Autocrats and peaceful resignation in the post-Soviet space: is there a political culture explanation?

2024

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1080/21599165.2024.2321470
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

When faced with large-scale dissent, autocracies often use repression. However, in some cases, autocrats resign peacefully, raising the question of why they do not prioritise the survival of their regime. I investigate a culture-related explanation I term “moderating” theory – that high levels of a country's support for democracy have a “moderating” cognitive effect on autocrats' decision-making – in two case studies: Georgia and Armenia. In 2003, President Eduard Shevardnadze (1995-2003) of Georgia peacefully stepped down following a large-scale electoral protest. In Armenia 2018, Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan (2008-2018) abandoned his position without using military force when faced with mass dissent.