Nonviolent also does not need foreign support unlike violence Chenoweth and Stephan claims, its domesticity makes it superior than violence (Chenoweth, Stephan, p.63). . Still, the international community like more likely to contribute diplomatic support to nonviolent campaigns than violent ones (Chenoweth, Stephan, 2011, p.53). Furthermore, unlike violence, nonviolence does not destroy plurality and does not create the perception of “us and them” (Howes, D.E., 2009, p.85). For Gandhi, [Dictators] have up to now always found ready response to the violence they have used. Within their experience, they have not come across organized non-violent resistance on an appreciable scale, if at all (Gandhi, p.90). Dictatorships or occupying regimes, oppressors in general are often specialized on physical warfare and …show more content…
In this context, expendability of the oppressor is a crucial factor for a nonviolent movement’s success. Although it has the danger for the movement to be seen dubious, a dictatorship or an occupier whose interests are conflicting with dominant international actors are tend to support nonviolent movements against them for the reasons that nonviolence both create sympathy among people and easier to support comparing with violent struggle. The reason for international community to see the domination of oppressor unpleasant may be either economical, like the case of Venezuela as we witness; military threat or the possibility for oppressor to create military threat in long-term if remains in rule, such as Iran and support of the West to Green Revolution Lastly, in cases where a country creates danger of power shifting which weakens existing dominant power, centres of power (or superpower(s)) may support opposition movements especially if they are