Leadership Transitions and Survival: Coups, Autocoups, and Power Dynamics

Ph.D. Defense Presentation

Zhu Qi

2024-10-28

Contents

1. Motivation and Main Questions

2. Main Contributions

3. Main Arguments

4. Main Findings

5. Limitations and Future Research

The key focus of my research is to examine coups and autocoups in the context of irregular leadership transitions. Specifically, I will analyze key factors driving their occurrences, and then compare leadership survival between coup-installed and autocoup leaders.

As Tobias suggested, my presentation will cover four sections: Main Questions, Main Contributions, Main arguments, main Findings, and finally, if time permits, I will also touch on the limitations of my research and potential further study.

1 Motivations and Main Questions

• Motivations
• Main Questions

• Alarming decline of democracy and rise of autocratization

• The Freedom House 2024 Report reveals a disturbing 18-year consecutive decline in global freedom.

(Nancy Bermeo, 2016. On Democratic Backsliding. Journal of Democracy.

The Politics of Presidential Term Limits, Edited by ALEXANDER BATURO and ROBERT ELGIE)

• High-profile examples include Vladimir Putin in Russia and Xi Jinping in China, both of whom successfully extended their tenures through constitutional amendments. In the United States, former President Trump’s refusal to accept the election results ignited debates over whether it constituted an attempted coup or autocoup.

• This study focuses on the power dynamics among ruling groups in shaping coup and autocoup attempts.

• The extant literature has discussed coups and autocoups separately, but this study aims to establish a unified framework to analyse both types of irregular leadership transitions.

• Previous studies have discussed a lot about the political survival, but few have compared the two significant and similar leaders: coup-installed and autocoup

• Surge in autocoups since 2000

• How do power dynamics among ruling groups affect classic coup and autocoup attempts?

• How can we analyze autocoups within a unified framework alongside coups in terms of irregular leadership transitions?

• How does the method of power acquisition impact leadership longevity?

Contents

1. Motivation and Main Questions

2. Main Contributions

3. Main Arguments

4. Main Findings

5. Limitations and Future Research

2 Main Contributions

• ONE
• TWO
• THREE
• FOUR

1. Emphasizing the key role of power dynamics and regime types in shaping coup attempts

• This study examines the pivotal factor influencing the success or failure of coup attempts: the power dynamics between incumbent leaders and those seeking to usurp them.

• This study refines the definition of autocoups and develops a novel dataset encompassing events from 1945 to 2023.

• Employing survival analysis on existing coup data and the newly compiled autocoup dataset, this research demonstrates how different modes of power acquisition significantly impact leadership survival.

2. Refining the definition of autocoups and introducing a novel dataset

3. Establishing a unified framework for analyzing coups and autocoups as irregular power transitions

4. Conducting a novel comparative analysis of leadership survival between coup-installed and autocoup leaders

Contents

1. Motivation and Main Questions

2. Main Contributions

3. Main Arguments

4. Main Findings

5. Limitations and Future Research

3 Main Arguments

• ONE
• TWO
• THREE

1. Balance of power between incumbents and other elites in ruling groups significantly shapes potential outcomes of coups or autocoups, consequently determines their attempts

Previous studies on coups have analysed the determinants of coup attempts in a great detail and proposed about 100 factors that could influence the likelihood of a coup, without a consensus on the most important ones. This study pays particular attention to the power dynamics among ruling groups, which is the fundamental determinant of a coup attempt.

2. Regime types pre-determine the balance of power among different factions.

3. Method of power acquisition significantly impacts leadership survival

Contents

1. Motivation and Main Questions

2. Main Contributions

3. Main Arguments

4. Main Findings

5. Limitations and Future Research

4 Main Findings

• One
• Two
• Three

1. Coup Attempts by Regime Type:

• Military regimes are 277.7% more likely to experience coups than dominant-party regimes

• Attributed to differences in power dynamics among ruling groups

2. Autocoup Analysis (1945-2023):

• Personalist regimes significantly more likely to experience and succeed in autocoup attempts compared to democracies

3. Leadership Survival Comparison:

• Coup-installed leaders are 2.23 times more likely to be ousted than autocoup leaders

Contents

1. Motivation and Main Questions

2. Main Contributions

3. Main Arguments

4. Main Findings

5. Limitations and Future Research

5 Limitations and Future Research

• Limitation
• Future Research Directions

Further refinement needed for autocoup definition and dataset

• More empirical analyses on autocoups based on the developed dataset

• Exploration of long-term impacts of coups vs. autocoups on regime stability and economic development

Thank you.