In a recent discussion, I had the thought that there were exceedingly few functioning multi-party democracies in the world that are not either in Europe or former British colonies.
By functioning multi-party democracy, I’d use as a definition a country that currently has an unbroken string of (at least two) peaceful transfers of power between two or more political parties (or coalitions).
Off the top of my head, the only non-European, non-former British Colony countries that meet this definition are Israel and Japan.
nitpick myself: Russia doesn’t follow your criteria.
Also Indonesia is another one; it actually swings a bit between parties, I dont think over the last 15 years any one parties held the country for more then 2 consecutive terms.
In fact, they fit your criterias so well that they had five different presidents in some weeks following the riots you’re refering too.
Actually, since the fall of the south-american dictatorships, of all south-america would fit your criterias, except perhaps Peru, thanks to Fujimori.
Well Brazil would be a “functioning” example. Power has been transfered 3 times between elected oficials… we have impeached one of these of course. (Would tranfer to his vice president be a transfer too ? hehe )
Politically speaking its a democracy. Corrupt in many ways but it is. The UK and the US woudn't be Multi-Party though... they are Dual Party ?
I don’t know if South Africa counts. From 1948 to 1994, South African politics was dominated by the Nationalists, and then, after the new Constitution was written and apartheid ended, it’s been dominated by the ANC. While I guess technically, it fits your definition…a peaceful changeover in 1948 from Unity to Nationalists, then in 1994, from Nationalists to ANC, we’re still talking about 46 years of single party rule, that was only ended by changing the electorate, and it doesn’t look like the ANC is going to end up giving up power any time soon.
South Korea
Thailand
Nicaragua
Mexico (perhaps sneaking in under the wire, given decline of PRI)
Taiwan (sure, there were protests about the results of the election, but there were protests in the US in 2000 – in both cases, power appears to have transfered according to legal processes)
Costa Rica
Ghana
Turkey
Some folks have mentioned Pakistan. I don’t know what newspaper you’ve been reading, Musharaff took over in a coup about five years ago and can hardly be said to have gained power through democratic action.
The UK has 3 parties with significant numbers of Parliamentary seats. I think that qualifies it as multi-party. The OP is defining “multiparty” as “more than one” anyway.
Israel should fall under the definition of a former colony; it was a British mandate, and the important factor is that the current system of government has existed since the departure of the Brits.
Japan’s system of government was largely authored by the American occupying forces; I don’t think you should count it either if the Commonwealth states are out.
Taiwan isn’t, technically, a state. It meets only three of the four criteria for statehood- defined borders, an existing population, and a government which exercises control over its territory. It doesn’t really have the ability to engage in international relations, though, because hardly anybody recognises it.
South Africa was also colonized by the British.
However, I can add Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, (and possibly a few other former Soviet states. Kinda depends on whether your peaceful transitions are based on rigged elections.)
Do former French colonies count? Morocco is a pseudo-democracy: a constitutional monarchy, like the UK, but the monarch has more than token influence.