|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
Underdevelopment and Military Regimes
“…the most striking and frightening characteristics of all African governments is this, that without an exception, all of them are dictatorships…[making] the South African apartheid look tame…”
- African poet Okot, Indigenous Ills.
My aim in this essay is to understand what relationship, if any may exist between underdevelopment and military regimes. I shall attempt this by briefly examining colonial history and colonial legacy, moving onto to examine some of the factors that are required for a potential military assumption of political power, which is followed by a canvassing of Guillermo O’Donell’s term ‘bureaucratic authoritarianism’. I also shall investigate the relationship between underdevelopment and the purchasing of armaments by military regimes and finally, in conclusion, whether underdevelopment can cause military regimes to rise and fall.
It is my opinion that there is an undeniable relationship between underdevelopment and military regimes. This statement is based on the following concept: In modern times, military regimes gain ascendancy in what are traditionally termed, from a Eurocentric perspective at least, ‘poor’ or developing countries. As various military regimes either assume or consolidate their power, they increasingly spend more and more of their countries’ wealth on purchasing arms. ... Given the lack of hard currency in most developing states, the arms purchases are generally gained with foreign exchange credits, creating an increasingly oppressive debt structure (military expenditure accounted for an estimated 40% of the increase in Third World debt between 1975 - 85).
Between 1881 and 1899 Britain and France, joined by Germany, Italy, Belgium, Portugal, and Spain launched upon the ‘scramble for Africa’ ; in the process they divided the continent up into some 50 colonies and protectorates. ... ”
While the exact forms of domination varied between various colonies, it can be said that where political domination was attempted, economic domination followed in its wake, although not necessarily the reverse. ... I would argue that while economic domination did not cause underdevelopment, it certainly perpetuated it. ... In only a few short years most of the former colonies south of the Sahara went from notional independence to military dictatorships. ... Samuel Finer, in his 1975 book, defines military intervention “…as being the product of both the ability and the disposition to intervene”. ...
Peter and Susan Calvert identify two broad groupings of factors (push/pull), which could cause a military intervention, noting that both groups may be needed to instigate an intervention.
Approximate Word count = 1888
Approximate Pages = 7.6
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|