Is Boycott the Best Way to Participate?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives IS BOYCOTT THE BEST WAY TO PARTICIPATE? A study of the possible democratizing effects of election boycotts in the Arab world: 1990-2010 DEPARTMENT OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN MASTER THESIS ROGER VALHAMMER MAY 2011 ii Abstract This thesis aims to determine if election boycott is a sound strategy if the opposition in Arab states aspires democratization. No scholars have conducted research focusing on this specific subject up to date, despite the recent increase in the numbers of parliamentary elections being boycotted in the Arab region. The general research question is: “What are the democratizing effects of opposition boycott of parliamentary elections in the Arab world?” Studies on election boycotts do not abound, but generally speaking, there are two opposing camps. On the one hand, one finds those scholars who support the arguments following Staffan I. Lindberg’s theory of democratization by elections. On the other hand, there are those who argue for the possible democratizing effects of certain types of boycotts, namely major boycotts. Based on the fact that the Arab world evidently has not democratized due to the various regimes’ electoral openings, I anticipated democratizing effects of major boycotts. In order to identify possible boycott effects on the democratization process in Arab states, the thesis employed the method of comparative historical analyses, including both qualitative and quantitative approaches, to test possible effects on specific democratizing variables. The analyses were conducted utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data, including my own collected data, Judith Kelley’s dataset, monitor reports as well as other secondary sources. The quantitative results showed that there were no democratizing effects from minor election boycotts or election boycotts in general, while there were positive correlations between major boycotts and some of the dependent variables. The likelihood for causal correlations, however, was weakened by the qualitative study. The qualitative analyses indicate that if major boycotts have effects, it is in interaction with other more important contextual factors. These findings are also strengthened by the strong correlation between non-hegemonic regimes and the effect of boycotts. However, these results are tentative, and cannot be confirmed without more extensive research. In conclusion then, this thesis suggests that the democratizing potential of boycotting parliamentary elections in the Arab world is not substantial, although possibly higher when major boycotts are interacting with other crucial external or internal contextual variables. iii Acknowledgements Writing the acknowledgements means that numerous years of education has finally come to an end. It also signifies that I eventually managed to get away from Twitter, with its hashtags, retweets, and arguably pointless (some would say meaningful) discussions, and finish the thesis. Although I think I should get credit(s) for all the social media knowledge I have acquired the last 10 months, I do recognize that it was a smart move to simultaneously work on my thesis. However, I am not the only one to thank for this achievement, and I would therefore like to express gratitude to a number of persons that have provided me with insightful comments, suggestions, and not least encouragement and support. First of all I would like to thank my supervisor, associate professor Michael Alvarez at the Department of Comparative Politics, for his guidance and encouragement throughout the writing process. I would also like to thank professor Sheila Carapico, Chair of the Political Science Department at the American University in Cairo, for her suggestions and feedback in the beginning of the process as well as for her inspiring course Comparative Politics in the Middle East, which introduced me to the topic of my thesis. I am also thankful for the help associate professor Judith Kelley at Duke University has provided me, by giving me the permission to cite her working paper and by giving me access to her newest dataset. Thank you to everyone I have discussed the thesis with, and especially to Asle Sætre, for taking the time to comment on the thesis and giving me grammatical advice. There are many who have helped me during all these years at Høyden, not least fellow students, professors, and friends. There is not enough space to mention them all, but I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my mom Anne Marie and my sister Rebekka, for all their love, support, and never-ending faith in me. I would also like to thank Else for her encouragements, belief in me, and for being there when I needed it the most. This thesis is dedicated to my father, Karl Aage. I know he would have been proud. Roger Valhammer Bergen, May 2011 iv Table of contents ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................................... III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................................................IV TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................... V LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................................... VII LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................................... VII ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................................VIII 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 JUSTIFYING THE THESIS ..............................................................................................................................................4 1.2 STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS........................................................................................................................................5 2.0 THEORY...................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 DEMOCRATIZATION: DEFINITIONAL DEBATE ........................................................................................................7 2.1.1 Democratization by elections........................................................................................................................ 9 2.1.2 The Arab world: Democratization theories...........................................................................................12 2.1.3 The true Arab exceptionalism .....................................................................................................................16 2.2 IN THE NAME OF BOYCOTT......................................................................................................................................18 2.2.1 Boycott characteristics...................................................................................................................................19 2.2.2 Election boycotts: Two types........................................................................................................................21 2.2.3 Election boycott theories...............................................................................................................................24 2.2.4 Boycott as a democratizing factor............................................................................................................27 2.3 VARIABLES AND HYPOTHESES................................................................................................................................29 2.3.1 Independent variables: A typology............................................................................................................30 2.3.2 General democratic level...............................................................................................................................31 2.3.3 Political reform..................................................................................................................................................32 2.3.4 International monitors...................................................................................................................................33 2.3.5 Free and fair atmosphere for political campaigning........................................................................35 2.3.6 Boycotts in general...........................................................................................................................................37 2.4 SUMMARY OF THE THEORETICAL ARGUMENT .....................................................................................................37 3.0 METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................................39 3.1 RESEARCH STRATEGY: QUANTITATIVE VERSUS QUALITATIVE METHODS .....................................................39 v 3.2 COMPARATIVE HISTORICAL ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................42