Electoral violence and the legacy of authoritarian rule in Kenya and Zambia
| Author | Kristine Höglund,Johan Brosché,Hanne Fjelde |
| Published date | 01 January 2020 |
| Date | 01 January 2020 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0022343319884983 |
| Subject Matter | Research Articles |
Electoral violence and the legacy
of authoritarian rule in Kenya and Zambia
Johan Brosche
´
Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University
Hanne Fjelde
Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University & Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO)
Kristine Ho
¨glund
Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University
Abstract
Why do the first multiparty elections after authoritarian rule turn violent in some countries but not in others? This
article places legacies from the authoritarian past at the core of an explanation of when democratic openings become
associated with electoral violence in multi-ethnic states, and complement existing research focused on the immediate
conditions surrounding the elections. We argue that authoritarian rule characterized by more exclusionary multi-
ethnic coalitions creates legacies that amplify the risk of violent elections during the shift to multiparty politics.
Through competitive and fragmented interethnic relations, exclusionary systems foreclose the forging of cross-ethnic
elite coalitions and make hostile narratives a powerful tool for political mobilization. By contrast, regimes with a
broad-based ethnic support base cultivate inclusive inter-elite bargaining, enable cross-ethnic coalitions, and reduce
incentives for hostile ethnic mobilization, which lower the risk of violent elections. We explore this argument by
comparing founding elections in Zambia (1991), which were largely peaceful, and Kenya (1992), with large-scale
state-instigated electoral violence along ethnic lines. The analysis suggests that the type of authoritarian rule created
political legacies that underpinned political competition and mobilization during the first multiparty elections, and
made violence a more viable electoral strategy in Kenya than in Zambia.
Keywords
authoritarianism, elections, ethnicity, Kenya, violence, Zambia
Introduction
The shift to multiparty politics in sub-Saharan Africa in
the early 1990s raised hopes for democratization across a
continent where most countries had limited experience
of competitive elections. The transition gave rise to
‘founding’ elections, viewed as critical junctures on the
path to democracy. In some of these elections, as in
Malawi and Benin, there were only isolated incidents
of violence, while electoral contests were far from peace-
ful in, for instance, Co
ˆte d’Ivoire and Nigeria. Why do
the first multiparty elections after authoritarian rule turn
violent in some countries but not in others?
We argue that an important step for understanding
this underexplored variation lies in the varying strategies
chosen by political leaders in how to consolidate political
support during authoritarian rule. The institutional
setup of the authoritarian regimes across much of Africa
looked similar, for example, in the dominance of a single
party. Yet, how leaders sought to retain the support of a
ruling coalition within the authoritarian framework dif-
fered significantly. One salient aspect is to what extent
Corresponding author:
kristine.hoglund@pcr.uu.se
Journal of Peace Research
2020, Vol. 57(1) 111–125
ªThe Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0022343319884983
journals.sagepub.com/home/jpr
To continue reading
Request your trial