Answer to question 5:

All three answers are correct. (So the correct answer is 4). Chenoweth and Stephan’s research found that overall, more people participated in nonviolent campaigns compared to violent campaigns. For their case studies, when 3.5% of the population participated in nonviolent resistance, the campaign was successful*.

The more people participate and the more different groups from society are represented, the easier they gain sympathy from others and pose a greater threat to the established order. The chances are then greater that people who actually belong to the opposition will side with the activists. (In Egypt, for example, several soldiers no longer cooperated in the violent repression of activists against dictator Mubarak in 2011.)

Nonviolent resistance strives for a more complete picture of the situation, by informing people about issues that are often hidden and kept quiet by the political power(s). A well-known example is of course the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa, which took place after Apartheid, with the aim of recognizing the crimes committed during Apartheid, without locking everyone up. This was post-conflict, but also think of the environmentalists fighting against water pollution by mining companies, while the government praises the new jobs the company creates, or the residents in the Amazon keeping track of how much rainforest is being cut down, while here no further official figures can be found.

*This does not mean that the success was only in the number of participants, because in some examples from after 2011, the year in which they published their first major study, there were also examples where this did not apply.