Conquering the centre to reclaim the state? The role of capitals in resisting autocratization in Southeast Europe

Recently, autocratization processes have increasingly attracted scholarly attention. Although researchers have chosen countries as units of analysis, the literature on regime internal variations demonstrates that autocratization can develop at subnational levels. Accordingly, we claim that autocratization can be successfully opposed at the local level. The article shall thus focus on the role of capital cities in autocratizing countries. We argue that this perspective can help shed light on overlooked aspects of regime developments. In fact, we will look at how urban spaces can constitute ‘democratic enclaves’ which may reverse autocratization. Grassroot participatory initiatives on the use of urban public space or open assemblies on budget spending are among the examples of these localized practices of re-democratization. After introducing the theoretical framework, the paper will map divergent regime developments at the subnational and national level in Southeast Europe (SEE), i.e. the trajectories of hegemonic and opposition forces in the national and city-level executives. Then, it will explore three case-studies: Budapest, Banja Luka, and Zagreb. They have been chosen as capitals of SEE countries experiencing recent autocratization or democratic backsliding. In fact, under the longstanding leadership of, respectively, Viktor Orbán and Milorad Dodik, Hungary and Republika Srpska have embarked upon an autocratization path over the past decade, whereas Croatia has been marked by a less severe, albeit noticeable, democratic backsliding. Nonetheless, these cities also represent typical cases of opposition’s victory in the capital, against the dominant parties at the central government: Gergely Karácsony’s broad anti-Fidesz coalition in 2019 in Hungary, Draško Stanivuković’s Party of Democratic Progress and its allies against Milorad Dodik’s forces in 2020 in Bosnia’s Republika Srpska, and finally Tomislav Tomašević’s Yes, We Can! movement, which surprisingly defeated the Croatian Democratic Union at the 2021 Zagreb local elections. With insights from case-specific literature, and interviews with experts, the paper aims to answer two research questions: which were the drivers of the opposition victory in Budapest, Banja Luka, and Zagreb? More generally, which conditions can enable the opposition to turn an electoral victory in the capital into a wedge to effectively resist and reverse statewide autocratization? We shall test the hypothesis that the opposition’s strategies for winning elections in multilevel polities are shaped by what we label as the ‘nationalization-insulation’ dilemma: at the urban level, the opposition might decide to ‘nationalize’ the political contestation and present itself as the anti-establishment alternative, to win mayoral elections by rallying ’round the flag’ in a larger front against the authoritarian incumbent. However, this strategy might equally penalize the opposition in future national contests, since the incumbent party often relies on strong rural basis and statewide support, while the opposition’s legitimacy mainly derives from being entrenched in the capital. Overcoming this dilemma, namely being able to both ‘nationalize and insulate’, is pivotal to win elections in multiple layers, and thus oust autocratic actors. The relevance of this topic is evident for advancing research on autocratization, understanding the prospects of re-democratization in Hungary and Bosnia’s Republika Srpska, and avoiding further democratic decay in Croatia.