Abstract
Does the level of public support for democracy promotion tools vary with the characteristics of potential autocratic targets? We conduct an experimental conjoint design on a sample of 1,464 U.S. citizens that manipulates several core characteristics of potential autocratic targets. We then compare citizens’ preferences with the cross-national evidence testing the determinants of democracy promotion success. We find that respondents support the use of coercive measures (military action and sanctions) precisely in contexts where, according to comparative research, these instruments are unlikely to foster democratization: Oil-rich, exclusionary, personalistic regimes with no elections, and with no ties to the U.S. Conversely, the characteristics driving public support for the use of democracy aid are more consistent with those favoring effectiveness: Autocratic regimes with multi-party elections and with links to the West. These findings have important policy implications by contributing to understand the micro-foundations of target selection.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
