face not only less leverage from the West, but also more active role from authoritarian regimes like China and Russia when they are challenging the US, for example by issuing their own annual reports about human