The contemporary authoritarianism in the post-Soviet space (case study of Belarus and Georgia under Saakashvili rule)

Özet

The paper describes the very essential dilemma of democracy building in the post-Soviet area: the role of elites and popular support in the absence
of institutional constraints on executive power; these tools can be used both in favor of democracy building and against it, and ultimately for the sake
of regime to maintain its power. Many post-Soviet incumbents, among them Saakashvili and Lukashenko, managed to become authoritarian rulers
because, and not on the contrary of mass support. Divide and rule strategy helped them to overcome the resistance of plural elites and to suppress
them in the name of modernization, good governance and stability. In particular, it shows how the constraints on power can be used by the newly
elected rulers against each other and how their removal leads to power consolidation and concentration in one hand. From this perspective comparing
Saakashvili and Lukashenko makes sense and reveals the shallowness of democratization approaches and rhetoric, in which these two leaders are
always considered to be at the different poles of democracy building. In the meantime, it focuses on the role of society and the phenomenon of a
“good” autocrat who at the early stage can be useful for the country modernisation and then drive to the authoritarian rule, thus retaining power by all
available means. The research also discusses the role of external powers in the observed processes and particularly Russia as sponsor and promoter
of autocratic regimes in the neighbourhood