Why do some (non)violent civil resistances in nondemocracies achieve democracy while others do not? In order to answer this question, this project examined factors that result in different outcomes and the mechanisms critical to democratization. In particular, I paid close attention to whether autocracies failing after successful (non)violent civil resistance adopted transitional justice (TJ) mechanisms such as trials, truth commissions, and amnesty, and how civil society worked in each course of democratization.
I explored the conditions of democratic consolidation (e.g., economic development, democratic neighbors, and political institution) and among them, focused on the civil culture that led citizens to participate positively and actively in politics with belief and trust. I found that in the course of democratization, implementing TJ policies is necessary in order to build inter-group trust and encourage citizens to participate critically in political reform. Because TJ mechanisms are designed to make past wrongdoers accountable and reconcile conflicting sides, these approaches can strengthen civic culture and promote reconciliation by restoring the rule of law and rebuilding victims’ dignity.
In addition, I argued that a robust civil society (CS) plays a vital role in sustaining democracy, not only by encouraging TJ adoption, but also by playing roles such as supporter, mobilizer, enforcer, monitor, and so on. In this context, I suggested that (non)violent civil resistance can contribute to building a robust CS. Particularly, nonviolent and large resistance with diverse participants can increase the capacity, legitimacy, and representativeness of a CS so that it can play its role(s) properly.
Statistical analysis with large-n data supported these arguments. Despite the controversy in the literature, adoption of TJ policies turned out to be a positively significant factor for achieving democratic consolidation; and, the robustness of CS, which can be developed through (non)violent civil resistance, was significant as well, particularly at the early phase of the democratization process. The application to the 2011 Arab Uprising cases (Tunisia and Egypt) that focused on TJ adoption and the role of CS revealed consistent conclusions as well.
Although there are several limitations to this study, I attempted to reveal the importance of the linkages among steps to democratization and increase understanding of the “process” rather than simply the “cause” or “result.” In addition, the findings can be implemented in policies for proliferating democracy by supporting/encouraging democratization from the ground up (i.e., below), CS growth, and TJ adoption after transition.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:arizona.edu/oai:arizona.openrepository.com:10150/626336 |
| Date | January 2017 |
| Creators | Kim, Eunbee, Kim, Eunbee |
| Contributors | Ghosn, Faten, Ghosn, Faten, Braithwaite, Alex, Nassar, Maha |
| Publisher | The University of Arizona. |
| Source Sets | University of Arizona |
| Language | en_US |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text, Electronic Dissertation |
| Rights | Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds