When 'Democracy' is Just a Military Uniform in Disguise
What the byline won't tell you: The idea of a military junta orchestrating an 'election' to legitimize its rule isn't some novel political innovation. It's a classic, and rather theatrical, political maneuver designed less for internal consumption and more for external optics. FIRST INSTANCE: The Legacy of Controlled Transitions The pattern of military forces orchestrating 'democratic' transitions
to maintain power is as old as the concept of military rule itself. A particularly infamous example occurred in South Vietnam in 1967 , when the military junta held elections that many observers, including the US press, knew were rigged. General Nguyễn Văn Thiệu, a military strongman, 'won' a presidential election with a suspiciously low but sufficient margin amidst widespread allegations of voter
intimidation and fraud. The exercise was primarily to present a facade of legitimacy to a skeptical international audience, particularly the United States, that was underwriting the war effort (Associated Press, 1967). REPETITIONS: A Global Encore This same playbook has seen countless reprises. In Nigeria, 1993 , General Ibrahim Babangida annulled presidential elections widely believed to have
been won by Moshood Abiola, citing 'irregularities' then installing an interim government run by a loyalist. The objective was clear: maintain military influence behind a civilian front, without the messiness of actual democratic outcomes (Human Rights Watch, 1994). Faster forward to Egypt, 2014 , where Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, after orchestrating a military coup in 2013, 'won' the presidency with