One of the foremost controversies apparent following the 2011 intervention in Libya, was the outcome of regime change. Critics charge the facilitation of the Gadaffi regime's overthrow was not...Show moreOne of the foremost controversies apparent following the 2011 intervention in Libya, was the outcome of regime change. Critics charge the facilitation of the Gadaffi regime's overthrow was not justifiable under the United Nations mandate, not justifiable under the prominent 'Responsibility to Protect' norm and may have undermined efforts to resolve the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Syria. However, it is asserted that in situations where intervention is undertaken to stop atrocities committed by a government, the removal of that regime is necessary in achieving its aims. In exploring this link between humanitarian intervention and regime change, this piece analyses how the academic literature can justify the enactment of regime change in instances of intervention. This relationship otherwise lacks a sustained analysis in the academic literature. Whilst regime change is often difficult to justify in instances of humanitarian intervention, and inevitably controversial, this analysis will demonstrate that it is also often a necessity in achieving an intervention's humanitarian goals.Show less
The purpose of this study was to shed light on the relationship between regimes with a strong personalist dimension and a negative post-tenure fate. This was a relevant exercise, because the...Show moreThe purpose of this study was to shed light on the relationship between regimes with a strong personalist dimension and a negative post-tenure fate. This was a relevant exercise, because the personalist dimension was missing in existing frameworks addressing post-tenure fates of authoritarian leaders and elites. Based on available literature, this personalist dimension was hypothesized to be a strong indicator for a negative post-tenure fate. In this thesis this hypothesis is substantiated and found to be statistically significant through merging of the Archigos data-set on regime leaders and Geddes’ (1999) typology of authoritarian regimes. The relationship is then further explored through analysis of two similar cases, Libya and Tunisia. Based on this analysis it was possible to draw several plausible hypotheses regarding the relationship, which provide an interesting starting point for future research. All in all, it is clearly shown that the conditions that come with a strong personalist dimension can be expected to have a strong negative influence on the post-tenure fate of the regime leadership.Show less
