After Authoritarianism: A Comparative Study of Divergent Regime Outcomes in Iran and Spain

Sammanfattning

This thesis examines why authoritarian breakdown can produce fundamentally different regime outcomes, comparing the cases of Spain and Iran. Spain transitioned to democracy following the end of Francoist rule in 1975, while Iran's 1979 revolution produced a new authoritarian system. Drawing on democratic transition theory, the study develops an analytical framework centered on four interrelated dimensions: the mode of transition, elite dynamics, coercive institutions, and mass mobilization. Among these, the mode of transition is treated as the overarching dimension, establishing the strategic environment within which the others operate. Through a structured qualitative comparison, the analysis shows that in Spain a negotiated and coordinated transition reduced uncertainty and created conditions for elite cooperation, opposition moderation, and the gradual subordination of coercive institutions to civilian authority. In Iran, revolutionary rupture generated high uncertainty and institutional collapse, deepening elite fragmentation, enabling coercive consolidation, and leaving mass mobilization without the organizational foundation needed for inclusive institutional development. The findings support scholarship treating democratization as a contingent and open-ended process rather than a predetermined outcome. They suggest that understanding regime breakdown requires asking what conditions were in place before collapse rather than what actors intend afterward. Political outcomes, the thesis argues, are a question of process rather than structure alone.