In order for a change in leadership to occur, it is necessary to satisfy an array of internal and external factors. When it comes to leaders who make it into power, the predominant necessity is for them to be perceived by citizens as being “less bad” than those currently in power and for them to be acceptable to numerous external veto players
Comparative experiences in the replacing of long-standing political leaders in the region have numerous differences, but also individual similarities. Viewed from a regional perspective, the possibility to change a government lies in the openness of political and electoral competition, i.e., in opportunities to participate equally in political and electoral processes. Conditionally speaking, the “old elites” prevent the creation of room for new leaders and parties to emerge, thereby preserving the positions they’ve already acquired. Instability, uncertainty, inexperience and suspicions of foreign meddling in the sovereignty of the state are presented to the citizens as traps of changing and striding towards something. A number of internal and external factors need to be satisfied in order to change the leadership. In order for a change in leadership to occur, it is necessary to satisfy an array of internal and external factors. When it comes to leaders who make it into power, the predominant necessity is for them to be perceived by citizens as being “less bad” than those currently in power and for them to be acceptable to numerous external veto players, with context also playing a significant role.
Systems with open competition, like that of Slovenia, have a high level of personnel replacement within their frameworks, while closed competition systems like Montenegro’s are very difficult for new leaders to penetrate and for new politicians to develop
Under the aforementioned circumstances, the space in which new leaders operate is very constricted, as there is a need for them to present themselves to citizens as being independent and legitimate players, while on the other hand they must strike a balance with external demands and influences. Systems with open competition, like that of Slovenia, have a high level of personnel replacement within their frameworks, while closed competition systems like Montenegro’s are very difficult for new leaders to penetrate, and thus the potential for new politicians to develop lies in spontaneous movements and individuals who return from living abroad. Existing parties provide almost no space for new personalities to build themselves up as relevant politicians. The trap for all new politicians lies in the determinism of the existing “rules of the game” and institutional frameworks that have been produced by the previous government, so reforms of any kind are aggravated from the outset because there are no implementation mechanisms.
The development of democratic institutions is slowed and the façade of democracy covers the gulf and the mistrust in “democratic mechanisms” of governance, because citizens view them as the culprits. Stable Western democracies had changes of leadership and the arrival of new leaders within their existing multiparty systems and within parties that are stable and clearly profiled, but that has also become highly questionable and unstable in these years of populism and crises. The political systems of the countries of our region have varying degrees of stability, but it is generally the case that they are systems in which space for the new has been constricted and reduced down to rare examples of good practice. The interchangeability of governments, new ideas and policies with new leaders represent essential parts of democratic political processes. In these processes, institutions pass tests and come to be defined as a collection of experiences that utilise the best and most legitimate practices.
