Exogenous Intervention, Endogenous Repercussions: State Legitimacy in Iraq, Panama, and Venezuela
Presentation Type
Oral Presentation
Presentation Type
Submission
Keywords
Iraq, Panama, Venezuela, state legitimacy, exogenous extraction, U.S intervention, Saddam Hussein, Manuel Noriega, Nicolás Maduro
Department
International Studies and Languages
Major
Political Science and International Studies
Abstract
When an exogenous actor extracts an endogenous leader, implements a new leader in their place, and attempts to influence the composition of the new regime, the legitimacy of the new state is called into question. It is evident that in both Iraq and Panama, the decisions in initial leadership and post-extraction environment produced notable hindrances to state legitimacy. Previous literature has focused on this relationship through both quantitative measures of input and output legitimacy over time and qualitative analysis of legitimacy deficits within the transitional period of both Saddam Hussein’s and Manuel Noriega’s regimes. Thus, the impact of rebel influence, a strategic byproduct of the new government’s lack of domestic approval, has not been explored. I employ a longitudinal study, critically pinpointing historical dynamics, shifting ethnic power relations, and insurgency actions and rhetoric. I find that the legitimacy of a succeeding state is determined by the perceived domestic credibility of the initial leader installed, and weak legitimacy creates a window of opportunity for other non-state actors to build stronger competing governing platforms. Ultimately, this framework provides a cautionary vantage point for the contemporary dilemma in Venezuela.
Faculty Mentor
Amanda Rizkallah
Location
Black Family Plaza Classroom 189
Start Date
10-4-2026 3:15 PM
End Date
10-4-2026 3:30 PM
Exogenous Intervention, Endogenous Repercussions: State Legitimacy in Iraq, Panama, and Venezuela
Black Family Plaza Classroom 189
When an exogenous actor extracts an endogenous leader, implements a new leader in their place, and attempts to influence the composition of the new regime, the legitimacy of the new state is called into question. It is evident that in both Iraq and Panama, the decisions in initial leadership and post-extraction environment produced notable hindrances to state legitimacy. Previous literature has focused on this relationship through both quantitative measures of input and output legitimacy over time and qualitative analysis of legitimacy deficits within the transitional period of both Saddam Hussein’s and Manuel Noriega’s regimes. Thus, the impact of rebel influence, a strategic byproduct of the new government’s lack of domestic approval, has not been explored. I employ a longitudinal study, critically pinpointing historical dynamics, shifting ethnic power relations, and insurgency actions and rhetoric. I find that the legitimacy of a succeeding state is determined by the perceived domestic credibility of the initial leader installed, and weak legitimacy creates a window of opportunity for other non-state actors to build stronger competing governing platforms. Ultimately, this framework provides a cautionary vantage point for the contemporary dilemma in Venezuela.