Lots of scholars idealized the post-Cold War period, assuming that many authoritarian regimes were

transitioning toward democracy when it was actually not the case. The author, therefore, seeks to examine
the true nature of regime change by moving away from this idealization of the certain swing of these
regimes towards democracy. In this article, he deals with one type of hybrid regime in particular:
competitive authoritarianism (CA). In this kind of regime, it is precisely the formal democratic institutions,
considered as the main means of exercising political authority, which find themselves flouted and
ultimately do not meet the minimum conventional standards that constitute democracy. Unlike democratic
regimes, which also sometimes break the rules, CA regimes are at a different level because rules are broken
so often that it creates significant inequality between the government and the opposition forces. The fact
that elections are held does not mean that the basic principles of democracy are respected; on the contrary,
sometimes it even helps authoritarian regimes to stay in place ad maintain their power and legitimacy.
However, although CA regimes do not meet the criteria of full-fledged democratic regimes, they also do
not fully meet those of a purely authoritarian one, thus being in between these two. CA regimes use legal
and much more subtle means to persecute, harass and put pressure on the opposition but at the same time
provide an important channel through which the opposition can regain power or at least weaken the
existing autocratic leadership ( unlike « pseudo-democratic regimes »). In order to do so, there are four
areas of potential democratic contestation: 1) the electoral arena 2) the legislative arena; 3) the judicial
arena, and 4) the media. By resorting to various forms of legal persecution, CA regimes can also limit the
challenges posed by opposition forces without triggering massive protests or destroying their international
reputation. But this permanent and tolerated duality between democratic rule and autocratic methods
generates a climate of constant instability, and although the elimination of autocratic elites frees up space
for the opposition, it does not de facto lead to democratization ( see Albania, Zambia, Ukraine). CA
regimes are not a new phenomenon but have multiplied in recent years, which can be explained by the
difficulties of consolidating democratic and authoritarian regimes in the post-Cold War era, despite a global
wave of democratic optimism. However, although this period did not necessarily contribute to the
proliferation of democratic regimes, it certainly did not encourage the hardening of authoritarian ones
either. Periods of liberal hegemony (such as after the First World War) put some pressure on non-
democratic regimes to maintain international legitimacy. Through the evolution of communication and
control methods, authoritarian regimes are finding it more difficult to maintain themselves, thus creating
numerous types of non-democratic ones. The author insists on the importance of studying these emerging
non-democratic regimes to get out of the post-cold war democracy fantasy and understand the large range
of possible alternatives for this period's regimes. The international parameters of external influence,
extremely put forward by researchers to analyze regime change, do not necessarily allow a good
understanding of the relationship between the post-Cold War international environment and regime change.
The author offers us a new framework for analyzing it through Western influence and links, (« leverage and
linkage » effect). The linkage reinforces the effectiveness of the leverage effect, hence understanding the
different levels of leverage and linkage is essential to understanding cross-national variation in international
influence on democratization. When the linkage is dense and extensive, as in Latin America, international
pressure is powerful and constant, sometimes contributing to democratization despite unfavorable domestic
conditions, while weaker linkage reduces the degree of effectiveness of external pressure (see Middle East,
Southeast Asia, Soviet Union) and increase the influence of domestic factors that are more likely to
predominate. In the mixed case, i.e., where the linkage is weak but the leverage is strong (Africa), external
pressure is only partially effective and rarely results in democratization; democratizing pressure is
intermittent and limited. When the linkage is strong but leverage is low, this tends to create indirect
democratic pressure (governments will be particularly sensitive to international opinion). Through the
example of four countries, the author tries to illustrate the causal mechanisms of regime change through the
linkage ad leverage effect : Mexico and Slovakia (high linkage have contributed to democratization
although leverage is low in Mexico). Russia (linkage and leverage are low which severely limits the impact
of external democratic pressures, there is strong domestic control and little external control of authoritarian
power), and finally Zambia (leverage was high but linkage was low, weaker the authoritarian regime but
not enough to lead to democratization). As noted earlier, the democratizing effects of the post-Cold War
international environment are often overestimated, particularly because the influence of external democratic
forces has been severely limited, with an emphasis on multiparty elections but not on civil liberties or
equality of opportunity. Thus, although international influence played a significant role in weakening
authoritarian regimes, its impact on democratization was quickly curbed. The author hopes to open the eyes
of future studies dealing with the relative importance of.Domestic variables and international factors in
explaining the process of democratization. He points out that economic development plays along with civil
society contribute more and more to the process of potential democratization, although linkage is for him
probably the most important international cause of democratization in the post-Cold War era.