Power vacuum
In political science and political history, the term power vacuum, also known as a power void, is an analogy between a physical vacuum to the political condition "when someone in a place of power, has lost control of something and no one has replaced them."[1] The situation can occur when a government has no identifiable central power or authority. The physical analogy suggests that in a power vacuum, other forces will tend to "rush in" to fill the vacuum as soon as it is created, perhaps in the form of an armed militia or insurgents, military coup, warlord or dictator. The term is also often used in organized crime when a crime family becomes vulnerable to competition.[2]
Hereditary or statutory order of succession or effective succession planning are orderly ways to resolve questions of succession to positions of power. When such methods are unavailable, such as in failed dictatorships or civil wars, a power vacuum arises, which prompts a power struggle entailing political competition, violence, or (usually) both. A power vacuum can also occur after a constitutional crisis in which large portions of the government resign or are removed, creating unclear succession.
Historical examples
[edit]Historic examples include the aftermath of the assassination of Julius Caesar, the Time of Troubles in the Tsardom of Russia, the defeat of France in the Franco-Prussian War, the Mexican Revolution after the Porfiriato, the Russian Civil War in the aftermath of World War I, and the decrease in power of Great Britain and France in the Middle East after the Suez Crisis.
China
[edit]China is the first country still existing to have been united other than Egypt, and has had repeated power vacuums throughout its history. China was first unified under emperor Qin Shi Huang in 221 BCE, ushering in more than two millennia in which China was governed by one or more imperial dynasties. From the start, China has experienced power vacuums after dynasties have been toppled, usually resulting in civil wars between different factions vying to form the next dynasty or political regime. These have included but are not limited to the Warring States period (475-221 BC), Three Kingdoms (220-280 AD), the Manchu conquest of China (1618-1683 AD), and the Chinese Civil War (1927-1949 AD).[3]
During the course of the Ming treasure voyages (1405–1433), the Chinese Ming empire was the dominant political and military force within the Indian Ocean.[4] However, in 1433, the Chinese government withdrew their treasure fleet and thus left a large void within the Indian Ocean.[4]
Contemporary examples
[edit]In 2003, when the United States led a coalition to oust Saddam Hussein in the Iraq War, the absence of an all-out Iraqi opposition force at war with government forces meant that once the Ba'ath Party was removed, no local figures were on hand to immediately assume the now vacant administerial posts. For this reason, Paul Bremer was appointed by the United States government as the interim head of state to oversee the transition.[5]
In other western-led interventions such as in Kosovo (1999) and Libya (2011) where the initial claim of justification in each case was a humanitarian matter, there had been active opposition fighting on the ground to oust the relevant governments (in the case of Kosovo, this meant removal of state forces from the desired territory rather than ousting the government itself). Subsequently, successor entities were immediately effective in Libya and Kosovo.
Power vacuums often occur in failed states sometimes referred to as Fragile states where the state has lost the power to prevent its citizens from forming states within states, such as in post-communist Moldova's Transnistria. The ongoing war in Sudan is an example of a power vacuum in the aftermath of the Sudanese revolution.[6]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ "Power Vacuum". Cambridge English Dictionary. 2010. Archived from the original on October 10, 2010.
- ^ "Mob, murder and the Hamilton connection". The Hamilton Spectator. thespec.com. 16 November 2018.
- ^ White, Matthew (November 7, 2011). The Great Big Book of Horrible Things: The Definitive Chronicle of History's 100 Worst Atrocities. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0393081923.
- ^ a b Finlay, Robert (1992). "Portuguese and Chinese Maritime Imperialism: Camoes's Lusiads and Luo Maodeng's Voyage of the San Bao Eunuch". Comparative Studies in Society and History. 34 (2): 225–241. doi:10.1017/S0010417500017667. JSTOR 178944. S2CID 144362957.
- ^ Memo to Bremer from Office of General Counsel, CPA dated 22 May 2003, Retrieved February 28, 2014 Archived 13 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ "100 days of conflict in Sudan: A timeline". Al Jazeera. 24 July 2023. Archived from the original on 28 September 2023. Retrieved 28 September 2023.