Meaning and importance 1

Meaning and importance of comparative politics

excerpted from: Kesselman, M., Krieger, J. & Joseph, W.A. (2005). Introduction to comparative politics. 4th edition. USA:
Wadsworth Cengage Learning

This module clarifies not only the meaning and main concern of comparative politics but also its importance. It
also briefly describes the techniques used in making comparisons between or among states.
After reading the excerpted materials, you should be able to:
a. explain the rationale for comparative politics
b. demonstrate your understanding of the techniques of comparison
Key Concepts to Understand:
comparative politics dependent variable independent variable political legitimacy state

Comparative politics is a subfield within the academic discipline of political science as

well as a method or approach to the study of politics. The subject matter of comparative politics
is the domestic politics of countries or peoples. xxx Comparative politics involves comparing
domestic political institutions, processes, policies, conflicts, and attitudes in different countries;
xxx
xxx Much of the world’s political activity continues to occur within state borders, and
comparisons of domestic politics, institutions, and processes enable us to understand critical
features that distinguish one country’s politics from another. Furthermore, we believe that,
despite increased international economic integration (a key aspect of globalization), national
states are the fundamental building blocks in structuring political activity. xxx
The comparative approach principally analyzes similarities and differences among
countries by focusing on selected institutions and processes. As students of comparative politics
(we call ourselves comparativists), we believe that we cannot make reliable statements about
most political situations by looking at only one case. xxx
Comparativists often analyze political institutions or processes by looking at two or more
cases that are selected to isolate their common and contrasting features. The analysis
involves comparing similar aspects of politics in more than one country. For example, a
comparativist might analyze the similarities and differences in the executive branches of
government in the United States, Britain, and Canada.
Some comparative political studies take a thematic approach and analyze broad issues,
such as the causes and consequences of nationalist movements or revolutions in different
countries. Comparative studies may also involve comparisons of an institution, policy, or
process through time, in one or several countries. xxx
xxx Political scientists often compare developments in different cities, regions, provinces,
or states. Comparative analysis can also focus on specific institutions in different countries,
such as the legislature, executive, political parties, social movements, or court systems, as well
as specific processes and policies. xxx Countries comprise distinct, politically defined territories
that encompass political institutions, cultures, economies, and ethnic and other social identities.
Although often highly divided by internal conflicts, countries have historically been the most
important source of a people’s collective political identity, and they are the major arena for
organized political action in the modern world.
Within a given country, the state is almost always the most powerful cluster of
institutions. But just what is the state? xxx in comparative politics, the state refers to the key
political institutions responsible for making, implementing, enforcing, and adjudicating important
 Meaning and importance 2

policies in a country. Thus, we use phrases such as the “German state” and the “Mexican state.”
In many ways, the state is synonymous with what is often called the “government.”
The most important state institutions are the national executive—usually, the president
and/or prime minister and the cabinet—but in some cases, the executive includes the
Communist Party leader (such as in China), the head of a military government (as in Nigeria
until 1999), or the supreme religious leader (as in the Islamic Republic of Iran). Other key state
institutions include the military, police, administrative bureaucracy, the legislature, and courts.
States claim, usually with considerable success, the right to issue rules—notably, laws,
administrative regulations, and court decisions—that are binding for people within the country.
Even democratic states—in which top officials are chosen by procedures that authorize all
citizens to participate—can survive only if they can preserve enforcement (or coercive) powers
both internally and with regard to other states and external groups that may threaten them. A
number of countries have highly repressive states whose political survival depends largely on
military and police powers. But even in such states, long-term stability requires that the ruling
regime have some measure of political legitimacy; that is, a significant segment of the
citizenry (in particular, more influential citizens and groups) must believe that the state is entitled
to command compliance from those who live under its rule. Political legitimacy is greatly
affected by the state’s ability to deliver the goods through satisfactory economic performance
and an acceptable distribution of economic resources. Moreover, in the contemporary period,
legitimacy seems to require that states represent themselves as democratic in some fashion,
whether or not they are in fact. xxx
The fact that states are the fundamental objects of analysis in comparative politics does
not mean that all states are the same. Indeed, the organization of state institutions varies
widely, and these differences have a powerful impact on political, economic, and social life.
Hence, the country studies in this book devote considerable attention to variations in institutions
of governance, participation, and representation—along with their political implications.
xxx Because countries are the basic building blocks in politics and because states are
the most significant political organizations and actors, these are the two critical units for
comparative analysis. The comparativist seeks to measure and hopefully explain similarities and
differences among countries or states. One influential approach in comparative politics involves
developing causal theories—hypotheses that can be expressed formally in a causal mode: “If X
happens, then Y will be the result.” Such theories include factors (the independent variables,
symbolized by X) that are believed to influence some outcome (the dependent variable,
symbolized by Y) to be explained. For example, it is commonly argued that if a country’s
economic pie shrinks, conflict among groups for resources will intensify. This hypothesis
suggests what is called an inverse correlation between variables: as X varies in one direction, Y
varies in the opposite direction. As the total national economic product (X) decreases, then
political and social conflict over economic shares (Y) increases. This relationship might be
tested by statistical analysis of a very large number of cases, a project facilitated in recent years
by the creation of data banks that include extensive historical and contemporary data. Another
way to study this issue would be to focus on one or several country cases and analyze how the
relevant relationships have varied historically. Even when explanation does not involve the
explicit testing of hypotheses (and often it does not), comparativists try to identify similarities
and differences among countries and to discover significant patterns. xxx

(copied from: Sodaro, M.J. (2008). Comparative politics: A global introduction. 3rd edition. NY: McGraw-Hill)
The purposes of studying comparative politics xxx:
► to widen our understanding of politics in other countries
► to increase our appreciation of the advantages and disadvantages of our own political
system and to enable us to learn from other countries
 Meaning and importance 3

► to develop a more sophisticated understanding of politics in general, including the

nature of democracy and non-democratic governments, the relationships between
governments and people, and other concepts and processes
► to help understand the linkages between domestic affairs and international affairs
► to help us see the relationship between politics and such fields as science,
technology, the environment, public health, law, business, religion, ethnicity, culture
and others
► to enable us to become more informed citizens, so that we can more effectively
develop our own political opinions, participate in political life, evaluate the actions and
proposals of political leaders, and make our own political decisions and electoral
choices
► to sharpen our own critical-thinking skills by applying scientific logic and coherent
argumentation to our understanding of political phenomena

This video, 101 Introduction to comparative politics categorizing the world

Essay:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_W8cuOVrEE will supplement what you just read.
1. Why is political science interested in the comparison of states?
While this second video, Why Major in Political Science?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfwUott_xxk, justifies why you are majoring in political science,
there are a lot of ideas that are relevant to comparative politics. Also, watch it for inspiration. If you
were thrown by your significant others into this field of political science, this video will help you
appreciate the field you are thrown into. Only when you appreciate the field of political science that you
will be willing and determined to do the tasks demanded by the different modules for this course and
the other political science courses that you enrolled this trimester.
2. What are the weaknesses of categorizing the world into these labels: (a) first, second, third
world; (b) global North – global South; and, (c) democratic-authoritarian rule
Enhancement Activity:
It is time to make a self-evaluation of what you understood.

Define the following terms:

1. State

2. Political legitimacy
3. In what way would comparative politics be relevant to the future career that you are
aspiring for?
3. Comparative politics

Enumeration:
List down the different ways by which a comparativist can compare different states.
 Meaning and importance 4

After doing a self-evaluation, you can now relax and enjoy the reading material below.

Energy and Politics

The world’s hunger for energy resources like oil and natural gas is insatiable. These assets are
finite in quantity, and the fact that only a few countries have abundant supplies of petroleum or
gas makes for very close interdependencies between the resource-rich supplies and the
countries that must import their energy supplies. xxx The imbalance between the energy-
exporting countries and energy-importing countries can sometimes lead to sharp political
frictions. In some cases, oil-exporting countries can exert external influences on the internal
economic, and sometimes political, conditions of oi-importing countries. The relationship
between Russia and Ukraine provides an example.
Russia and Ukraine. When the Soviet Union disintegrated at the end of 1991, Russia
and the other fourteen "union republics" that constituted the USSR became independent
countries. The second largest of these constituent republics after Russia was Ukraine, a
largely Slavic country with a thousand-year history of interaction with the Russians marked by
close cooperation as well as intense conflict. After Ukraine became independent, it began the
difficult transition from a communist dictatorship to a new democracy, but corruption and abuses
of power became commonplace. When Leonid Kuchma was re-elected Ukraine's president in
1999, his campaign was marred by a number of illegal machinations. Subsequently President
Kuchma was caught on tape ordering the murder of a prominent pro-democracy journalist who
was critical of his administration. By the time the 2004 elections rolled around, many Ukrainians
were eager for change.
Because Kuchma was barred by the constitution from seeking a third term, one of his
cronies, Viktor Yanukovich (yah-noo-KOH-vihch), ran in his place. Yanukovich's chief opponent

was Viktor Yushchenko (YOOSH-chehn-kaw), a vocal proponent of democratic accountability

and the rule of law. As polls showed rising support for Yushchenko, the Kuchma-Yanukovich
team pulled out all the stops to block their opponent's election. In one of several assassination
attempts, state security agents peppered Yushchenko with dioxin, a poison that almost killed
the candidate and permanently disfigured his face. The incident infuriated Yushchenko's
supporters, and the crowds that thronged his campaign stops grew larger.
Interest in the election was by no means limited to Ukrainians. With democracy on the
line in Ukraine, the United States and the European Union (EU) denounced the Kuchma
government's attempts to harass Yushchenko. The United States was incensed at Kuchma,
not only because of his assassination schemes, but also because he had sold military
equipment to Saddam Hussein. The EU had its own stake in Ukraine. It had recently expanded
its membership from 15 West European countries to 25 countries that included eight former
communist states in Central and Eastern Europe. Many Europeans regarded Ukraine as a
potential EU member, but only if its government were solidly democratic. For its part, Russia's
government under President Vladimir Putin openly sided with the Kuchma-Yanukovich forces.
Putin was determined to retain Russia's traditional influence in Ukraine, if not through outright
subjugation as in the past, then at least by making sure that Ukraine was governed by leaders
who regarded Russia as their country's principal partner and took Russia's interests into
account.
When the state electoral commission announced preliminary results showing that
the Russian-backed Yanukovich had defeated the pro-Western Yushchenko in a head-to-
head runoff election by barely 3 percent, an uproar followed. Yushchenko's supporters
found indisputable evidence of fraudulent vote counts, along with incriminating tapes
proving a government conspiracy to misrepresent the actual vote. Millions of Ukrainians
staged daily demonstrations and demanded a fair recount or new elections. Many waved
flags and banners in bright orange, the official color of the Yushchenko campaign. The
 Meaning and importance 5

"Orange Revolution" was under way.

The enormous popular upheaval in Yushchenko's favor could not be denied: Ukraine's

Supreme Court invalidated the election results and mandated a new runoff contest. Money
and campaign advice from American and EU sources poured into Yushchenko's campaign.
while Russia provided assistance to the Kuchma-Yanukovich camp-each side providing
graphic examples of external influences on Ukraine's internal politics. On December 26,
Yushchenko defeated Yanukovich by winning 51.99 percent of the vote. The Orange
Revolution had triumphed.
President Putin's disappointment at Yushchenko's victory did not die down easily.
In early 2006, less than three months before crucial parliamentary elections in Ukraine,
Putin's government announced that it was raising Ukraine's gas bill by 400 percent. Russia
increased the pressure by cutting back gas deliveries to Ukraine, and to European
countries as well, at the height of a frigid winter. (Russia supplied 30 percent of Ukraine's
natural gas, and about one-fourth of Europe's supply.) Concerned about Russia's use of
energy as a political weapon, European governments convinced Putin to back down: he
resumed gas exports and cut a deal with Ukraine limiting the price increase to 90 percent.
But the agreement obliged the Ukrainian government to purchase the gas through a Swiss
company rumored to be under the control of corrupt Russian business magnates and
crime figures. In the end, it appeared that President Putin had succeeded in heightening
Ukraine's vulnerability to Russian energy pressures.
Now let's take a look at external-internal relationships from another vantage point: How
can internal conditions within energy-exporting countries have external effects on importing
countries? As anyone who drives a car or pays for home heating fuel knows, the prices for
these indispensable products have risen appreciably in recent years. At the start of 1999, the
world market price for crude oil was only slightly higher than $10 per barrel. In 2006, it
frequently exceeded $70 a barrel, approaching $80 during the conflagration involving Israel
and Lebanon. The price of home heating oil in the United States jumped from a national
average of $1.13 per gallon in 2002 to $2.33 per gallon by the end of 2005, with still higher
prices to follow." To some extent, these price hikes are attributable to rising energy demands in
the world's two largest countries, China and India, whose hot economies require ever-
increasing fuel imports from abroad. As world demand for energy goes up, oil companies -
whether government owned or privately owned - can get away with charging higher prices. But
energy price increases also depend in part on fears about the reliability of supplies in countries
that are, or could become, politically unstable. Some of the main oil-exporting countries in the
world with a potential for instability include Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, the
United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela xxx
Algeria. After more than 130 years as a French colony, Algeria achieved its
independence in 1962. Since then it has been governed mainly by a succession of military
leaders and military-backed civilian dictators. Most of them have had little interest in
democracy. Elections to the presidency and legislature have tended to be manipulated by the
main ruling party. By the late 1980s, as the government began to permit a bit more democracy,
the chief opposition to the ruling clique was a collection of Islamic groups organized as the
Islamic Salvation Front. Some of these Islamic groups were relatively moderate, but others
were more extreme in their assertion of fundamentalist Islamic doctrines at variance with
democratic freedoms and practices. In the first round of parliamentary elections held in 1991,
the Islamic Salvation Front won 188 seats in the national legislature and appeared poised to
win a commanding two-thirds majority of seats in the second round. Rather than allow this
Islamic victory, the military staged a coup at the start of 1992 and canceled the second round
of voting. Islamic groups then went on the offensive, and a bloody civil war ensued. It is
estimated that, over the course of the next ten years or so, about 150,000 Algerians were killed
as the more extreme Islamic elements engaged in wholesale massacres and urban terrorism,
 Meaning and importance 6

while militias loyal to the government went on killing sprees against the oppositionists. In 1999,
Abdelaziz Bouteflika (boo-tah-FLEE-kah), a former foreign minister with close ties to the
military, won the presidency in an election marred by fraud and the withdrawal of the leading
challengers. Bouteflika immediately sought to calm the country through a "civil harmony" law
granting amnesty to Islamic fighters who were willing to reject violence. The civil war gradually
abated, though sporadic outbursts of fighting killed thousands during the next several years. In
2004, Bouteflika was returned to power in an election deemed relatively clean by official
international observers. His government announced a new amnesty program for Islamic
militants peaceful than it had been in many years, and oil exports to the United States and
other countries increased significantly after 2000. But widespread unemployment and other
problems persisted, nurturing opposition to the governing elite that could ignite more instability
in the future. And with about 700 armed Islamic extremists still at large, a new eruption of
violence could jeopardize Algeria's reliability as one of the world's leading oil suppliers.
Iran. When Iran's democratically elected prime minister engineered the government's
takeover of a largely British-owned oil company in the 1950s, Britain and the United States
forcibly removed him from power and replaced him with the shah, who was the son of the
country's former ruler. The shah established a powerful dictatorship, but a succession of U.S.
presidents nevertheless supported him as a key ally in the oil-rich Persian Gulf region. The
United States continued to support the shah until a revolution led by the Islamic cleric Ayatollah
Khomeini (ho-may-NEE) toppled him in 1979. From the start, Iran's Islamic Republic was
militantly anti-American-and anti-Western-and it has remained so. The United States no longer
imports oil from that country.
In recent years, the Iranian government's attempt to build nuclear weapons has
seriously aggravated its relations with the United States and Europe. While the Western allies
sought to block Iran's nuclear bid through diplomacy and the prospect of economic sanctions,
hints of possible U.S. military action against Iran provoked defiant responses from Iran's
leaders, including threats of raising oil prices still higher or cutting back exports to Europe.
When Iran test-fired a missile in the spring of 2006, the price of oil futures on world markets
jumped $2 a barrel. Iran's support for Hezbollah, the militant Islamic group that launched
rockets at Israel from Lebanon in 2006, contributed to raising oil prices even higher. Iran has
the second-largest share of the world's total known petroleum reserves (11.1 percent of the
total in 2004), and concerns about the availability of oil from Iran's largely isolated Islamic
government inevitably have a chilling effect on the global petroleum market.
Iraq. When Saddam Hussein ordered his forces to invade Kuwait in 1990, one of his
principal motives was to gain control over Kuwait's valuable oil fields. The United States and
its main allies condemned the unprovoked attack as a brazen violation of international law.
They feared that if Saddam were allowed to get away with this move, he might be tempted to
invade Saudi Arabia next. Iraq has 9.7 percent of the world's total known petroleum reserves,
the third-largest share in the world. Control over Kuwait (which has 8.3 percent of the world's
proven oil reserves) and Saudi Arabia (22.1 percent) would have made Saddam the proprietor
of 40 percent of the world's oil reserves, allowing him to virtually dictate international oil prices.
The Western allies - and other countries as well - regarded such a prospect as unacceptable;
together they formed an anti-Iraq coalition consisting of more than thirty countries. Coalition
forces ejected Iraqi troops from Kuwait in 1991. Subsequently, an "oil for food" program was
established under the United Nations that allowed Saddam's government to sell oil on world
markets, while requiring it to use most of the proceeds to feed the Iraqi population and take
care of its health needs and other vital requirements. The UN program was riddled with
corruption, however, as detailed by an official investigation panel."
Some critics of the 2003 U.S.-Ied invasion of Iraq have charged that the Bush
administration's primary aim all along was to gain control of Iraq's oil wealth. Whether or not this

claim was true, it cannot be doubted that Iraq's oil will play a vital role not only inside Iraq but
 Meaning and importance 7

around the world as well. Proceeds from oil revenues can help pay for the country's post-
invasion rebuilding and modernization. And a reliable flow of oil from Iraq at reasonable prices
may have a stabilizing effect on world prices. Since the invasion, antiquated oilfield equipment
and periodic attacks on pipelines by anti-American insurgents have made Iraq's oil exports fall
below their 2003 level, resulting in a shortfall of 2 to 5 million barrels of oil a day. Whatever the
future may bring, whoever controls Iraq's government is bound to have a palpable effect
on the international energy market.
Kuwait. Since the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91, Kuwait's leaders have drawn closer to
the United States. In 2003 they permitted U.S. forces to base most of their contingents on
Kuwaiti territory prior to the invasion of Iraq. Since 1992, Kuwait's monarchical government
under the AI-Sabah family has allowed the national parliament to play a role in overruling some
of the decisions taken by the royal family, and the leadership has recently granted women full
voting rights and other civil rights. To date, the government's pro-Western orientation and its
ability to export large quantities of oil have made it a reliable source of energy in the global
marketplace. Even so, its precarious location makes its long-term outlook dependent to some
extent on what happens in Iraq.
Nigeria. A British colony from the nineteenth century until 1960, Nigeria has only
recently returned to the path of democracy after more than thirty years of military dictatorship.
From the mid-1960s until 1999, military rulers were responsible for massive corruption and
government inefficiency, squandering an estimated $280 billion in oil revenues. The election of
General Olusegun Obasanjo (o-BAH-san-jo) as president in 1999 opened the way to the
restoration of democracy. Despite his avowed commitment to the rule of law and political
equality, Obasanjo had a difficult time establishing democratic practices in a country seething
with ethnic and religious conflict and suffering from endemic poverty. Long-standing animosities
between Muslims and Christians periodically exploded into violence, and the acute
maldistribution of Nigeria's national income (including its oil revenues) among its various
regions and its 250 ethnolinguistic groups exacerbated socioeconomic disparities.
Not long after assuming power, Obasanjo's government announced the elimination of
state subsidies for domestically consumed fuel. The subsidies had kept energy prices relatively
low for Nigerian citizens, but they contributed to the government's budget deficits. The removal
of the subsidies sparked nationwide strikes and protests. In 2003 violence escalated in the
oil-rich Niger Delta, where an ethnically based militia warned that it would kill foreign oil workers

in the region if its demands for local self-rule and a greater share of oil income were not given
to its core ethnic group. The turbulence resulted in a 40 percent reduction in oil production in
the region. In 2006 the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) kidnapped
foreign oil workers and shut down part of an oil facility, among other violent activities. Nigeria's
oil exports fell by 25 percent and world oil prices spiked ever higher as a result. With
presidential elections set for 2007, Nigeria's internal turmoil was expected to intensify.
Saudi Arabia. Thanks to its control over the world's largest petroleum reserves, Saudi
Arabia is a principal energy supplier for many countries around the world. In 2004 it banked
more than $100 billion in oil revenues. Ever since the country was constituted as a unified state
in 1932, it has been governed by the large AI Saud family, which has based its rule on a fairly
strict interpretation of Islamic law. Despite the fact that this monarchical regime is about as far
removed as any political system can be from democracy, with practically no electoral or civil
liberties guaranteed to the citizenry, Saudi leaders have been cultivated by every American
president from Franklin D. Roosevelt to the Bushes, as well as by the leaders of other
democracies around the world. In recent years the foundations of Saudi rule have been rocked
by terrorism. Osama bin Laden, who came from one of Saudi Arabia's wealthiest and most
influential families, has made it clear that his ultimate aim is to bring down AI Saud rule and
replace it with an even more stringent-and more anti-Westem-Islamic state. Fifteen of the
nineteen perpetrators of September 11 came from Saudi Arabia, and Saudi donors have
 Meaning and importance 8

provided millions of dollars in contributions to al Qaeda.

In 2003 and 2004, terrorists stepped up their attacks on foreign oil companies and
other targets in Saudi Arabia, driving up world oil prices. In early 2006 a daring attempt by
suicide bombers to blow up the world's largest oil-processing plant was foiled at the last minute
by Saudi security forces. The plant processes two-thirds of the country's oil and affects 10
percent of the world's oil supplies. Fears of such attacks in the future instantly raised world oil
prices by more than $2 a barrel. Any disruption in the flow of Saudi Arabia's oil to the outside
world is bound to cause a major escalation in the prices the world must pay for petroleum
products.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE). The UAE, which possesses 8.2 percent of the
world's known oil reserves, is a confederation of seven small Persian Gulf states. Governed by
conservative emirs who have shown little inclination to introduce democratic rights and
liberties, the UAE has been internally stable. Nevertheless, the UAE's location in the Middle
East makes it vulnerable to regional conflicts. Prior to September 11, terrorist organizations
used banks and financial services in the UAE, but since then the confederation has generally
complied with U.S. requests to stop these practices. When the U.S. government made a deal
with a UAE company to provide security for seven American ports in 2006, vocal opposition to
the agreement in the port cities and in Congress, based on fears of potential terrorism,
pressured the UAE to cancel the deal.
Venezuela. From the early 1960s to the late 1990s, Venezuela was governed mainly
by civilian parties that did little to restrain official corruption or relieve acute poverty. In 1999
Hugo Chavez was elected president on a platform a more equitable economic policy. Upon
assuming the presidency, Chavez immediately set to work reorganizing Venezuela's main
political institu tions. A new constitution that was approved by the voters in a referendum
allowed Chavez to restructure the national legislature and the Supreme Court, reducing their
independence and subjecting them to his leadership. Although Chavez enjoyed broad support
in the reshaped legislature and among millions of Venezuela's poor, his opponents mounted a
campaign to remove him from the presidency. Elements of the military managed to oust him in
2002, but Chavez returned to office two days later with the help of his backers in the military
ranks. Massive demonstrations and a 62-day strike staged by the president's opposition in
2003 failed to unseat him, and a recall referendum in 2004 resulted in yet another Chavez
victory. Chavez retaliated by stepping up the prosecution of opposition leaders, including
political figures and human rights activists.
Chavez has been openly critical of the United States, denouncing U.S. hegemony in
the global economic system and lambasting the invasion of Iraq. Despite these frictions, the
United States was still a major importer of Venezuela's oil. With 6.5 percent of the world's oil
reserves-the sixth-largest supply in the world-Venezuela has reaped windfall income gains as
world oil prices have risen in recent years. Chavez has injected large infusions of these oil
profits into social services for Venezuela's poor, firming up his base of support in this large
segment of the population. Nevertheless, Chavez has accused the U.S. government of
undermining his regime and has threatened to cut off oil exports to the United States. In 2006
his government called on the oil-producing countries to cut their exports by up to a million
barrels a day. In advance of the 2006 presidential elections, he ordered trials for political
oppositionists on trumped-Up criminal charges. But as expected, Chavez handily won re-
election in December 2006, winning 56.2 percent of the popular vote. The possibility of more
instability in Venezuela may affect its reliability as an oil supplier in the international economy.
 Meaning and importance 9

Assignment:
Do this by pair. Choose a classmate you can work with. You can use
facebook messenger or any apps that will facilitate your collaboration.
The worksheet is given in the next page. Save it with the file name
bearing your names: Family name-Family name Mod 1 Assignment. If
your family name is the same with another classmate, indicate your first
name.
Names: ____________________________________ ________________________________
PS 103 Module 1 Assignment
Write n.d. if there is no relevant data for a particular state along a given basis.

ENERGY AND POLITICS

BASES UKRAINE ALGERIA IRAN IRAQ KUWAIT NIGERIA SAUDI ARABIA UNITED ARAB VENEZUELA
EMIRATES

Internal Factor/s
that Affected the
Country’s
Democratization

External Factor/s
that Affected the
Country’s
Democratization

Internal Factor that

Triggered Foreign
Intervention

Internal Factor that

Affected or may
Affect the Prices of
Oil