I thought about this when a coworker mentioned in casual conversation that they wondered why a certain head of state (no reason to get into specifics) is not simply done away with to resolve a currently ongoing international conflict. To my knowledge that’s almost never done in the real world because it rarely works as intended. I was wondering if any politics/international relationship experts or avid Hitman/Assassin’s Creed players knows the real reason why this is, and if there’s even a official term for why this is not done in real politics? Thanks.
In: Other
there are many reasons for this.
first of all, its not easy to do, especially not if you want it to look like it was a random person doing it and not someone you paid for it.
then theres also the problem that especially in dictatorships the heads of state surround themselves with yes men that follow their ideals so the chances are if you get rid of the head the yes men below will not be any better and one of these people will most likely be the new head.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_and_executed_heads_of_state_and_government](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_and_executed_heads_of_state_and_government)
Apparently it was a thing in the 70s but has gone out of fashion since.
States have always tried to kill the leaders of foreign nations and movements within their own nations. It’s just usually hard to pull off, as heads of state and other important figures are well protected, and doing so too openly is likely to invite retaliation, legal punishments, and sanctions. Hell, some times they aren’t even slightly subtle about it, like when the U.S. dropped bombs on the houses of Black activists in Philadelphia, or the recent murders of political rivals by Putin.
It’s difficult to do, Heads of State have a lot of security, and the country you’ve targeted will probably retaliate in some way, which could be terrorist attackes or decalring war on the country they know or suspect did it.
It’s also against all kinds if international law, so don’t expect any other country to back you up.
The ‘knife and buldgeon’ method of regime change is alive and well in some places.
Also, you tried valiantly to avoid it, but it’s obvious to me you were talking about Rishi Sunak.
It was done in the past or at least tried. But we have stopped for multiple reasons. First of all if the other country finds out and is willing to go to war it will be seen as an act of war and most countries want to avoid going to war. Second of all we understand that in most cases the assasination of a leader is incredbly unpredictable and these countries often end up in a “worse position” than they were with the leader because if over throwing of the goverment doesnt start with the population of that country it is quite likly that they will get even more extreme and more in opposition to your own country. Then you also often have the problem that the leader is just replaced by someone else from the leaders circle that will just continue what the leader did.
Then there is also the problem its just hard to do. Russia tried to kill Selenskyj on multiple occasions but they failed. Famously the US tried to kill Fidel Castro dozens of times but also failed.
Mostly because they just get replaced by somebody similar or in many cases somebody even less desirable who is more paranoid.
For the US there’s an executive order against it (https://dpcld.defense.gov/Portals/49/Documents/Civil/eo-12333-2008.pdf) but that’s not even cut and dry since it was “put aside” to deal w/ terrorist leaders. I’m not sure about worldwide but most countries openly condemn political assassinations, and they rarely happen nowadays.
There are many layers of protection around any heads of state, especially the ones you might want to assassinate. So the assassination attempt is likely going to fail and they are probably going to find out who is behind it. If you for example look at the assassination attempts going after people like Fidel Castro and Tito you see how hard it is. Even the attempts at Hitlers life were numerous and all backfired. And these are just the assassination attempts which have been made public as there may have been many stopped ones that are never even made public.
The other issue is that an assassination only removes the head of the regime. There are still hundreds of high level officials like ministers, generals, governors, etc. who share the same ideas and are part of the same regime. If you remove the head of state you are not going to remove the rest and they will just find some other leader. The Soviet Union did not fall when Lenin or Stalin died. The PRC did not fall when Mao died. Even the Ba’ath party still survives after Saddam Hussein was executed along with all their high level officials and the part banned in the occupied Iraq. So you can not just assassinate the head of state without a plan for how to deal with the rest of the regime.
As others have mentioned, it is not easy to do. And it has been tried before.
But one aspect is, leaders don’t magic themselves to become leaders. Every one of them spent years in some organization be it political, military, religious, etc. Their messages and ideology are not born “whole cloth”. These leaders embody a will and ideas developed by success and interaction. This is why it is seldom correct to say “the people don’t want this. it is only the leaders”.
In many cases, eliminating the leaders just means they’ll be replaced with another with broadly the same ideas and intent. No leader stands alone – they’re always supported by structures political, social, military, economic etc.
When your enemy is making a mistake, It’s not a good idea to interrupt them.
Strongmen and Autherterians tend to surround themselves with Yes-Men instead of actual experts, This makes their regimes secure but ineffective. It’s better to have an ineffective enemy than an effective one.
Often though, It’s easier to keep an eye out for up and coming leaders and either assassinate their character, Corrupt them, or take them out before they gain popular support. (Eastern Bloc Countries this happens all the time)
If you have a Nation that has a Popular leader who will do things that your government doesn’t want, You can also engage in Economic sabotage which will turn the people against them, or make that Leader unable to follow through with the prosperity they promised (See Latin America).
Alternatively, You can quietly foster and support Extremists within the Enemy state to slowly sap international support for that State. Then you can point to those Extremists when they inevitably Seize power and say “There, They’re clearly the bad guys” (I’m definitely not talking about the Middle East, Don’t look into the beginnings of Hamas)
Latest Answers