Turbulent waters in the Maldives
If every story has two sides, this one has them worlds apart. On one side we have a recently ousted president who is crying “coup”. He happens to be the first leader elected after the end of a lengthy dictatorship, but could not implement reforms, got the boot and now demands new elections.
On the other side we have his vice president, who climbed to power as soon as the boss left. Accused of being a puppet of forces loyal to the old regime, he says there was no coup and decides not to hold elections for the time being.
This is happening in the Maldives, and the only thing clear is how fragile the country’s infant democracy is. It all started with a script that is now familiar: A dictator, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, was overthrown after three decades of rule with multiparty elections in 2008. A young activist, Mohamed Nasheed, was then elected with 54% of the vote. Masses are jubilant, the outside world applauds.
Now turn to 2012: after disputes with powerful judges (allegedly loyal to the old dictator) and street protests, Nasheed resigned in a press conference on February 7th. He later said he was forced to do so at gunpoint and claims he was the victim of a coup. The vice president takes over, and the Judiciary issues an order for the former president’s arrest. To complete the picture, the rise of Islamic forces starts to worry the West.
Hopefully the second part of the script will not become commonplace. There are many doubts about what is actually happening in the islands. The process that led to Nasheed’s overture presents itself as a mass revolt, but many suspect it was orchestrated by supporters of the old regime – “looks much like an old-fashioned coup”, writes “The Economist”. Assistant secretary of State Robert Blake just flew to the Maldives this Saturday and supported the government’s decision not to hold elections, arguing that the country is not ready for them. But he got the new president to agree to an independent probe into the facts.
Of course no one wants to compare the Maldives with any other country in transition, but it is a dark reminder of how long and dangerous the path ahead is after a revolution. “Dictatorships don’t always die when the dictator leaves office”, wrote Nasheed the other day. Don’t we know it. As Barak would say: we gotta have patience.
1 Comment
Leave a comment
Sign up for our mailing list
Posts by Region
Posts by Topic
Recent Comments
Archives
- May 2012 (3)
- April 2012 (9)
- March 2012 (16)
- February 2012 (20)
- January 2012 (13)
- December 2011 (10)
- November 2011 (14)
- October 2011 (19)
- September 2011 (25)
- August 2011 (10)
- July 2011 (16)
- June 2011 (14)
- May 2011 (14)
- April 2011 (16)
- March 2011 (20)
- February 2011 (15)
- January 2011 (24)
- December 2010 (16)
- November 2010 (24)
- October 2010 (27)
- September 2010 (17)
- August 2010 (42)
- July 2010 (40)
- June 2010 (65)
- May 2010 (72)
- April 2010 (38)
- March 2010 (18)
- February 2010 (32)
- January 2010 (46)
- December 2009 (45)
- November 2009 (38)
- October 2009 (15)
- September 2009 (24)
- August 2009 (11)
- February 2009 (1)
Who we like
- AfPak Channel
- CIPE Blog
- Countries at the Crossroads
- Cyrus Samii
- Democracy Arsenal
- Democracy Dialogue
- Democracy Digest
- Democracy Resource Center
- EITI Blog
- ElectionGuide.org
- Fruits and Votes
- Global Voices Online
- One Blog
- Open Budgets Blog
- Open Democracy
- Policy and Power
- Progressive Realist
- Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Blogs
- Space for Transparency
- The Coming Prosperity
- The Democratic Piece
- The International Jurist
- The Kaufmann Governance Post
- United Nations Democracy Fund
- Zunia.org





Tough call. Seems a lot more murky than what’s happening in Egypt or Russia. This reminds me more of the mess in Honduras not too long ago. It wasn’t clear at all to me whether or not it was a coup because of Honduras’s dysfunctional Constitution. He said-she said stories are tough to decipher in countries with weak institutions.