Concentrating authority within the presidency creates a high-stakes environment for Guinea-Bissau. Historically, the military has stepped in whenever politicians fought over control of state resources. If the president gains more power, the prize for winning an election becomes much larger. This makes the political competition more aggressive. When one person holds the reins of both policy and patronage, losing an election feels like total erasure for the opposition.
This dynamic directly feeds the military's habit of intervening. Officers often view themselves as the ultimate arbiters of power. If a president uses expanded executive tools to sideline rivals or weaken the legislature, the military may see this as an excuse to restore 'balance' through a coup. Instead of building stable institutions, the focus shifts to whoever holds the most immediate control.
The result is a fragile cycle. More power in the presidency does not necessarily mean more stability. Often, it just raises the pressure on the system. If the president cannot satisfy the military's demands or the ruling elite's interests, the army might decide to take charge themselves. This pattern turns political competition into a zero-sum game where the stakes are nothing less than survival.
