The Johns Hopkins University

SAIS Europe at Bologna

POLITICAL SYSTEMS OF THE DEVELOPING WORLD
First Semester 2015-2016
Final Take-Home Exam, January 9
Gianfranco Pasquino
I PLEDGE MY HONOR THAT I HAVE NEITHER GIVEN NOR RECEIVED
AID ON THIS EXAM. Valerie Tarr

1. What is political order? Can one speak of authoritarian political

order and of democratic political order? Explain the differences
making reference to some really existing situations.
The search for political order is what drives state building, modernization and
decay, and yet it is a phrase that defies easy definition. In the broadest terms political
order can be understood as the existence of a tacit agreement between the ruler and the
people that legitimizes the existence of the government. Political order stems also from
Rousseaus theory of a social contract, an implicit agreement between the government
and the governed that validates political institutions, and by extension, the state itself.
Huntington builds on this concept by describing the presence of order within groups,
beginning with the family and extending to the greater community, and in successfully
governed states, to the country as a whole.1 The desire for political order can also be
compared to a need for social order. In this sense, political order creates a social order
because of the sense of security that exists in understanding consequences; whether these
be the positive results of voting, or the negative consequence of speaking out against an
authoritarian ruler, the social order that stems from faith in positive results or fear of
negative penalties can be the result of a tacit political order.
For this order to be maintained, credible institutions must be built. Political
institutions are what empower the people within a political system, whether it be the
electorate in a democracy, or the government in an authoritarian regime. For the existence
of political order, where the power lies does not truly matter, what is important is simply
that it exists. Therein lies the distinction between democratic and authoritarian political
order, who holds the power?
Within a democratic system the people ostensibly hold power and institutions are
built around the voting public: unions, courts, political parties all exist to translate the
desires of the people to the government. In the case of successful democracies, social
order sublimates in to political order because the people understand that their desires will
be met and their grievances answered. In the United States for example, the system is set
up in such a way that the voting public is constitutionally empowered to vote for their
local representatives. If the person elected performs satisfactorily, they will continue to be
elected, and if they dont, the people can exercise their voting muscles and vote them out
of office. This is an example of bottom up political order, one that stems from social
order. The people organize and create a government.
Order in an authoritarian system, however, comes from the top down. An
authoritarian ruler creates a government and institutions, often extractive, that in turn
create the social contract to which the citizens are required to adhere. The important
distinction between democratic and authoritarian political order is the lack of freedom. It
is important to note that a lack of political freedom does not necessarily indicate a lack of
political order. As Linz states, authoritarian powers may be ill-defined but are still
quite predictable.2 It is this predictability that creates order.
1 Huntington,SamuelP.PoliticalOrderinChangingSocieties.NewHaven:YaleUP,1968.
2 Linz,JuanJ.TotalitarianandAuthoritarianRegimes.Boulder,CO:LynneRienner,2000.

Those living under an authoritarian regime are aware of the consequences, and it is
this stability that creates order. Of course, as with any order, this also requires a certain
permanence, so authoritarian order is best represented in stable authoritarian states.
Francos regime in Spain is a good example of an authoritarian system that maintained
political order for almost 40 years. Under his the Cortes governed, although this
legislature was not elected by the people it can still be considered an institution
responsible for maintaining order in the country. Additionally, the top down political to
social order in 20th century Spain created a system in which the consequences to political
actions were well known, concentration camps, executions and disappearances as well as
brutal repression of speech were all methods of maintaining political order under Franco.
To paraphrase Justice Potter in his opinion on obscenity, political order cant be precisely
defined, but you know it when you see it. What is important when comparing democratic
and authoritarian political order is separating order from freedom. The defining
difference in democratic political order is the existence of choice and freedom. However,
political order exists in both cases and is built on institutions and a tacit agreement
between the people and the government to follow through.
737 words

2. Which are the most important obstacles to political, social, and

economic development in the developing countries? Make several
references and suggest how to surmount the obstacles.
Development can often be equated with modernization, and with it a fundamental
change to the very fabric of society, especially to the holders of power. This power shift is
often unwanted by the controlling elites who have prospered under the current conditions,
this breeds corruption and an unspoken sabotage of the state. Development is often
hindered by lack of effective government institutions and an unwillingness to create
better ones. At the core of both this reluctance is corruption and clientelism; and
corruption is frequently both a cause and a symptom of poor development.
Countries that have received copious amounts of foreign aid have created within
themselves huge bureaucracies, through which aid money is dispersed, often never
reaching its intended recipients. Nigeria is great example of this. Although as a country it
received over $2.3 billion in aid in 2012 alone, a staggering 46% of its population lives
below the poverty line.3 Add to that amount of foreign aid high reserves of oil and gas
and Nigeria has become a country where corruption is endemic, scoring 27 out of 100 on
Transparency Internationals corruption index.4 The new sources of money and power are
themselves in part responsible for corruption in many cases, often poor countries simply
do not have a cultural mechanism that prepares people for the accumulation of so much
wealth and this new power dynamic is what breeds corruption.5
Strong institutions are vital to political development, if developing towards a
democracy these institutions must include a mechanism by which the citizens can hold
their rulers accountable, usually through a strong electoral system, and taxes. However, in
Nigeria, with that amount of foreign aid, oil and gas the government is not reliant on
taxpayers for income, and so does not feel beholden to them for services. This is a huge
obstacle to surmount. Ideally, to create a stronger political system Nigeria should create
inclusive political institutions that enfranchise the people and empower the electorate.6
Part of this responsibility must also come from the foreign governments that continue to
pour in billions of dollars of aid to countries that are clearly misusing the funds. In order
for the government of Nigeria to be responsive to its people, it must first be responsible
for itself.
The issue of foreign aid and corruption not only limits political development, but
hinders economic development as well; because economic and political development are
often inextricably linked. Extractive political institutions pave the way for extractive
economic practices, when landed elites and factory owners know that their workers have
no agency there is no incentive to distribute their wealth to the lower echelons through
3 World Bank Development Indicators. Web. 10 Jan 2016
4 "TransparencyInternationalTheGlobalAntiCorruptionCoalition."TransparencyInternationalThe
GlobalAntiCorruptionCoalition.Web.10Jan.2016.
5 Stokes,SusanCarol.TheOxfordHandbookofComparativePolitics,Ch.25:PoliticalClientelism.
Oxford:OxfordUP,2007.
6 Acemoglu,Daron,andJamesA.Robinson.WhyNationsFail:TheOriginsofPower,Prosperity,and
Poverty.NewYork:Crown,2012.

fair pay. And when the bureaucracy knows that they will receive bribes from the rich
economic agents in their districts, there is no incentive to protect the workers through
labor laws. All of this leads to an unrepresented, helpless majority that cannot advocate
for themselves, thus perpetuating the cycle of poverty. Extractive economic policies are
common in Latin America where agricultural monopolists are able to exploit workers
with impunity because of the implicit protection of corrupt politicians and governments.7
Unfortunately, the cycle of exploitation is unlikely to be broken without an improvement
in the social development of many poor countries. In this case social development can be
defined as an improved education system, social safety nets like welfare, and the granting
of agency to the voiceless. The most efficient way to improve social development would
be by creating a strong central government that can provide universal education, health
care and welfare. However, for the reasons previously stated this is often unrealistic in
many developing countries. Thankfully, some aspects of this are the most responsive to
grass roots development efforts, especially incremental improvements created by
womens health programs, educational support and micro loans.
Although all three are inextricably linked, perhaps social development is the one
factor that can be the most effectively, if not efficiently, improved. The creation of a
coherent middle class that can hold the government responsible for failed policies and
pressure for improvements would be a vital piece to development.8
781 words

7 Acemoglu,Daron,andJamesA.Robinson.WhyNationsFail:TheOriginsofPower,Prosperity,and
Poverty.NewYork:Crown,2012.
8 Bates,RobertH.,J.A.Widner,EconomicChangeandPoliticalLiberalizationinSubSaharanAfrica.
ChapterOne.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUP,1994.

3. Precisely define what a failed state is. Deal with a couple of real
cases of your choice and suggest how to create a viable state.
The Fund for Peace defines a failed state as a country that is unable to control its own
territory, or has lost the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force therein;
where the authority is unable to make united decisions; where the state is unable to
provide public services; and a state which is unable to interact with the international
community.9
One example that exists on the cusp of East and West Europe is Ukraine. Although still
considered a relatively stable state on the Fragile States Index, its situation has worsened
over the last decade, with the last two years having been particularly damaging.10
Territorial integrity is one of the most vital conditions of having a stable state and the loss
of Crimea for Ukraine has been a major destabilizing element. Although the country
appears to be regaining some political stability, the threat from Russia remains, and the
EU agreement is not receiving support in Europe. A country that was split between East
and West may find itself with nowhere to turn, which could only lead to further instability
and the possibility of a continental crisis.11
Additionally, many developing countries find themselves unable to deliver public
services, but Bangladesh struggles especially with this problem. Currently on alert on
the FSI and spending barely 3% of its GDP on health and education, Bangladesh is in
danger of losing all of the improvements it has gained through macroeconomic growth,
simply because it is unable to support its population.12
The country that has topped the FSI list for two years is South Sudan. The worlds
youngest country may not last for much longer; barely five years old, South Sudan has
been at war with itself since its founding. The government is unable to see past ethnic
divisions, and genocidal violence and guerrilla war threaten to destabilize the country
completely. South Sudan fails every one of the Funds criteria for a stable state and there
is no solution on the horizon.13
The creation of a viable state is a delicate issue. To use South Sudan as a test case,
one would first have to somehow erase generations of ethnic conflict. Without the basic
freedom from sectarian violence, a state could never be truly successful. Assuming that
this could be done, perhaps by further splitting the country along ethnic lines, one would
then need a functioning bureaucracy. Although not the sexiest component to a working
government, an educated and robust bureaucracy to efficiently deal with the minutia of
daily governing is the best foundation on which to build a sustainable state. In order to
create this functioning bureaucracy, the next element would be a reasonably welleducated populace. Universal literacy and access to a relatively free press maintain
accountability between the ruler and the people. Then, the upper echelons of power,
9 "TheFundforPeace."TheFundforPeace.Web.10Jan.2016.
10 "TheFragileStateIndexTheFundforPeace.Web.10Jan.2016.
11 "DutchVotersOverwhelminglyRejectAgreementwithUkraine:Poll."POLITICODutchVoters
OverwhelminglyRejectAgreementwithUkrainePollComments.2016.Web.10Jan.2016.
12 World Bank Development Indicators. Web. 10 Jan 2016
13 "InFocus:SouthSudanWarDestroyedEveryAspectofPeople'sLife."InternationalBusinessTimes
RSS.2016.Web.10Jan.2016.

whether it is democracy or benign dictatorship, need somehow to be held responsible by

the people. Whether this is through the payment of taxes, voting or a combination of the
two, in order for a leader to be accountable for their decisions there should always exist
the threat of loss of power. The functioning bureaucracy and responsible leader should
then attempt to create the institutions required to maintain their educated populace: laws
and a judiciary, schools, hospitals, sanitation. And, in order to make this utopian state
really sustainable, strong macroeconomic and monetary policies need to be implemented
to ensure that the state can pay for itself without reliance on loans that may put some of
the control of their country in the hands of multilateral aid agencies or foreign
governments.
Of course this thought experiment is just that, an experiment. The unfortunate
reality is that even with fully functioning institutions and responsible leaders, it is still
possible for a few people or a few companies to destabilize the entire process. Even some
of the most advanced countries in the world are not considered very sustainable in the
eyes of the Fund for Peace, in fact only one is: Finland. The next safest category contains
most of the rest of the Scandinavian countries as well as Portugal and Germany among a
few others. But, the country that involves itself the most in overseas nation building is
only number 158 out 178, the United States. Perhaps what makes Finland so sustainable
is the fact that it focuses its energy at home.
800 words