As Paul Collier notes in his ‘War, Guns and Votes’, and in particular his chapter on ‘Votes and Violence’, the methods that dictators use to hold onto power are vast and varied. In this edition of the blog on whether Fiji’s current regime is a dictatorship, I will analyse to what extent Commodore Frank Bainimarama has used these methods to justify his hold on power.
The first method that Collier identified is for new regimes to claim that they are turning over a new leaf and are becoming a better government than the last. According to Collier, this is what most people want and allows for both the government and the country itself to change direction for the better. As Bainimarama has expressed openly, the coup of 2006 was a direct result of the injustices that were occurring under the existing government. The injustices included the granting of pardons to those involved in the 2000 coup. However, as time has progressed, the justification for the interim government’s hold on power on these grounds has become strained. However, it must be noted that this method is employed by political leaders in democracies and is a fundamental element of free and fair elections. Opposition parties will often base much of their manifesto’s against unpopular policies of the current government. Therefore, how can this alone be an indicator of a dictatorship?
Second, Collier identifies lying to the electors as an important tactic for dictators to employ in order to stay in power. Lying to the media is relatively easy and according to Collier the citizens are therefore provided with a bias and one-sided presentation of the facts. This is however contrary to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights which states that "everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. This right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers". Bainimarama has controlled the media to impressive effect and against staunch opposition from Australian and New Zealand news outlets in particular.
However, sometimes lying to the general public may actually be in their best interest. For example, the New Zealand Government has historically denied and lied to the New Zealand public about the operations of the Special Air Service (SAS) abroad. Does this therefore make New Zealand a dictatorship, or is Collier pointing towards a heavily government-controlled media as an indicator of a dictatorship?
Third, turning a minority into a scapegoat for the ineptness of previous governments is also a useful method to allow dictators to hold onto power. In the eyes of dictators, minorities play an important role legitimising the operation of governments such as those in Zimbabwe and Fiji. Ever since the first constitutional crisis of 1987, the coups that have dominated Fiji’s political landscapes have been a result of the deep ethnic tensions between native Fijians and Indo-Fijians. Bainimarama recognises these deep ethnic divisions as important foundations for his current regime and his drive for changes in the current communal electoral system.
Fourth, bribery of officials and important members of the public may allow continuance in office as long as the resources are available. Where you have more resources than your key opposition members, you can selectively ensure you remain in power. In Venezuela, many academics identify the use of “oil revenue” to pay for social programs as a form of bribery. In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe gave profitable farmland owned by white men to his black supporters. It is unclear to what extent this method has been used in Fiji in a financial sense to allow the regime to continue, but supporters of Bainimarama have found positions in the judiciary and other important public office roles. Therefore it is clear that as long as a dictator controls the public sector, other forms of bribery may be open to them beyond financial means.
Fifth, intimidation of voters is also an important method through which dictators retain power. When dictatorships are supported by military means of armed militias, generally there is very little open public opposition. However as experience has taught us, violence on its own may not suffice and it may get out of control. Intimidation of the opposition played a crucial role in the rise to power of Bainimarama. As leader of the military in Fiji, Bainimarama was uniquely positioned to make nine key demands from the government. As Commodore of the military forces in Fiji, there is little opposition to his regime in terms of those capable of intimidation or indeed fighting back. As long as Bainimarama enjoys the support of the military, it is unlikely there will be a change in regime in Fiji.
Sixth, Collier identifies restricting the field to exclude strong candidates as yet another important tactic dictators employ in order to stay in power. Not only is it essential to increase your chances of winning a possible election, but to also decrease those of your key opponents. As elections are unlikely to happen in the near future, Bainimarama has excluded all other opposition to his regime.
Finally, when all else appears to have failed, dictators can also miscount the votes in order to ensure that unfavourable results dont remove them from their position of power. In order to win an election, Collier notes that an incumbent simply needs to obtain one more vote than the opposition to remain in power. As democracy movements swell in popularity across the globe (such as in Iran). However it is unclear whether Bainimarama would go this far in order to stay in power.
It remains clear therefore that although Bainimarama claims to be acting in the public interest to solve the constitutional crisis that has plagued the country since at least 1987, his methods for staying in power are often employed by dictators across history. The methods chosen by the interim regime indicate to us that Fiji’s current regime is a dictatorship.
No comments:
Post a Comment