Covert regime change and ideology

Publication id: ammons-2026-covert-regime-change
Status: verified

Citation: Ammons, J., Shakya, S. & Zhukov, K. (2026). Covert Regime Change and Ideology. Public Choice. Download

Facts¶

Policy hook¶

Covert regime change operations are widespread in international relations, but do ideological factors explain variation in success rates and consequences? How does ideology shape covert intervention outcomes?

Main finding¶

Analysis of covert regime change operations examines ideology’s role in explaining variation in outcomes and consequences of interventions across historical cases.

Data and setting¶

Covert regime change operations dataset; historical analysis from early 20th century through recent period; Varieties of Democracy and related sources.

Research design (plain language)¶

Comparative analysis of covert regime change cases examining how ideological factors predict intervention outcomes and post-intervention governance quality.

One caveat¶

Historical case data on covert operations is incomplete and may reflect reporting bias, with success and outcome measurement subject to interpretation.

PDF or DOI¶

Publisher page

Why it matters¶

Covert regime change—intervention disguised as internal rebellion—is a persistent tool of US foreign policy and other powers, yet systematic analysis of what determines success is rare. This paper examines whether ideology (ideological distance between intervener and target, or ideological coherence post-intervention) shapes outcomes. For foreign policy scholars, ideology is often dismissed as rhetoric masking material interests, but this paper treats it as a potentially causal variable. If true, it suggests that ideologically aligned coups may be more stable than regime-change operations imposed against local values. For policymakers, the finding implies that covert intervention outcomes depend not just on military/financial support but on ideological fit with the target population. For international relations theory, it bridges structural and ideational approaches: material capabilities matter, but ideas affect whether imposed regimes persist. The caveat (incomplete historical data) is significant—success and failure reporting biases underestimate failed coups—but comparative analysis within available data remains valuable for identifying patterns.