In November 2004, media controlled by the regime claimed the victory of Viktor Yanukovych, who had then been chosen by a corrupt president. Even though exit polls showed Viktor Yushchenko as the winner of the election, it was clear to the public that electoral fraud had been committed. This was only the beginning of Ukraine's Orange Revolution, which put the country's political future at stake. Even more, most experts would agree that the 2004 presidential elections were "the dirtiest elections held since Ukraine declared its independence in 1991." Even though the Central Election Commission (CEC) declared Yanukovych the winner, Yushchenko objected and called on his supporters to gather at the Maidan. The corrupt regime feared a bloodthirsty mob, but instead turned into a peaceful protest bringing together "people from diverse backgrounds who had risked their safety to defend simple ideals of decency and fairness that were easily understood in the whole world.” Having succeeded in overturning the rigged elections, the CEC eventually called for new elections which resulted in Yushchenko being the clear winner and being sworn in as president in early 2005. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayThis case study will analyze the Orange Revolution in Ukraine through the theoretical framework of Revolution Theory. Therefore, it will focus on the consequences of the revolution itself and how this coincides with the academic literature based on the theory of revolution. Using the theory of revolution as an analytical framework, I will be able to fully understand the post-revolutionary state of Ukraine by also examining the main principles of revolutions proposed by scholars such as Sidney Tarrow. By comparing the case study to the main notions of revolutions, it will allow me to establish a pattern of revolutionary similarities while examining what differentiates them from each other. Additionally, to examine and understand what the Orange Revolution was about, it would be important to define what a revolution is. According to Charles Tilly, the definition of a revolution is "a forced transfer of power over a state, during which two or more distinct blocs of contenders incompatiblely claim control of the state and a significant portion of the population , subject to the jurisdiction of the State, acquiesces in the demands of each bloc.” In other words, radical change requires overthrowing an old regime by replacing it with a new one. This would normally involve a conflict between two competing forces within a country. When examining the theory of revolution, it is important to examine its original relationship to the Aristotelian notion that a basic cultural value system is tenuous, making a society vulnerable to conflict. revolution. Any radical change in fundamental values ​​or beliefs within a community constitutes the ground for revolutionary upheaval. Furthermore, Anievas explains how revolutions have played a vital role in the structure and dynamics of international relations and "begins to understand the interconnections between revolutions and international relations as emerging organically from a unified process of world historical development." Additionally, Tarrow identified four stages for the success of a social movement such as the Orange Revolution. The first dimension is to have a political opportunity structure that,in this case, would be the corruption and electoral fraud committed by both Kuchma and Yanukovych. The second dimension focuses more on how to adapt to different political opportunities using “conflict repertoires” as a strategy and tactic to produce political change. The third and fourth dimensions focus more on mobilizing structures and framing. Mobilizing structures are made up of institutions or organizations that provide the platform for bringing about political change and movement framing involves looking at how the movement communicates its goals to the population at large. Although social movement theory is not sufficient to explain the post-revolutionary situation in Ukraine, it sheds light on the conditions that led to the moment of political change in the country. This also fits well with the main principles of revolutions which, as Tilly stated, are "a forced transfer of power to the state...", which was accomplished here. On this subject, Michael Kimmel focuses more on the question of whether the revolution itself produces a society with more equality, justice or freedom than the previous regime. In this case, it would be fair to say that Yushchenko managed to achieve this by gathering the public on the Maidan and leading a peaceful protest that resulted in another election being held due to electoral fraud. To a larger extent, the main objective of the revolution was to challenge the initial declared results and this was easily achieved thanks to the unity of Yushchenko and his fellow supporters and their determination to get the CEC to declare new elections. Even though “one cannot measure the cognitive state of mind of large masses of individuals either…”, the paradigm shared by the general population was the demand for a non-corrupt Ukraine via Yushchenko becoming the new president . Although there are no rules or path set by a revolution, each one being different and having its own goals, it is obvious that many revolutions related to the overthrow of an old regime tend to use the power of people to make themselves heard, but also push for action to be taken for political change to occur. Applying this theory to my case study, the four dimensions proposed by Tarrow correspond relatively well to the Orange Revolution. The political opportunity structure would be electoral fraud and corruption which would make the country vulnerable to change. Adapting to different political opportunities by providing “protest repertoires” to bring about political change would be the civic youth organization called “Black Pora”, pora meaning it's time in Ukrainian. This movement was created in 2004 to coordinate the mobilization of young people against the corrupt Kuchma regime and has since split into two different entities. Mobilization of structures and framing would be one aspect of using media to convey to the rest of the world the message that Ukraine opposes corruption and will no longer want the country to continue to be a authoritarian type regime. The fact that "popular demand and coordinated pressure from the international community pushed the institutional approach forward" demonstrates how Yushchenko and his fellow supporters managed to gain support from the international community in supporting the Orange Revolution and also shows the rest of the world that What people want is what matters more than people hungry for power. “We are free. The old days are over. We are a new country now. also underlines the success of the revolution. That.