Using the military to fight organized crime and restore public security is an increasingly common strategy adopted in countries plagued by high levels of violence, especially in Latin America. Although militarizing security is widely perceived as an effective strategy, it can erode fundamental democratic principles and institutions. Are people willing to trade long-term democratic stability with short-term security? We address this question in the context of Ecuador, where violent crime has recently shaken the country. In April 2024 President Daniel Noboa called for a referendum to approve a series of constitutional reforms to give the military a more active role. The week before the referendum, we conducted a nationwide survey experiment in which we made respondents aware of the possible adverse effects of militarization. We find that reminding people that the militarization of security can undermine the rule of law or increase the chances of an executive coup decreases support for this approach to security. This reduction holds even when respondents are explicitly told that militarization has been proven effective in reducing violence. These findings suggest that people are unwilling to trade long-term democratic principles for short-term security, even during a security crisis.
To investigate further the trade-off between short-term security and long-term democratic stability, in spring 2025, we plan to replicate the study in three additional countries in Latin America that vary in terms of crime levels and democratic history. We will present the preliminary results at the EPSA conference.