The Rise and Decline of Military Authoritarianism in Latin America: The Role of Stabilization Policy

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
THE RISE AND DECLINE OF _______ MILITARY AUTHORITARIANISM IN LATIN AMERICA: THE ROLE OF STABILIZATION POLICY Gordon Richards he rise of military regimes in Latin America over the past two decades has produced a wide literature on this form of authoritarianism, termed "bureaucratic authoritarianism."1 Following coups in Brazil (1964), Argentina (1966, 1976), Chile (1973), and Uruguay (1973), the prevailing political trend in Latin America appeared to be military authoritarian regimes, despite earlier analyses that had concluded that accelerated economic development in these countries would be associated with greater democratization. In contrast to the prior "caudillistic" dictatorships and the unstable succession of military intervention in politically unstable countries, the new military dictatorships were less personalistic, more effectively institutionalized, and emerged not in the most backward countries but rather in those at a relatively higher level of development. The bureaucratic authoritarian regimes are also distinct from interwar fascist regimes in that they are typically more technocratic than ideological, and they frequently involve collégial rule rather than the supremacy of an individual dictator enveloped in a cult of personal1 . The classic work is Guillermo O'Donnell, Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism: Studies in South American Politics Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press (1973, 1979). For more recent studies of this type of regime, see in particular David Collier et al, The New Authoritarianism in Latin America Princeton: Princeton University Press (1979). Gordon Richards is a postdoctoral associate at the University of Chicago, and is director of economic analysis at the National Association of Manufacturers. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author alone, and do not reflect the policy positions of the National Association of Manufacturers. The usual disclaimers apply. 155 156 SAIS REVIEW ity. A further dissimilarity from fascist regimes is that under bureaucratic authoritarianism, policies generally have led to the political demobilization of the public in a nonparty context rather than a popular mobilization through a single ruling party. Some scholars have viewed the new military authoritarianism as the emerging political model for Latin America. A range of works has identified the military regimes as essentially forward-looking or modernizing phenomena. Some studies emphasized the technocratic character of the regimes; more critical studies traced the vulnerability ofdemocracy to the exigencies of underdevelopment and found industrialization more likely to take place under authoritarian auspices. However, recent experience has disproved the prognosis that the military regimes would be able to perpetuate themselves in power indefinitely. By the early 1980s signs of political weakness in the military authoritarian regimes were increasingly evident. The Argentine dictatorship collapsed in the aftermath of the Falklands debacle, but even prior to this time the regime's stability was in doubt; in this respect, the military's decision to occupy the Falklands was partly motivated by domestic economic difficulties. Similar developments have occurred elsewhere. In late 1984 the Uruguayan military allowed an election in which a civilian president from the centrist Colorado party, Julio Sanguinetti, was returned to power. In Brazil, the candidate of the opposition and former prime minister, Tancredo Neves, won the presidency through the electoral college by building a coalition that included a substantial contingent of the government party. Neves' sudden death before taking office placed the future of civilian government in doubt inasmusch as his successor, Vice President Jose Sarney, did not enjoy his widespread support from both of Brazil's major political parties. However, as of this writing (May 1985), the military has renounced the option of intervention in the political process, while the Congress has approved popular election of the president, a move that it had previously rejected under military administration. In essence, what Neves accomplished even though he did not live to hold office was to restore the prestige of civilian rule and create a precedent for a return to democracy. While the Pinochet regime in Chile is still clinging to power, its hold clearly has become more tenuous and recently it has been able to sustain itself only through recourse to increased repression. This regime has confronted massive popular unrest and has been faced with an increasingly powerful opposition demanding the restoration of democracy. The one major concession that the regime made toward popular participation...

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: