This thesis explores the delegitimation concept in an electoral authoritarian context by studying how religious institutions seek to delegitimise the autocratic tendencies of the government. The thesis conducts a case study of the main religious institutions in Zambia, where the response to the authoritarian practices by the government is analysed and reviewed through a qualitative textual analysis. Newspaper articles and written statements by the churches are the central material for the study. The results of the analysis show that during the period of 2016-2020, the main religious institutions have been highly critical of the actions by the government and openly criticised them through public progressive statements as well as rejected to join activities that were hosted or organised by the government. However, the results also show that the response has been divided among the otherwise unified religious actors, where some churches have been less bold in their criticism and rejection of the government. While still regarded as a strong response to authoritarian practices, this split in response does denote that the main religious institutions’ efforts to delegitimise the government is in some sense weakened.

No description available.

This thesis measures the extent of the impact of the EU’s management of its migration flow in the aftermath of the ‘Summer of Migration’ on its legitimacy and normative power towards external actors.  Although historically funded and legitimated by its commitment to Human Rights values, the EU has failed to manage effectively and ethically the migration crisis indenpently. Building upon Buchanan’s constructivist approach of the strategies of legitimation used by IOs in IR, this thesis argues that this failure, by shedding light on the union’s weaknesses and pressuring it into to unethical external deals, deteriorates its image towards external actors and provides delegitimating tools to competitors of the EU in a global context of post-US hegemony, feeding power struggles in a shifting polarized world. By creating a theoretical bridge between EU internal policies and their external consequences, this thesis investigates interconnexions and causality effects between the structural flaws of the CEAS, the 2016 EU/Turkey deal and the loss of legitimacy of the EU. The arguments defended by this thesis are supported by an empirical research based on the critical discourse analysis of the evolutions of Turkish leaders’ speeches given at the UN General Assembly debates between 2009 and 2019. Using methods deriving from Discourse Historical Analysis (DHA), the analysis of the speeches pinpoints the role of the EU’s management of the migration crisis in the shift from positive to negative discourses of Turkish leaders towards the union. Finally, the study considers that the normative arguments related to the non-commitment of the EU to its upheld HR values has become a semantic tool of delegitimation for Turkey against the EU, and to promote itself as a new leader of IR.