Military dictators are unusually willing to hand back power
The average military dictatorship lasts about five years, and its leader typically holds on for just three. Oddly, generals are more likely than other autocrats to negotiate an exit, because they can return to barracks and protect the army as an institution rather than risk it in a civil war.
In a military dictatorship an officer holds supreme power, usually the commander-in-chief or the head of a ruling junta. The modern form took shape in 19th-century Latin America, spread through Europe in the early 20th century, and surged again during the Cold War when the 1960s brought fresh juntas to Latin America, Asia and Africa. Their numbers may have dropped since the Cold War ended, according to some researchers.
Most arrive by coup, often when officers sense a threat to the armed forces themselves: budget cuts, meddling in promotions, or civilian interference. Public justifications tend to cite corruption, disorder or a communist menace, while private motives can include ambition, greed or factional rivalry. Young democracies are most exposed, since their institutions are fragile and civilian control of the army is not yet settled, and natural resources sharpen the temptation. Such takeovers almost always happen in peacetime; Kemalist Turkey was the one notable exception by 1980. For most officers the personal risk is small, because only the leader and top brass usually suffer if the regime falls.
Holding power is harder. Juntas struggle to build mass parties or civilian support, and the greatest danger to a military ruler is fellow officers, so one coup often breeds another. Leaders who last tend to build civilian or paramilitary forces to counterbalance the army. Elite disillusionment, rather than street protest, is the usual trigger for collapse, though foreign pressure or invasion can also end a regime.
Compared with other dictatorships, military regimes are more likely to democratise, especially when no single officer dominates. Economic growth, urbanisation and a rising middle class increase pressure for civilian rule, and a regime's legitimacy often rests on a promise to step aside. Handover brings its own problems: armies may keep ruling in the background, militarised police are hard to convert, and democracies that emerge from military rule typically record higher homicide rates than others.
Source: Military dictatorship
