Changing the leadership of a state

Changing the leadership of a state

• Changing the leadership of a state
• Not necessarily a social revolution
• Outside the constitutional frames
• Without the use of armed violence by those who want change
• The definition does not include anything about what sort of society we have before or get after the revolution

How to define Power?

• How to define Power?

• “Power over” and “Power to”

• “Power to prevent” and “Power to act”

• Main idea:

• Power being dependent on cooperation

All of them are under-researched

• All of them are under-researched

• Wave One: Poland, Bolivia, Uruguay, and Philippines

• Wave two: Czechoslovakia, DDR, Hungary, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Russia

• Wave three: Francophone Sub-Saharan Africa: Benin, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Senegal, Mali, Malawi, Madagascar

• Wave four: Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon

• Wave five: Iceland, Latvia, Hungary, Czech Republic,....

• Wave six: Tunis, Egypt,...

Will Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, and more follow?

• Will Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, and more follow?

• No guarantees for victory

• Just like in armed conflict the outcome is uncertain and difficult to predict

• What about Libya?

• No preparation for unarmed struggle

• Unlike Egypt we saw groups prepared to take up arms

• Missiles and bombs makes it more difficult to use civil resistance

Most oppositional movements have little preparations for taking power

• Most oppositional movements have little preparations for taking power

• Difficult enough to organise a movement

• In order to have a sustainable success you must prepare for being in position

• What about running a country?

Obviously not enough to remove the old regime!

• Obviously not enough to remove the old regime!

• How to build a better system?

• How to implement Human Rights at all levels in the society?

• How to teach Conflict Transformation?

• How to reduce corruption?

• How to secure a peaceful future?

• …………..

Most successful revolutions carried out without weapons

• Most successful revolutions carried out without weapons

• Easier to remove than to replace

• Lack of preparation for being in power

• No reason to believe you need less training and planning for nonviolent campaigns compared with armed struggle

• Nonviolence must be developed and improved