Navigating great power competition: The Maldives as a democratising small state

This thesis evaluates how great power competition systematically constrains democratisation in small states when geo-strategic interests intersect with domestic political processes. Using the Maldives as a case study, it demonstrates that democratic consolidation is constrained by mechanisms employed by great powers, such as economic incentives, elite relations, and security expectations.

The Maldives’ democratic transition in 2008 coincided with the renewed strategic prominence of the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) as India, China, the United States (US), and other emerging powers expanded regional engagement. This dual transformation of domestic democratisation alongside heightened geopolitical competition generated conditions in which internal reforms became persistently entangled with external pressures. By selecting episodes across three phases since its democratic transition, this thesis shows how these mechanisms operate to constrain the Maldives’ democratic trajectory.

Theoretically, the thesis synthesises three rarely integrated areas of scholarship: small-state studies, democratisation, and great-power politics. It develops a theoretical framework that situates the Maldives within broader debates on state hierarchy, democratic fragility, and geostrategic competition. The framework centres the democratisation process by examining how external strategic competition shapes domestic political outcomes through the three mechanisms. Methodologically, the thesis employs a qualitative case study design using structured, focused comparison. It analyses key episodes of great power involvement across distinct phases of the Maldivian democratic trajectory. The GMR Airport dispute during the Transition Phase (2008–2012), significant bilateral and multilateral policy shifts such as withdrawing from the Commonwealth and severing ties with Qatar during the Backsliding Phase (2012–2018), and the “India Out” controversy during the Revival Phase (2018–2023). This comparative approach demonstrates the non-linear nature of Maldivian democratisation, with backsliding, stagnation, and reversals most visibly evident when external strategic interests intersect with domestic politics through the three mechanisms.

This thesis demonstrates that small state agency in geopolitically significant regions becomes systematically constrained by structural power asymmetries and internal vulnerabilities when great powers compete for influence. It shows that while smallness is often associated with democratic resilience, such resilience is not inherently linear under conditions of intense geopolitical competition, even when small states possess all positive characteristics conducive to democratic governance. It provides the first comprehensive analysis of the Maldives’ democratic trajectory in relation to great power dynamics, clarifying patterns of change and continuity in its foreign policy from a distinctly Maldivian perspective, grounded in empirical evidence from domestic political actors and processes.

Finally, the thesis contends that, in the absence of alternative international institutional mechanisms to address the unique vulnerabilities of small states, navigating great power competition will remain a significant challenge when external strategic interests intersect with domestic priorities. The findings of this thesis offer analytical generalisability to other small island states in contested geopolitical spaces where similar structural conditions and mechanisms may constrain democratic consolidation.