ebook img

Defiant Dictatorships: Communist and Middle-Eastern Dictatorships in a Democratic Age PDF

230 Pages·1997·11.595 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Defiant Dictatorships: Communist and Middle-Eastern Dictatorships in a Democratic Age

Defiant Dictatorships Communist and Middle-Eastern Dictatorships in a Democratic Age Paul Brooker DEFIANT DICTATORSHIPS Also by Paul Brooker THE FACES OF FRATERNALISM: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan TWENTIETH-CENTURY DICTATORSHIPS: The Ideological One-Party States Defiant Dictatorships Communist and Middle-Eastern Dictatorships in a Democratic Age Paul Brooker Lecturer in Politics Victoria University Wellington New Zealand f& M ©Paul Brooker 1997 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London WIP 9HE. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The author has asserted his right to be identified as the author of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 1997 by MACMILLAN PRESS LTD Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS and London Companies and representatives throughout the world ISBN 0-333-63172-2 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully managed and sustained forest sources. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 32 1 06 05 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 97 Printed in Great Britain by The Ipswich Book Company Ltd Ipswich, Suffolk Contents Introduction 1 1 Defiance as a Stabilising Influence 7 2 Communist China 25 3 Communist Vietnam 49 4 Communist North Korea 66 5 Communist Cuba 82 6 Baathist Syria 99 7 Baathist Iraq 114 8 Qadhafi's Libya 131 9 Khomeinist Iran 145 Conclusion 163 Appendix I: Communist Ideology, Economy and Political Structure - the Orthodox Model 166 Appendix II: Baathist Ideology and Structure 171 Notes and References 175 Bibliography 206 Index 218 v This page intentionally left blank Introduction The wave of democratisation that swept through the Communist world and Third World in the 1980s and early 1990s did not eliminate all the dictatorships - some survived the onset of a democratic age.1 (By 'dictatorship' is meant a regime that is not a democracy nor a monarchy, and by 'democratic' is meant freely competitive, regular elections for public office.) Among the most prominent examples of dictatorships which survived into the mid-1990s were the four remaining Communist regimes of any significance, namely China, Vietnam, North Korea, and Cuba, and also four well-known Middle Eastern regimes: Baathist Syria and Iraq, Qadhafi's Libya, and Kho- meinist Iran. These eight dictatorships had avoided even the facade of democratisation involved in setting up semi-competitive multi-party elections to reconfirm the regime party and/or leader in power.2 Nor had their defiant refusal to democratise forced them to reshape their dictatorship. There had been no parallel to Communist Poland in 1981 and socialist Burma in 1988, when resistance to popular pressure for some democratisation had led to not just a change in the regime's leadership but also a shift to open militarisation and rule by a military junta, respectively the Military Council of National Salvation and the State Law and Order Restoration Council. The defiant 'stability under pressure' of these dictatorships had been so great that in most cases the same personal ruler, senior leader or collective leadership who had headed the regime in 1980 was still in power in the middle of the 1990s. Where this was not the case, either a) the ruler had died of natural causes and been replaced by his designated successor or deputies, as in North Korea and Iran, or b) a collective leadership had replaced itself with a new generation of leaders, as in Vietnam. These regimes' defiance of the trend towards replacing dictatorship with democracy was therefore only part of their overall stability and their broader defiance of the political turmoil occurring in the rest of the Communist world and Third World. Therefore any answer to the obvious question of why these eight Communist and Middle Eastern dictatorships have proved so stable must go beyond providing an explanation for the lack of democrat isation and instead consider the wider question of their overall sta bility. Unfortunately, the various explanations that have been put forward to account for these regimes' lack of democratisation are not 1 2 Defiant Dictatorships easily transformed into wider explanations of overall stability. For example, the 'exceptionalism' of the still predominantly non-demo cratic Arab world in this democratic age has commonly been accounted for by pointing to Islam as a purportedly anti-democratic influence upon Arab societies.3 In fact the argument has been applied on occasion to the whole Islamic world from West Africa to Indonesia.4 But any explanations based upon religious, cultural or other long-standing factors cannot explain the overall stability of the four Islamic defiant dictatorships because such long-standing factors were clearly unable to prevent the relative /^stability shown by these Middle Eastern countries in the decades before the onset of a demo cratic age. When their political history in the fifteen-year period 1965-79 is compared with the stability shown by these countries in 1980-94, there is a marked difference that can hardly be explained by such long-standing factors as religion or culture. Iran had just completed a revolution in 1979 that had overthrown the Shah's regime and estab lished an Islamic Republic under Khomeini's rule. Iraq had seen in 1979 (with Saddam Hussein's succession to the Presidency) the com pletion of the shift in power from the military to the civilian wing of the Baathist regime which had originated in a 1968 coup. Syria had seen in 1970 the coup which brought Defence Minister Asad's faction to power after years of internal factional conflict within the Baathist regime, including a 1966 coup by leftist Neo-Baathists. Libya had seen the monarchy overthrown by a Qadhafi-led coup in 1969 and then in the later 1970s the complete restructuring of the military regime into a purportedly direct democracy guided by the Leader of the Revolution. Explanations based upon religious or cultural factors also have problems in accounting for the stability of the four remaining Com munist regimes. It is true that all four experienced a similar degree of political stability in the 1960s-70s as they have in the 1980s-90s. These Communist regimes' stability is highlighted only by the standard contrast with the number of fellow-Communist regimes, including the superpower Soviet Union, that collapsed in the 1980s-90s. Never theless, any attempt to use a cultural explanation for this contrast, such as the influence of 'Confucian' or 'Asian' values, faces the problem of how to account for the survival of the Cuban Communist regime in Latin America. Furthermore, the only one of the three Asian Communist regimes, the Chinese example, which did not follow on from a long period of foreign, colonial rule was preceded by a half- century of political instability. By 1950 China had seen the overthrow Introduction 3 of the monarchy, the descent into warlordism, the establishment of the Kuomintang party-state regime, its transformation into a military- party regime under Chiang Kai-shek's rule, and then finally the re placement of the Kuomintang by a Communist party-state regime. If Chinese culture was apparently quite unable to exert a stabilising influence upon the country's political development before the Com munists took power, it is hard to understand how a cultural factor could be so influential during the Communist era. Explanations of stability that are based upon the nature of the regimes' origins are also difficult to sustain. It is often pointed out that the few surviving Communist regimes were established through local revolutionary and armed struggle rather than being imposed (as most of the East European Communist regimes were) by the occupying forces of the Soviet Union in the aftermath of the Second World War. However, this argument overlooks two awkward facts. First, the North Korean Communist regime imposed by Soviet postwar occupying forces is still defiantly stable and second, the locally established Yugoslavian and Albanian Communist regimes are now defunct - and so is the Soviet Union itself. As for the Middle Eastern examples of dictatorship, all have been established by local forces, not by an external power, but so, too, had been all the African dictatorships that collapsed in the 1980s-90s. What is more, some of these African dictatorships had originated in a popular struggle against colonial rule - a prestigious heritage which none of the four Middle Eastern dictatorships can claim. Only the Iranian regime can rightly claim, thanks to the 1978-9 revolution, to have originated through any form of popular movement. The other three regimes claim a revolutionary heritage but in reality were the product of military coups, and in the Libyan case developed a revolu tionary programme only several years after the coup. The Baathist military coups in Syria and Iraq were at least carried out by officers belonging to or sympathising with the Baathist political movement. But their seizures of power still lacked the popular support and mobilisation seen in Iran or in such African anti-colonial movements as the Guinean PDG, whose party-state regime was overthrown in 1984. Therefore if the origins of the Middle Eastern dictatorships are to provide some explanation for their stability, it could only be through the very implausible argument that a dictatorship is more likely to maintain stability if it originated not as an anti-colonial movement but as a military coup lacking organised popular support. As in the case of the Communist regimes, such origins-based

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.