Autocratization as Ethnocratization? How Regime Transformations toward Autocracy Deteriorate Ethnic Relations

Abstract

When a country becomes more autocratic, does it affect the relations between ethnic groups in a systematic way? Cross-national and case-based research witnesses how autocratization (the opposite of democratization) is becoming increasingly prevalent, particularly in societies where ethnic relations are politicized and polarized. However, we still lack sufficient knowledge on how autocratization might have an impact on ethnic relations. The paper advances previous autocratization and ethnic studies. It hypothesizes that if a country autocratizes, this further deteriorates its ethnic relations (ethnocratization). It substantiates this claim through a mixed-method design. It starts with a longitudinal analysis at the ethnic group-level, to demonstrate how ethnic discrimination and domination are more probable during autocratization episodes. Next, it examines a collection of international reports on the predicament of ethnic majorities and minorities in countries undergoing autocratization episodes, to identify two causal mechanisms as the main incentives and justifications of the incumbent (and autocratizing) elites: ideological legitimation and authoritarian experimentation. This research encourages scholars on autocratization and ethnic studies to join their efforts, to investigate how democracy and ethnic inclusion can decline in parallel and, thus, to show the reasons why they should advance together.

Acknowledgements

I thank Leonardo Puleo and Luca Tomini for their detailed feedback on this paper. My grateful remarks also go to Sebnem Gumuscu and Viivi Vadelma Jarvi, discussants and organizers of the 2023 MPSA panel “The Economics of Authoritarianism and Democratic Transitions”, where I presented a previous version of this work. Finally, I kindly thank the two anonymous reviewers and the editors of the journal for their precise suggestions, helpful insights and overall support.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Anna Lührmann and Staffan I. Lindberg, “A Third Wave of Autocratization Is Here: What Is New About It?” Democratization 26, no. 7 (2019): 1095–113; Andrea Cassani and Luca Tomini, “Reversing Regimes and Concepts: From Democratization to Autocratization,” European Political Science 19 (2020): 272–87.

2 Seraphine F. Maerz, Amanda Edgell, Matthew C. Wilson, Sebastian Hellmeier, and Staffan I. Lindberg, “A Framework for Understanding Regime Transformation: Introducing the ERT Dataset,” V-Dem Working Paper 113 (2021); Seraphine F. Maerz, Amanda B. Edgell, Matthew C. Wilson, Sebastian Hellmeier, and Staffan I. Lindberg, “Episodes of Regime Transformation,” Journal of Peace Research (2023): 1–18.

3 Svend-Erik Skaaning, “Waves of Autocratization and Democratization: A Critical Note on Conceptualization and Measurement,” Democratization 27, no. 8 (2020): 1533–42; Luca Tomini, “Don’t Think of a Wave! A Research Note about the Current Autocratization Debate,” Democratization 28, no. 6 (2021): 1191–201; Vanessa A. Boese, Staffan I. Lindberg, and Anna Lührmann, “Waves of Autocratization and Democratization: A Rejoinder,” Democratization 28, no. 6 (2021): 1202–10.

4 Daniel Treisman, “How Great Is the Current Danger to Democracy? Assessing the Risk With Historical Data,” Comparative Political Studies (2023).

5 Luca Tomini, When Democracies Collapse: Assessing Transitions to Non-Democratic Regimes in the Contemporary World (Boca Rato, FL: Routledge, 2017); Sebastian Hellmeier, Rowan Cole, Sandra Grahn, Palina Kolvani, Jean Lachapelle, Anna Lührmann, Seraphine F. Maerz, Shreeya Pillai, and Staffan I. Lindberg, “State of the World 2020: Autocratization Turns Viral,” Democratization 28, no. 6 (2021): 1053–74; Vanessa A. Boese, Martin Lundstedt, Kelly Morrison, Yuko Sato, and Staffan I. Lindberg, “State of the World 2021: Autocratization Changing Its Nature?,” Democratization 29, no. 6 (2022): 983–1013; Felix Wiebrecht, Yuko Sato, Marina Nord, Martin Lundstedt, Fabio Angiolillo, and Staffan I. Lindberg, “State of the World 2022: Defiance in the Face of Autocratization,” Democratization (2023): 1–25.

6 Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, How Democracies Die (Crown, 2019); Stephan Haggard and Robert Kaufman, Backsliding: Democratic Regress in the Contemporary World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021); Michael Coppedge, Amanda B. Edgell, Carl Henrik Knutsen, and Staffan I. Lindberg, Why Democracies Develop and Decline (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022).

7 Vanessa A. Boese, Amanda B. Edgell, Sebastian Hellmeier, Seraphine F. Maerz, and Staffan I. Lindberg, “How Democracies Prevail: Democratic Resilience as a Two-Stage Process,” Democratization 28, no. 5 (2021): 885–907; Luca Tomini, Suzan Gibril, and Venelin Bochev, “Standing up Against Autocratization across Political Regimes: A Comparative Analysis of Resistance Actors and Strategies,” Democratization 30, no. 1 (2023): 119–38.

8 Fredrik Barth, Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference (Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, 1998); Donald L. Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict, Updated Edition with a New Preface (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000); Kanchan Chandra, Constructivist Theories of Ethnic Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).

9 Manuel Vogt, Nils-Christian Bormann, Seraina Rüegger, Lars-Erik Cederman, Philipp Hunziker, and Luc Girardin, “Integrating Data on Ethnicity, Geography, and Conflict: The Ethnic Power Relations Data Set Family,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 59, no. 7 (2015): 1327–42.

10 Alberto Alesina, Arnaud Devleeschauwer, William Easterly, Sergio Kurlat, and Romain Wacziarg, “Fractionalization,” Journal of Economic growth 8 (2003): 155–94; Alberto Alesina, Stelios Michalopoulos, and Elias Papaioannou, “Ethnic Inequality,” Journal of Political Economy 124, no. 2 (2016): 428–88.

11 Rogers Brubaker, Ethnicity without Groups (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004); Kurt Weyland, “Firmer Roots of Ethnicity and Nationalism? New Historical Research and Its Implications for Political Science,” Perspectives on Politics 19, no. 2 (2021): 564–70.

12 Matthijs Bogaards, Ludger Helms, and Arend Lijphart., “The Importance of Consociationalism for Twenty-First Century Politics and Political Science,” Swiss Political Science Review 25, no. 4 (2019): 341–56.

13 Donna Lee Van Cott, From Movements to Parties in Latin America: The Evolution of Ethnic Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007); John D. Huber and Pavithra Suryanarayan, “Ethnic Inequality and the Ethnification of Political Parties: Evidence from India,” World Politics 68, no. 1 (2016): 149–88.

14 Maayan Mor, “Government Policies, New Voter Coalitions, and the Emergence of Ethnic Dimension in Party Systems,” World Politics 74, no. 1 (2022): 121–66.

15 Andreas Wimmer, Waves of War: Nationalism, State Formation, and Ethnic Exclusion in the Modern World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012).

16 Rogers Brubaker and David D. Laitin, “Ethnic and Nationalist Violence,” Annual Review of Sociology 24, no. 1 (1998): 423–52; Ashutosh Varshney, “Ethnic Conflict and Civil Society: India and Beyond,” World Politics 53, no. 3 (2001): 362–98; Stefan Wolff, Ethnic Conflict: A Global Perspective (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).

17 Lars-Erik Cederman, Nils B. Weidmann, and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, “Horizontal Inequalities and Ethnonationalist Civil War: A Global Comparison,” American Political Science Review 105, no. 3 (2011): 478–95.

18 Carla Canelas and Rachel M. Gisselquist, “Horizontal Inequality as an Outcome,” Oxford Development Studies 46, no. 3 (2018): 305–24.

19 Daniel Bochsler, Elliott Green, Erin Jenne, Harris Mylonas, and Andreas Wimmer, “Exchange on the Quantitative Measurement of Ethnic and National Identity,” Nations and Nationalism 27, no. 1 (2021): 22–40.

20 Caroline A. Hartzell and Matthew Hoddie, “The Art of the Possible: Power Sharing and Post—Civil War Democracy,” World Politics 67, no. 1 (2015): 37–71; Pippa Norris, Driving Democracy: Do Power-Sharing Institutions Work? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018); Daniel Bochsler and Andreas Juon, “Power-Sharing and the Quality of Democracy,” European Political Science Review 13, no. 4 (2021): 411–30; Andreas Juon and Daniel Bochsler, “The Two Faces of Power-Sharing,” Journal of Peace Research 59, no. 4 (2022): 526–42.

21 Edward D Mansfield and Jack Snyder, “Democratization and the Danger of War,” International Security (1995): 5–38; Jack L. Snyder, From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict (New York: Norton, 2000); Jacques Bertrand, “Democratization and Religious and Nationalist Conflict in Post-Suharto Indonesia,” Democratization and Identity: Regimes and Ethnicity in East and Southeast Asia (2004): 177–200; Michael Mann, The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Edward D. Mansfield and Jack Snyder, Electing to Fight: Why Emerging Democracies Go to War (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007).

22 Zeric Kay Smith, “The Impact of Political Liberalisation and Democratisation on Ethnic Conflict in Africa: An Empirical Test of Common Assumptions,” The Journal of Modern African Studies 38, no. 1 (2000): 21–39.

23 Andreas Juon and Daniel Bochsler, “The Wrong Place at the Wrong Time? Territorial Autonomy and Conflict During Regime Transitions,” Comparative Political Studies (2023): 1–34.

24 Oren Yiftachel, Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006); Ilan Peleg, Democratizing the Hegemonic State: Political Transformation in the Age of Identity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007); James Anderson, “Ethnocracy: Exploring and Extending the Concept,” Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 8, no. 3 (2016): 1–29; Neil DeVotta, “Sri Lanka: The Return to Ethnocracy,” Journal of Democracy 32, no. 1 (2021): 96–110.

25 Sammy Smooha, “Ethnic Democracy: Israel as an Archetype,” Israel Studies 2, no. 2 (1997): 198–241.

26 Katharine Adeney, “How Can We Model Ethnic Democracy? An Application to Contemporary India,” Nations and Nationalism 27, no. 2 (2021): 393–411; Christophe Jaffrelot, Modi’s India: Hindu Nationalism and the Rise of Ethnic Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021).

27 Sammy Smooha, “The Model of Ethnic Democracy: Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State,” Nations and Nationalism 8, no. 4 (2002): 475–503.

28 Yiftachel, Ethnocracy.

29 Guido Panzano, Ethnic Domination in Deeply Divided Places: The Hegemonic State in Israel and Estonia (Florence: Firenze University Press, 2021); Matthijs Bogaards, “Consociationalism and the State,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics (2023): 1–19.

30 For the various modalities of autocratization, cf. Andrea Cassani and Luca Tomini, Autocratization in Post-Cold War Political Regimes (Cham: Springer, 2018).

31 In fact, autocratization processes are rarely unjustified. Specifically for post-colonial contextsand the Global South, scholars have already investigated how a centralization of power in the hands of the incumbent has been justified as conducive to development and in the name of the unity or even the peace of the country, especially after ethnic-based conflicts, cf. Richard L. Sklar, “Democracy in Africa,” African Studies Review 26, no. 3–4 (1983): 11–24; Hilary Matfess, “Rwanda and Ethiopia: Developmental Authoritarianism and the New Politics of African Strong Men,” African Studies Review 58, no. 2 (2015): 181–204; Gabrielle Lynch, Nic Cheeseman, and Justin Willis, “From Peace Campaigns to Peaceocracy: Elections, Order and Authority in Africa,” African Affairs 118, no. 473 (2019): 603–27.

32 Juraj Medzihorsky and Staffan I. Lindberg, “Walking the Talk: How to Identify Anti-Pluralist Parties,” Party Politics (2023): 1–15.

33 Neophytos Loizides, The Politics of Majority Nationalism: Framing Peace, Stalemates, and Crises (Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press, 2015).

34 Johannes Gerschewski, “The Three Pillars of Stability: Legitimation, Repression, and Co-optation in Autocratic Regimes,” Democratization 20, no. 1 (2013): 13–38.

35 Masha Gessen, The Future Is History: How Totalitarianism Reclaimed Russia (Granta Books, 2017); Manuel Vogt, Mobilization and Conflict in Multiethnic States (Oxford: Oxford University Press, USA, 2019).

36 Evan S. Lieberman, “Nested Analysis as a Mixed-Method Strategy for Comparative Research,” American Political Science Review 99, no. 3 (2005): 435–52.

37 Michael Coppedge, John Gerring, Carl Henrik Knutsen, Staffan I. Lindberg, Jan Teorell, David Altman, Michael Bernhard, Agnes Cornell, M. Steven Fish, Lisa Gastaldi et. al., “V-Dem Codebook v12 Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project” (2022); Maerz et al., “Episodes of Regime Transformation.”

38 Vogt et al., “Integrating Data on Ethnicity, Geography, and Conflict.”

39 For instance, bias might occur if the same expert assesses the electoral quality in a particular country in a specific year and then examine the conditions of its ethnic groups. However, using data from multiple sources and measuring different underlying concepts (like electoral democracy and ethnic group power status) should minimize this bias.

40 As explained in the codebook, “senior” (usually for majorities) or “junior” (for minorities) “partners” are assigned to ethnic groups included in the political regime with “real influence on decision making.” A “dominant” status is given to ethnic groups when they have “dominant power in the executive but there is some limited inclusion of “token” members of other groups who however do not have real influence on decision making”; similarly, “monopoly” status is given to ethnic groups maintaining all the “monopoly power to the exclusion of members of all other ethnic groups.” Similarly, the EPR lists as “powerless” those ethnic groups when their “elite representatives hold no political power (or do not have influence on decision making) at the national level of executive power—although without being explicitly discriminated against.” Conversely, they give the “discriminated” status to groups of which “members are subjected to active, intentional, and targeted discrimination by the state, with the intent of excluding them from political power. Such active discrimination can be either formal or informal, but always refers to the domain of public politics (excluding discrimination in the socio-economic sphere).” The category of “self-exclusion”—for example, groups controlling a restricted territory without engaging in central politics—has been excluded from this analysis. Cf. Nils-Christian Bormann, Girardin, L., Hunziker, P., and Vogt, M., GROWup Research Front-End Documentation RFE Release 2.0 (Zurich: ETH Zurich, 2015).

41 Maerz et al., “A Framework for Understanding Regime Transformation”; Lars Pelke and Aurel Croissant, “Conceptualizing and Measuring Autocratization Episodes,” Swiss Political Science Review 27, no. 2 (2021): 434–48; Matthew C. Wilson, Medzihorsky, J., Maerz, S. F., Lindenfors, P., Edgell, A. B., Boese, V. A., & Lindberg, S. I., “Episodes of Liberalization in Autocracies: A New Approach to Quantitatively Studying Democratization,” Political Science Research and Methods (2022): 1–20.

42 To clarify, the EDI is based on a combination of V-Dem small-scale indexes concerning the electoral principle of democracy, such as free and fair elections, freedom of association, and the extent to which public offices are elected. Therefore, this indicator does not include variables on ethnic issues or practices related to social groups—differently from other “thicker” indicators on democracy or democratic quality.

43 Anna Lührmann, Marcus Tannenberg, and Staffan I. Lindberg, “Regimes of the World (RoW): Opening New Avenues for the Comparative Study of Political Regimes,” Politics and Governance 6, no. 1 (2018): 60–77.

44 We can also rule out the possibility that there are other global factors (not connected to autocratization, such as trends in international economy or globalization) affecting our outcome and making our relationship spurious. Cf. Nils-Christian Bormann, Pengl, Y. I., Cederman, L. E., & Weidmann, N. B., “Globalization, Institutions, and Ethnic Inequality,” International Organization 75, no. 3 (2021): 665–97.

45 Nils B. Weidmann, “Geography as Motivation and Opportunity: Group Concentration and Ethnic Conflict,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 53, no. 4 (2009): 526–43.

46 David B. Carter and Curtis S. Signorino, “Back to the Future: Modeling Time Dependence in Binary Data,” Political Analysis 18, no. 3 (2010): 271–92.

47 Having different dependent variables, the total number of observations for each model changes accordingly: for instance, in the model explaining the shifts of ethnic groups “from junior partner to powerless” (2.1), we only include groups of the same respective baseline status (junior partner).

48 We exclude the possibility that there might be issues of reverse causality. As we have seen and it can be observed from Table A1, the change in the relations between ethnic groups is a very rare phenomenon (around 1% of the sample), while autocratization episodes are not. This being sad, we do not exclude that other conditions related to ethnicity, such as grievances, or the overlapping between economic and ethnic cleavages might be considered as factors leading to autocratization. Cf. Christian Houle, “Ethnic Inequality and the Dismantling of Democracy: A Global Analysis,” World Politics 67, no. 3 (2015): 469–505; Lasse Egendal Leipziger, “Ethnic Inequality, Democratic Transitions, and Democratic Breakdowns: Investigating an Asymmetrical Relationship,” The Journal of Politics (2023): 1–25; Guido Panzano, “Do Mutually Reinforcing Cleavages Harm Democracy? Inequalities between Ethnic Groups and Autocratization,” Democratization (2023): 1–25.

49 Glenn A. Bowen, “Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method,” Qualitative Research Journal 9, no. 2 (2009): 27–40.

50 Adeney, “How Can We Model Ethnic Democracy?”; Damir Kapidžić and Věra Stojarová, Illiberal Politics in Southeast Europe: How Ruling Elites Undermine Democracy (Boca Raton, FL: Routledge, 2021); Milada Anna Vachudova, “Ethnopopulism and Democratic Backsliding in Central Europe,” East European Politics 36, no. 3 (2020): 318–40.

51 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A/HRC/30/41. 2015; A/HRC/45/34.2020; A/HRC/51/28. 2022.

52 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief. A/HRC/31/18. 2015.

53 Minority Rights Group International. Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on climate justice.2019.

54 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. A/HRC/44/57. 2020; A/HRC/50/60. 2022.

55 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues. A/HRC/49/46. 2022.

56 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A/HRC/4/32. 2007; A/HRC/30/41.2015.

57 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A/HRC/39/17. 2018; A/HRC/45/34.2020. Minority Rights Group International, Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on climate justice. 2019.

58 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. E/CN.4/2002/24. 2002; A/HRC/4/19. 2007.

59 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. A/HRC/35/41. 2017; A/HRC/41/54. 2019; U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues. A/HRC/28/64. 2015.

60 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, A/HRC/30/41. 2015; A/HRC/39/17.2018; A/HRC/42/37. 2019; A/HRC/51/28. 2022.

61 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. E/CN.4/2000/16. 2000; E/CN.4/2001/21. 2001; A/HRC/17/40. 2011; A/HRC/44/57. 2020; U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues. A/HRC/25/56. 2014; A/HRC/31/56. 2016.

62 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues. A/HRC/43/47. 2020; A/HRC/49/46. 2022; Minority Rights Group International, Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on climate justice. 2019; Peoples Under Threat. 2020; Peoples Under Threat. 2021; Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on work. 2022.

63 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief. A/HRC/43/48. 2020.

64 Sten Widmalm, Routledge Handbook of Autocratization in South Asia (Boca Raton, FL: Routledge, 2021).

65 Diego Fossati, “Illiberal Resistance to Democratic Backsliding: The Case of Radical Political Islam in Indonesia,” Democratization (2023): 1–22.

66 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. E/CN.4/1998/79. 1998; E/CN.4/2000/16. 2020; A/HRC/44/57. 2020.

67 Minority Rights Group International, Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on climate justice.2019; Peoples Under Threat. 2020; Peoples Under Threat. 2021; Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on work. 2022.

68 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, A/HRC/43/48. 2020.

69 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues. A/HRC/46/57. 2021; A/HRC/49/46. 2022.

70 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, A/HRC/4/32. 2007; A/HRC/39/17.2018; A/HRC/51/28. 2022.

71 Minority Rights Group International, Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on climate justice.2019; Minority Rights Group International, Peoples Under Threat. 2020; Minority Rights Group International, Peoples Under Threat. 2021.

72 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. E/CN.4/1996/72. 1996; E/CN.4/1997/71. 1997; E/CN.4/1998/79. 1998; E/CN.4/1999/15. 1999; E/CN.4/2000/16. 2020; E/CN.4/2001/21. 2001; E/CN.4/2002/24. 2002; E/CN.4/2003/24. 2003; E/CN.4/2004/18. 2004; E/CN.4/2006/16. 2006; A/HRC/7/19. 2008; A/HRC/17/40. 2011; A/HRC/44/57. 2020.

73 Amy MacKinnon, “Russia Is Sending Its Ethnic Minorities to the Meat Grinder,” Foreign Policy (2022).

74 Minority Rights Group International, Peoples Under Threat. 2020; Peoples Under Threat. 2021; Minority and Indigenous Trends—Focus on work. 2022.

75 U.N. HR Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, A/HRC/4/32. 2007; A/HRC/30/41.2015; A/HRC/45/34. 2020.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Guido Panzano

Guido Panzano is PhD candidate in Political Science at the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), where he works as Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique (FNRS) Research Fellow at the Centre d’Etude de la Vie Politique (CEVIPOL). His research interests include democratization, autocratization and ethnic issues.