Endpoints After Empire: Explaining Varying Levels of Democracy in Post-Communist Europe
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations Graduate Program in International Studies Spring 2017 Endpoints After Empire: Explaining Varying Levels of Democracy in Post-Communist Europe William John Eger Jr. Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the Eastern European Studies Commons, and the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Eger, William J.. "Endpoints After Empire: Explaining Varying Levels of Democracy in Post-Communist Europe" (2017). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/cm0j-8d64 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/12 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DIFFERENT ENDPOINTS AFTER EMPIRE: EXPLAINING VARYING LEVELS OF DEMOCRACY IN POST-COMMUNIST EASTERN EUROPE by William John Eger, Jr. B.A. May 1995, Virginia Military Institute M.A. December 2011, Norwich University A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY May 2017 Approved by Simon Serfaty (Director) David Earnest (Member) Austin Jersild (Member) ABSTRACT DIFFERENT ENDPOINTS AFTER EMPIRE: EXPLAINING VARYING LEVELS OF DEMOCRACY IN POST-COMMUNIST EASTERN EUROPE William John Eger, Jr. Old Dominion University, 2017 Director: Dr. Simon Serfaty The varying levels of democracy in central and eastern Europe provide scholars with an interesting study of democratization. Democracy grew to different levels and in varying ways in the region since the collapse of communism. The evolution of democracy in the region offers insight into which variables affect democracy, a test for established theories of democracy, and a workshop for new theories and hypotheses addressing democratization. This study sought to determine the impetus behind varying levels of post-communist democratization in the states of the region. It explores the different theories of democratization. The work takes a regional approach to examining the states. This approach isolates less traditional factors that contribute to democratic quality: history, culture and geography. Each of the factors is relevant to democracy in the region. The exploration of the historical background explains some of the forces still at work in the region. It presents the core causes of some of the democratic short-comings that exist. It also assists in a presentation of the next contextual factor: how the political parties and systems evolved since 1989. Religion in the region is especially relevant to the degree of rights and freedoms, as well. The area is very diverse, with some countries of predominantly Catholic, some states with sizeable Islamic segments, countries with overwhelming Eastern Orthodox majorities and states with a relevant number of Protestant Christians. Finally, the region‟s location has a bearing of democracy. The region represents the eastern border of western civilization. Not only does this account for their religious diversity in many areas and ethnic diversity in others, it also helps define some of the aspects of their democracy. The region long found itself as the battlefields of wars between those of the west and those of the east. The predicament of being trapped between two giants continues today. iii Copyright, 2017, by William John Eger, Jr. All Rights Reserved. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In writing this section of my work, I am confounded by the amazing people in my personal and academic life and the help support and direction they provided over the last five years. This research was intensely personal to me. My father‟s family is ethnic German and immigrated here in the late 19th century from the Austro-Hungarian Empire. My mother‟s family is from Poland, Lithuania and other parts of the Soviet Union. This paper is far more than research for me. It is about who I am. For this, I want to thank my parents for passing down our family histories. Your stories and our discussions as a younger person motivated me to find out more about central and eastern Europe. You always provided me with everything I needed for a full life and an exceptional education. Your support in this endeavor can never be fully appreciated. This long winding road of a dissertation would have been impossible without the faculty and staff at GPIS at Old Dominion University under the fine leadership of Dr. Regina Karp I still remember meeting with her for the first time. I did not even really know what International Studies was. She was more than willing to help an older student, former Marine and ex-grocery store manager reset his career. She and the faculty at GPIS taught me about global politics, conflict, interests and even some important things about life. Probably the largest influence on my research and my time at Old Dominion was my committee chair, Dr. Simon Serfaty. He served as a guide, mentor and critic throughout my studies and the dissertation process. Only through his boundless patience and guidance could I have completed the work before you. He labored through version after version and revision after v revision of an introduction as I worked to establish a research question. As the writing progressed, he served as my biggest advocate and harshest critic. I feel fortunate to have spent the time I have in his office discussing the topics of this research and its larger relevance to global politics. He shed new light on selected aspects of the European project, helped me refine my writing and labored to round out many of my rough edges. Dr. David Earnest helped me navigate the very complicated issues surrounding the economic transition of the region. He urged me to clarify what was murky and illustrate better the true nature of the states of the region rejoining Europe, particularly the common market. He also offered irreplaceable shepherding through the administrative and logistical aspects of the dissertation process. Again, his patience with an unconventional student like me was exceptional. Dr. Austin Jersild is my fellow historian. His in depth knowledge of the Soviet Union, modern Russia and the history of the region were a large help. He was always willing to discuss the historical aspects of the research, provide books and additional references. His feedback in the editing process allowed me to give the sections certain credibility. He also contributed to my analysis of the East-West Paradigm, the Russian threat and the role of NATO. Finally, I need to acknowledge the person who was literally by my side through the entire process: my beloved wife, Heather. She tolerated my late nights, night owl writing sessions, the annexation of our home office and my occasional absence from family game night. Patience is one admirable quality. It is another thing altogether when your partner, fellow parent and closest friend is missing. Words can never describe the admiration I have for her unwavering support. Through good times and bad, fits of writer‟s block and adulation over another completed chapter, vi deadlines missed and benchmarks met, she was a source of unquestioning support. She never stopped believing in me even when I stopped believing in myself. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES ...............................................................................................................viii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................36 III. METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................................79 IV. CASE STUDYS POLAND ....................................................................................................104 HUNGARY.................................................................................................144 BULGARIA ................................................................................................192 V. RESULTS AND FINDINGS ............................................................................................228 VI. CONCLUSION................................................................................................................235 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................238 VITA ......................................................................................................................................261 viii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Percentage of Support for the EU by Country ..................................................... 19 Figure 2. National Debt as a Percentage of GDP, EU States vs. Central and Eastern European States ........................................................................................... 29 Figure 3. Operationalized Democratic Criteria .................................................................... 85 Figure 4. Historical Criteria .................................................................................................