They do. It is a nationalistic rhetoric, much like what we saw here as well. At the end of the day, the legitimacy comes from some kind of populist support. Very unfortunate turn of events.
I’m not deeply familiar with all the dynamics either. From what I can tell, the sitting government was democratically elected and passed a set of laws that are legitimately in effect per the laws of the land. Then a relatively small number of people used violence, widespread destruction, and intentional (illegal) disruption for over a year. Now the government is caving in to those forces that operated outside their Democratic process and laws. This is likely a strategy to secure votes for upcoming elections, but the optics of it looking like caving into terrorism makes the government look weak.
I think they wanted people to know exactly who they are. Not only for the separatists themselves. But of course, the country gets a free card to deny involvement.
For better and worse, this is pretty much what I'd expect. It's not a serious attempt to genuinely govern or otherwise make reasonable policy, it's sending up an ideological flag, and since the fundamental ideology is actually opposed to the idea of well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability...
Instead of actually doing anything serious about the regime, they have chosen to do meaningless stuff that only strengthens the military dictatorship regime. I wonder what kickbacks the politicians get from literally helping them.
That's very surreal. And would be funny if the situation wasn't so serious.
Can someone from that country or who knows what's going on give some insight?
On the face of it, seems like military leaders who don't want to give up control. Is it more complicated than that? Do they actually believe there will be some kind of revolt by one faction if she stays in power (or at least some excuse like that)? The article I saw was not very insightful.
Ah, I see. Looks like it's the personal position of one minister, there's nothing about widespread support for it in the populace or legislature. Nothing to see here, I guess.
Could be attributable to corruption inthe military. It all looks good on paper, so they went with it. They also failed to account for the spirit of the military, and the leaders seem to believe in some romanticized notion of greatness. Detached from real world.
What's surprising about that? I'm actually asking, not trying to provoke.
There are four years of precedent of the leadership specifically and intentionally dividing and radicalizing the nation to directly drive electoral support to maintain power. Cruelty to outside groups is historically a very effective means to consolidate power. This is completely in line with past behavior and will more than likely continue.
From what I've heard from locals.. the recent chemical explosion triggered general fear of wide-spread corruption and an impending economic coup d'état from nationalists who want to disrupt the current power.
reply