The challenge of peaceful transition from dictatorship to an elected government
Tariku Debretsion
November 08, 2008
Issues of Social Justice, Change and Non-violence:
"Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary." Mahatma Gandhi
When we call for, and take a stand for, world peace, we are inevitably faced with questions of social justice without which conflicts within nations and between different nations flare up and intensify.
In turn, when looking at issues of social justice, one of the most important areas of focus is that of democratic involvement of citizens in choosing leaders and influencing and directing decisions on how they are governed.
In the last few years, the struggles for democracy and democratic governments have created flash points and conflicts over different parts of the globe, such as in Myanmar (Burma), Tibet and Pakistan in Asia, different countries in Latin America, and Ethiopia, Kenya, and Zimbabwe in Africa.
These struggles for democracy have often resulted in violence and brutal repression of opposition forces and the deaths of many people—sometimes on both sides of the conflicts. The end results have been intensified conflicts and deeper chasms between governments and opposition groups.
How should issues of social justice, democratic rights and governance be handled? How should opposition parties fight for democracy, and how should governments respond? How can each side impact the resolution of these issues so that conflicts are not intensified and positions hardened? These are some of the questions that need to be considered when attempting to peacefully resolve issues of social justice and democracy.
The answers to these questions are by their nature complex and multi-faceted. There is no simple answer or remedy that addresses them all. However, a guiding principle that needs to be adhered to is that articulated by the great leader Mahatma Gandhi: "Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary."
Governments that use violence to suppress opposition movements for democracy and change will only radicalize and make the opposition movements more extreme and invite more violence on themselves and their supporters.
On the other hand, opposition movements that use violence to achieve what they feel is legitimately theirs will also push the governments in power to harden their positions and intensify their violent suppression of them and their supporters.
Violence will only result in a cycle of vengeance that creates suffering, wastes lives and destroys the meager resources the county has. A victory achieved by using violence will bear the seeds of more conflict as the losers will now have new scores to settle and perceived or real hurts to avenge.
Lessons of the non-violent methods of working for change used by Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian Independence Movement and by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the United States Civil Rights Movement need to be studied and adapted as models for opposition movements. They hold the best promise for positive change. The use of violence to achieve change creates new wounds and hatreds and intensifies old ones, laying the ground for the new government to use violence to suppress the inevitable new opposition movements and groups.
What are the forces of change?
The inability of the ruling elite to meet the people's need for economic welfare and demand for justice
The increasing disaffection of the population and their determination to express their opposition in peaceful and non-peaceful ways
Growing dissent and rivalry within the ruling elite
International pressure and condemnation by the international community against atrocities of dictatorial regimes and radical groups.
What are the obstacles to peaceful change?
Diehard mentality of the few to hang on to power by violent means.
Leaders´ unwillingness to guide people to deal with ethnic and religious differences and letting problems grow and exploiting them to stay in or ascend to power.
Lack of strong opposition party that can articulate a political agenda, organize and lead people in peaceful civil disobedience and negotiate change.
The opposition resorting to destructive and violent ways
Focusing on differences instead of working together in areas that unite citizens
Inability to accept defeat
Internal and external forces which includes countries that have an interest in the instability of other nation(s) in order to exploit resources and countries that benefit from conflict by selling arms
How can the peaceful change be facilitated?
Renounce violence as a means of holding or ascending to power.
Assure those in power that if they step down and allow democratic change, they will not be subject to retribution for their acts while in power (except for extreme acts against humanity); that they can peacefully pursue their lives and occupations like any other citizen; that they can even organize political parties and compete for power peacefully.
The opposition, while honestly expressing their differences, should refrain from demonizing those in power
The opposition should assure the populace they follow democratic rules of governance.
Agree on an independent observer and mediator and respect their ruling.
Wherever possible, form a transitional national unity government made up of all the political parties to create confidence and allow a fair election to strengthen democratic transition.
Work together in all possible means for the best interests of the country and its citizens
Learn from leaders who relinquished their power peacefully as did Nelson Mandela of South Africa, Julius Nerere of Tanzania and Léopold Sédar Senghor of Ivory Coast (Cote D´Ivoire)
The path of non-violence to achieve change is a difficult one. It is not glamorous and it requires a lot of sacrifices, but in the end, it offers the best prospects for meaningful and lasting change, for minimizing the creation of new conflicts, and for resolving the ones that already exist.
Please join us in discussing this pertinent topic by posting your opinion on all or any part of the above thesis at http://worldunderstandingandpeace.com/
"Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary." Mahatma Gandhi
When we call for, and take a stand for, world peace, we are inevitably faced with questions of social justice without which conflicts within nations and between different nations flare up and intensify.
In turn, when looking at issues of social justice, one of the most important areas of focus is that of democratic involvement of citizens in choosing leaders and influencing and directing decisions on how they are governed.
In the last few years, the struggles for democracy and democratic governments have created flash points and conflicts over different parts of the globe, such as in Myanmar (Burma), Tibet and Pakistan in Asia, different countries in Latin America, and Ethiopia, Kenya, and Zimbabwe in Africa.
These struggles for democracy have often resulted in violence and brutal repression of opposition forces and the deaths of many people—sometimes on both sides of the conflicts. The end results have been intensified conflicts and deeper chasms between governments and opposition groups.
How should issues of social justice, democratic rights and governance be handled? How should opposition parties fight for democracy, and how should governments respond? How can each side impact the resolution of these issues so that conflicts are not intensified and positions hardened? These are some of the questions that need to be considered when attempting to peacefully resolve issues of social justice and democracy.
The answers to these questions are by their nature complex and multi-faceted. There is no simple answer or remedy that addresses them all. However, a guiding principle that needs to be adhered to is that articulated by the great leader Mahatma Gandhi: "Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary."
Governments that use violence to suppress opposition movements for democracy and change will only radicalize and make the opposition movements more extreme and invite more violence on themselves and their supporters.
On the other hand, opposition movements that use violence to achieve what they feel is legitimately theirs will also push the governments in power to harden their positions and intensify their violent suppression of them and their supporters.
Violence will only result in a cycle of vengeance that creates suffering, wastes lives and destroys the meager resources the county has. A victory achieved by using violence will bear the seeds of more conflict as the losers will now have new scores to settle and perceived or real hurts to avenge.
Lessons of the non-violent methods of working for change used by Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian Independence Movement and by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the United States Civil Rights Movement need to be studied and adapted as models for opposition movements. They hold the best promise for positive change. The use of violence to achieve change creates new wounds and hatreds and intensifies old ones, laying the ground for the new government to use violence to suppress the inevitable new opposition movements and groups.
What are the forces of change?
The inability of the ruling elite to meet the people's need for economic welfare and demand for justice
The increasing disaffection of the population and their determination to express their opposition in peaceful and non-peaceful ways
Growing dissent and rivalry within the ruling elite
International pressure and condemnation by the international community against atrocities of dictatorial regimes and radical groups.
What are the obstacles to peaceful change?
Diehard mentality of the few to hang on to power by violent means.
Leaders´ unwillingness to guide people to deal with ethnic and religious differences and letting problems grow and exploiting them to stay in or ascend to power.
Lack of strong opposition party that can articulate a political agenda, organize and lead people in peaceful civil disobedience and negotiate change.
The opposition resorting to destructive and violent ways
Focusing on differences instead of working together in areas that unite citizens
Inability to accept defeat
Internal and external forces which includes countries that have an interest in the instability of other nation(s) in order to exploit resources and countries that benefit from conflict by selling arms
How can the peaceful change be facilitated?
Renounce violence as a means of holding or ascending to power.
Assure those in power that if they step down and allow democratic change, they will not be subject to retribution for their acts while in power (except for extreme acts against humanity); that they can peacefully pursue their lives and occupations like any other citizen; that they can even organize political parties and compete for power peacefully.
The opposition, while honestly expressing their differences, should refrain from demonizing those in power
The opposition should assure the populace they follow democratic rules of governance.
Agree on an independent observer and mediator and respect their ruling.
Wherever possible, form a transitional national unity government made up of all the political parties to create confidence and allow a fair election to strengthen democratic transition.
Work together in all possible means for the best interests of the country and its citizens
Learn from leaders who relinquished their power peacefully as did Nelson Mandela of South Africa, Julius Nerere of Tanzania and Léopold Sédar Senghor of Ivory Coast (Cote D´Ivoire)
The path of non-violence to achieve change is a difficult one. It is not glamorous and it requires a lot of sacrifices, but in the end, it offers the best prospects for meaningful and lasting change, for minimizing the creation of new conflicts, and for resolving the ones that already exist.
Please join us in discussing this pertinent topic by posting your opinion on all or any part of the above thesis at http://worldunderstandingandpeace.com/