Bio
Adrien M. Ratsimbaharison is a scholar affiliated with Benedict College in Columbia, South Carolina, United States. His academic work focuses on political science and international studies, with a particular emphasis on African politics, development, democratization, and armed conflict in Africa. He has authored works including 'The Politics of Labeling in International Relations: The Case of the So-Called Coup d'État of March 2009 in Madagascar' and 'Democracy Democratization and Development in Post-Cold War Africa 1990-2012,' reflecting his deep engagement with the political dynamics of the African continent. Dr. Ratsimbaharison also serves as a reviewer for the Global Journal of Human-Social Science (GJHSS), contributing his expertise to the academic community.
Educational Journey
• Political Science/International Studies African politics Development, democratization, and armed conflict in Africa
Experience
Editors Role
Reviewer
GJHSS
2016 -Research
The Politics of Labeling in International Relations: The Case of the So-Called aoCoup daEtat of March 2009a in Madagascar
The consecutive and unconstitutional transfers of power which occurred in Madagascar on March 17, 2009, between, on the one hand, President Marc Ravalomanana and the Military Directorate, and on the other hand, the Military Directorate and Andry Rajoelina, have been labeled and condemned as a “coup d’état” by the great majority of the members of the international community. However, despite this quasi-unanimity, the different members of the international community adopted different responses in dealing with this so-called coup d’état. Using the labeling approach, this study analyzes the rules and procedures of the relevant members of the international community in dealing with a coup d’état in general and their actual responses in the particular case of Madagascar. This study finds, on the one hand, that the rules and procedures of the relevant members of the international community in dealing with a coup d’état were completely different, on the other hand, that their actual responses were usually inconsistent with their own rules and procedures.
