In a perfect world, lets say any drift from democracy towards authoritarianism would eventually be thwarted by the will of people and there would be a peaceful transition as the authoritarian is defeated (Pinochet) or by popular uprising. However what if things continue to worsen with no sign of improvement? What if people begin to starve, hospitals run out of medicine, and dormant diseases begin to run rampant again?
I ask these questions with specific reference to Venezuela, where the situation shows little signs of improving. Maduro continues to solidify his power while the situation continues to deteriorate. The elections later this year show little signs of hope with many opposition parties choosing not to participate due to the election being perceived as a farce. With a democratic transition seemingly becoming more and more unlikely, what are the alternatives?
I would argue that the only force with the power to change things in Venezuela currently is the military. But lets say there's a coup, do we prefer a military strongman to the current regime? What if things improve under the strongman, what type of message does this send to other democracies under pressure such as Brazil? Interested to hear everyones thoughts on this, do we want a military coup in Venezuela or do we hope for a peaceful transition?
A peaceful transition to democracy is what I would hope for as someone currently living comfortably in a democratic nation. But as a citizen of Venezuela I would perhaps welcome a military coup as the next best alternative. From an outside perspective it is easy to say that the only logical move is towards democratization and that we would not support a military coup, but if the coup were to help improve quality of life for the people of Venezuela would we perhaps have to re-evaluate?
ReplyDeleteZac - that's a good question. Some prominent opposition figures in Venezuela have even hinted at this. Two points, though.
ReplyDelete1) Historically military interventions can bring in democracy (a coup ended the last military dictatorship in Venezuela, in 1958), but they have often been highly problematic for many reasons. (Some of this has to do with internal divisions in Venezuela: if one side thinks the other side's military intervention is supported by the US, they will not be reconciled by the successor reime, for example).
2) Military intervention comes in many forms. One of the most important ones is simply refusing to repress demonstrations - this has ushered in democratic transitions in other places. Is that a more viable option?