Suchergebnisse

SINCE 1974, A PROCESS OF POLITICAL 'OPENING' HAS BEEN taking place in Brazil. But it was only after 1978, when the amnesty law was passed and exiles be an to return, that a majority of observers and academic analysts convinced them-selves that that process was real. The Brazilian regime can still be described as military-based and authoritarian, but now the so-called abertura has become meaningful enough to direct our attention to a different set of questions: why did such changes take place, contrary to most predictions, journalistic as well as academic, of the late 1960s and early 1970s? Why have elections pla ed such a decisive role in them, again contrary to most predictions? Are the fruits picked in this example of redemocratization really ripe to be enjoyed? Can the other countries subject to military-authoritarian rule in the Southern Cone equally aspire to them – that is , to orderly but yet significant steps toward an eventual demise of their authoritarian systems?

IN MEXICO, THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE IN AUGUST 1994 COULD INAGURATE AN ERA OF COMPETITIVE DEMOCRACY. THE MEXICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM HAS UNDERGONE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING THE PAST DECADE: THE NUMBER OF PARTIES HAS INCREASED, THE RANKS OF THE OPPOSITION HAVE SWELLED, AND ELECTIONS HAVE BECOME LESS BLATANTLY FRAUDULENT. BUT PREVIOUS ELECTIONS IN MEXICO HAVE BEEN MARKED BY IRREGULARITIES AND CONTROVERSY; THE 1994 RACE, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, WILL BE NO EXCEPTION. AN UNSATISFACTORY ELECTION WOULD POSE GRAVE RISKS IN THE POLITICAL REALM. UNLESS ITS MAIN POLITICAL ACTORS ARE ABLE TO REACH AN ACCORD REGARDING THE RULES OF THE ELECTORAL GAME, AND AGREE TO RESPECT THE OUTCOME, MEXICO COULD BE HEADED TOWARD POSTELECTION TURMOIL. THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES FIVE POSSIBLE SCENARIOS FOLLOWING THE ELECTION.