Electoral Protest

El presente texto, recogiendo las aportaciones de Charles Tilly a la comprensión y disección del fenómeno revolucionario y siguiendo su definición clásica de revolución, plantea un análisis tentativo del concepto para analizar las denominadas revoluciones de colores, esto es, las revueltas y protestas postelectorales que, tras una fase de contienda, consiguieron provocar una transferencia del poder en Georgia (en 2003, la Revolución Rosa), en Ucrania (en 2004, la conocida como Revolución Naranja) y en Kirguistán (en 2005, la Revolución de los Tulipanes). Para ello centra la atención, si bien realizando las matizaciones oportunas, en tres elementos principales de la definición de Tilly: la incompatibilidad de los contendientes y la apertura de una situación de soberanía múltiple, el apoyo de un sector importante de la población y, por último, la transferencia del poder por cauces no institucionales.

The intellectual impact of the so-called “globalization” undoubtedly affected the mindsets of researchers and scholars in the field of Political Science to work within the area of Comparative Politics and Government. This area offers a plethora of far-reaching, albeit complex and mind-boggling, issues and events that in themselves make compelling reasons for doing research. Under this area, a major electoral issue emerges, that is, legislative electoral contestation in “incomplete” regimes . The topic deals with the most common features of a rival-motivated legislative electoral contestation, which are electoral protest and electoral violence.

Otpor is discussed in the text as acomplex and contradictory new type of social movement, whose members attempted to contribute to the tradition of enlightened reform of social and political life in Serbia, simultaneously in a highly pragmatic and in a creative, possibly even irresponsible manner. After the introduction, analysed are popular and media narratives on the characteristics of the movement, dilemmas concerning the founding of the movement and meaning of its key symbols, and the Faustian question of goals and consequences of foreign, in particular American influences. Following is a discussion of strategic (non-violent revolution, calculated victimisation) and tactical (black campaigns, get-out-the-vote campaign) roles o fOt- por in the coordinated project o fousting Milosevic. Otpor’s role is then re-interpreted in the frame of the ‘electoral revolution’, developed by Valerie Bunce, Sharon Wolchik and Michael McFaul. An assessment of the transformation of Otpor from an active social movement into an exportable blueprint for non-violent political revolutions is offered in lieu of a conclusion.
Key words:
Otpor, new social movements, tradition of enlightened reformism, electoral revolution, democratisation.

The sight of thousands of people demonstrating for clean elections and an end to corrupt postcommunist regimes led many observers to declare that the so-called color revolutions had finally brought democracy to Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan. But how successful have these electoral revolutions actually been? The authors analyze all cases of electoral revolutions worldwide since 1991, distinguishing between failed and successful electoral revolutions, to conclude that even successful electoral revolutions have shown insignificant or no democratic progress in their wake. Electoral revolutions are ineffective at advancing democratization because they place too great an emphasis on elections themselves and do not address other fundamental
obstacles to democratization in hybrid and authoritarian regimes. International influences have proven more successful in promoting democratization in countries of postcommunist Europe.

The paper conceptualizes five basic developmental paths the post-Soviet republics followed. The conceptual framework of this paper is expanded theory of real socialism in non-Marxian historical materialism, namely proposed the model of secession from socialist empire. The first developmental path was followed by societies in which an independent civil revolution took place. This path of development bifurcates into two furhter sub-variants. Namely civil revolutions in the Baltic republics (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia) resulted in the independence and stable democracies. Civil revolution in Caucasus republics (Armenia, Gergia) were partially succesfull because civil movement in these societies were unable to build stable democracies. Countries such as Azerbaijan, Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine followed next developmental path. Its characteristic feauture is active participation of republican communist nomenclatures in seceding from the Soviet Union and gaining state independence. In this variant of development, democratization - characteristic for the first period of independence was counterbalanced by the growing autocratization of political system. This path of development was divided into two developmental variants: in one group of countries (Ukraine) the growth of autocratization caused civil resistance (Ukraine), in the rest societies of this group (Azerbaijan, Belarus, Moldova) - not. Finally the countries of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) followed the fith developmental path. In these societies, independence permitted to preserve dictatorship of local communist nomenclatures.

Le but de cet atelier est de plaider en faveur de l’idée que les situations africaines apportent des lumières sur le fait électoral partout dans le monde. En effet, on assiste, depuis les années 1990, marquées par la fin des partis uniques, à une nouvelle expansion du nombre des élections au suffrage universel sur ce continent. La plupart du temps, ces expériences politiques sont identifiées par les chercheurs, soit comme des élections « pas comme les autres », soit comme des élections « sans choix », voire sans électeurs. Ou encore, comparées à la prétendue normalité démocratique occidentale, elles sont alors condamnées à n’être qu’imparfaites, au mieux des imitations malhabiles de ses rituels, au pire de simples simulacres. Ces interrogations se comprennent surtout parce que pendant longtemps, la crédibilité d’une véritable analyse de l’élection en Afrique paraissait subordonnée à la possibilité d’appliquer à ce terrain, les outils quantitativistes utilisés en Occident.

L’atelier se déroulera sur deux jours. Il portera sur les cinq intrigues que le programme a pu construire pour l’instant : la mort du Phénix, le président Zombie, la solution dynastique, l’élection en monarchie et l’impossible contournement du vote… Chaque intervenant présentera les résultats des enquêtes menées sur neuf terrains (Cameroun, Congo, Congo-R.-D., Gabon, Kenya, Madagascar, Swaziland, Togo, Zimbabwe). Les séances seront organisées autour d’une intrigue principale abordée par un ou deux cas.

Mercredi 26 juin après-midI
Président des séances : Remy Bazenguissa-Ganga (IMAF-EHESS)
Séance : L’impossible contournement du vote
Kenya : le règne du "fils de..." à l’épreuve du vote électronique : Cecilia Passanti (Paris V – CEPED – IHA CREPOS)
RDC : Vers la consolidation de l’ordre dynastique : Sylvie Ayimpam (IMAF-EHESS)

The paper represents an attempt to channel polemical exchanges concerning the process of democratisation in Serbia into the frames of scientific dialogue, which is considered here to be a more productive genre of scientific communication than are polemics. The most important issue addressed concerns providing adequate theoreti-cal explanations of the “revolution of October the 5th” and of the roles that the stu-dent/popular movement “Otpor” played in it. According to the thesis defended by theauthor, the models of “waves of democratisation” and of “electoral revolution” offer an adequate theoretical frame for the discussion of such problems. Among the ques-tionsthatareaddressedinthepaperarethefollowing:howmuchcanrelyingonexter-nal sources blur the understanding of local processes; what is the difference between“exported/imported” and “electoral revolutions”; how should one situate the Serbian“October revolution” in the waves of postcommunist democratisation; what are the particularitiesoftheSerbian electoralrevolution compared to other“coloured revolu-tions”; how should the respective roles of external and internal players in the Serbiancase be evaluated; what are the particularities of projects of democratisation based onsynergy as opposed to those based on hierarchy and relations of rower; what binds to-gether the strategy of non-violent resistance, proactive politics and Otpor’s “Plan B”;finally, can a direct link between the amount of foreign assistance and the degree of loss of control over the results of political reform be presupposed.In the final section, offered is an assessment of the negative and positive as- pects of Otpor’s political legacy, as well as an attempt to link this legacy with an un-derstanding of the “dynamics of hope” as a political project on which Otpor workedsystematically.
Key words:
Otpor, electoral revolution, democratisation, political synergy,nonviolent resistance, hope as a political category.

The analysis of an unusual electoral protest in France at the end of the Second Empire offers an occasion to take another look at the political uses of law in the area of politics. The use of legal resources, particularly by lawyers, specialists in manipulating legal categories and the chief believers in the necessity and effectiveness of the law, brought about the transformation of the rules of electoral competition and proved to be a factor in nationalising, republicanising and collectivising political life.

Something amazing happened in Georgia's 1 October 2012 parliamentary elections. The government lost and it gave up power, aside from the now-weakened presidency that it will hold for another year. A new coalition known as Georgian Dream ran under the leadership of Georgia's richest man, the billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili, and won 85 seats in the unicameral, 150-member Parliament. Georgia's post-Soviet background and circumstances make the 2012 opposition win and subsequent orderly handover of power ...

Something amazing happened in Georgia’s 1 October 2012 parliamentary elections. The government lost and it gave up power, aside from the now-weakened presidency that it will hold for another year. A new coalition known as Georgian Dream ran under the leadership of Georgia’s richest man, the billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili, and won 85 seats in the unicameral, 150-member Parliament. Georgia’s post-Soviet background and circumstances make the 2012 opposition win and subsequent orderly handover of power truly remarkable. Indeed, among the “competitive authoritarian” regimes found in what used to be the USSR, it is nearly unheard of. Georgia is lucky to be getting a fourth chance at democracy, after the opportunities under Zviad Gamsakhurdia (1990–92), Eduard Shevardnadze (1992–2003), and Saakashvili faded. But this chance remains a fragile one.