Suchergebnisse

1970s military dictatorship in Latin America was followed by a democratization process in the 1980s, at a point when military powers had devastated the economy & more than doubled foreign debt. Now, in the beginning of the twenty-first century, the region finds itself in a period marked by governments that, perhaps more than ever before, are characterized by their reaction to the neo-liberal policies of the 1990s. Of particular concern in this respect is the changing relationship between the region & the United States, which in turn opens opportunity for the involvement of other international actors in the sphere. This brings about a high degree of uncertainty both for Latin America itself as well as for the international community. Some of the many cases of Latin American economies & politics in crisis are described here in detail. C Brunski

Popular uprising against authoritarian regimes is not enough to allow transition towards democracy to begin. The military has the final word on whether such an uprising will be successful or the uprising will be repressed in order to preserve the incumbent dictatorship. The military supported the uprising in Tunisia while it sided with the regime and repressed the uprising in Syria. In Egypt did the military refrain from supporting the regime and took over power themselves. Why did the military act so differently in the three cases? The article propose a theoretical explanation which combines variables influencing whether the military has the potential to support a popular uprising or not; and if there is a political situation, which allows for this potential to be exploited. The model of explanation is then tested against the cases of Tunisia, Egypt and Syria during The Arab Spring. Adapted from the source document.