An executive system is the set of institutions and leaders (chief executive and cabinet) that formulate, implement, and enforce policy—for example presidents, prime ministers, premiers, and their cabinets (CED PAU-3.C.1). Governments need executive systems to make day-to-day decisions, run the bureaucracy, lead foreign policy, and command the military; they turn laws into action and provide clear leadership (commander-in-chief, head of government/state roles in the CED). Different systems (presidential, parliamentary, semi-presidential, dual executive) affect who holds power, how accountable they are, and how policies get made—e.g., Mexico and Nigeria have single-term/elected presidents, the UK fuses executive and legislature under a PM, and China’s party leadership controls top appointments (CED PAU-3.C.2). For more review, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY), the Unit 2 overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2), and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

Executive leaders get power in a few key ways tied to system type and country rules. In presidential systems (Mexico, Nigeria) leaders win popular elections and serve as both head of state and government (Mexico’s one-term limit, Nigeria’s elected president). In parliamentary systems (UK) the prime minister is the leader of the party/coalition with the most Commons seats and can fall to a vote of no confidence; the monarch’s role is ceremonial. Semi-presidential/dual executives (Russia) split roles: an elected president appoints a prime minister who runs the civil service. In authoritarian or party-controlled systems (China) top leaders are chosen within the ruling party (General Secretary, Central Military Commission) behind closed doors; institutional vetting (Iran’s Guardian Council, Supreme Leader’s appointments) also shapes who can gain power. These variations link directly to AP CED keywords—presidentialism, parliamentary, semi-presidentialism, votes of no confidence, term limits—and are tested on both multiple-choice and FRQs. For a concise review, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and try practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

Head of state vs. head of government: the head of state is the symbolic, diplomatic, and often ceremonial representative of a country (e.g., the UK monarch), while the head of government runs day-to-day policy and the bureaucracy (e.g., the UK prime minister). In some systems one person fills both roles (presidential systems: Mexico, Nigeria—the president is both head of state and head of government, commander-in-chief, and chief executive). In dual or semi-presidential systems those roles split: Russia’s president is head of state and commander-in-chief, while the prime minister is head of government overseeing the civil service. Heads of state mainly legitimize the regime and conduct some foreign relations; heads of government set policy, manage the cabinet, and implement laws (CED PAU-3.C, keywords: dual executive, commander-in-chief, premier/prime minister). For AP prep, be ready to compare who holds which powers in course countries (use Topic 2.3 study guide: https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and drill practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

China's top leader wears several hats because power there is organized around the Communist Party, not just the state. The same person is usually: - General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (the party’s top leader), - President of the state (head of state), and - Chair of the Central Military Commission (controls the military, i.e., commander in chief). Holding all three titles fuses party, state, and military authority so the leadership can set and enforce policy without institutional rivalry—a deliberate design in China’s Leninist system. Leadership changes happen behind closed doors through the CCP’s internal processes, not open elections (CED: PAU-3.C.2.a). For AP purposes, this is a key example when you compare executive structures (Topic 2.3) and show how titles, powers, and selection differ across countries. Review the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and try practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government) to reinforce this.

Short answer: the Supreme Leader. Under Iran’s system the Supreme Leader sets the political agenda and holds the ultimate authority—he’s commander in chief and appoints top ministers, half of the Guardian Council, the head of the judiciary, and the Expediency Council (CED PAU-3.C.2.b). The president is an elected official (up to two 4-year terms) who runs the civil service and conducts day-to-day policy and foreign affairs, but his power is constrained by institutions the Supreme Leader controls (Majles oversight exists but can be limited by the Guardian Council/Expediency Council). For AP exam prep, know this as an example of a dual executive where real power lies with a non-elective theocratic office—use the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and Unit 2 overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2). Practice questions are at (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

Mexico’s president (a classic presidential system) is both head of state and head of government, serves one 6-year term (the sexenio), is commander-in-chief, leads the bureaucracy, drives foreign policy, and can approve/shape domestic legislation (strong central role historically). The U.S. president is also head of state and government, commander-in-chief, runs the executive branch and foreign policy, but: serves up to two 4-year terms, has a formal veto (subject to congressional override), and appoints cabinet members and federal judges with Senate confirmation. Key differences for AP: Mexico’s single, nonrenewable term concentrates power but limits long-term accountability; the U.S. system has more built-in checks (Congressional oversight, judicial review, Senate confirmation). Use this comparison for FRQ 3 (compare executive powers/constraints). For a quick topic review, see Fiveable’s Executive Systems study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY). For more practice, check the unit page (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2) and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

In presidential systems like Nigeria the president is both head of state and head of government, separately elected, serves fixed terms, leads the bureaucracy and armed forces, and has veto/legislative influence—so powers are split between an independently elected executive and the legislature (makes checks like impeachment important) (CED: PAU-3.C.2.d). Parliamentary systems like the UK fuse executive and legislative power: the PM is leader of the majority party in the Commons, can be removed by a vote of no confidence, and the cabinet is collectively responsible to parliament (CED: PAU-3.C.2.f). Practically, presidential systems create clearer separation of powers but more potential gridlock; parliamentary systems allow faster policy-making but less independent executive autonomy. This comparison is exactly the kind of knowledge AP FRQ 3 asks you to use—see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY), Unit 2 overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2), and practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

Russia is a semi-presidential system: the prime minister is formally the head of government (runs the bureaucracy and day-to-day policy), while the president is head of state and has stronger constitutional and practical powers. The CED notes the president appoints top ministers, conducts foreign policy, is commander-in-chief, and can influence the Duma (parliament) under certain conditions (PAU-3.C.2.e). That means the president controls key appointments, security forces, and the national agenda—so even if the PM manages government operations, the president can shape who runs those operations and what they do. In practice, recent presidents have centralized power further (appointing loyal ministers, directing security services), which makes the presidency dominant. For AP study, review Topic 2.3 (Executive Systems) and PAU-3.C in the CED and practice comparing executives across countries (study guide: https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY; unit overview: https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2). For extra practice, try Fiveable’s practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

The UK prime minister isn’t directly elected by voters. Voters elect MPs to the House of Commons; the leader of the party (or coalition) that wins the most seats becomes prime minister and is formally appointed by the monarch (CED PAU-3.C.2.f). If no party wins a majority, parties can form a coalition or a minority government. Party leaders are chosen internally by party members/MPs—so if a sitting PM resigns, the party runs a leadership contest and the winner becomes PM without a national vote. The PM must maintain Commons confidence (vote of no confidence can remove them) and can call elections under certain rules. This is a core feature of parliamentary systems (compare with presidential systems on the exam; see Topics 2.1 and 2.5). For a focused review, check the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and more unit resources (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2). Practice questions: https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government.

It means top leaders are chosen through internal party processes, not by open, competitive public elections. In China the Chinese Communist Party’s elites (Central Committee, Politburo/Standing Committee) pick who will be General Secretary, president, and other top posts; the Party also controls the Central Military Commission. The National People’s Congress (NPC) may formally confirm positions like the premier, but real decisions are negotiated “behind closed doors” inside the CCP. For the AP exam, remember PAU-3.C: titles (General Secretary, president, premier) and that leadership change is opaque—limited transparency, little public accountability, and elite bargaining rather than mass voting. For a quick review on this Topic 2.3 content, see the Fiveable study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and try practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

Some presidents are limited to one term (Mexico’s six-year “sexenio”) while others can serve multiple terms because of different constitutional designs and political trade-offs. Mexico’s single-term rule was written after decades of one-party dominance to prevent a president from becoming a long-term personalist leader and to force regular leadership turnover (a presidentialism choice tied to term limits). Other countries allow reelection to provide continuity, let voters reward performance, or strengthen accountability—especially where institutions (courts, legislature) can check abuses. Term-limit rules reflect history, regime type, and how elites balance stability vs. concentration of power. For AP exam framing, link this to presidentialism and “presidential term limits” in the CED (Topic 2.3–2.4). Want a quick refresher? See the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY), the Unit 2 overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2), and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

Start with a clear thesis that says which aspect of executive power you’re comparing (e.g., degree of autonomy, control over security forces, or policy-making). Briefly define key terms (presidentialism, parliamentary, semi-presidential, dual executive). For each paragraph: name a course country, state the executive type and specific powers (use CED facts—China: party/General Secretary + CMC; UK: ceremonial monarch + PM with fused executive; Mexico/Nigeria: presidential head of state & gov; Russia: strong president with PM; Iran: Supreme Leader vs elected president), give one concrete example of how that power is used, and explain the effect on policy/legitimacy. End with a direct comparison that ties differences to outcomes (stability, accountability, speed of policy). For AP FRQs, aim to compare at least two countries, use specific evidence from the CED, and connect evidence to your claim (this mirrors FRQ3 and FRQ4 expectations). Review Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and practice FRQs (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

A Supreme Leader system like Iran’s concentrates ultimate authority in an unelected religious figure who “sets the political agenda, serves as commander in chief, and appoints top ministers, half the Guardian Council, the Expediency Council, and the head of the judiciary” (CED). That means: the elected president (limited to two 4-year terms) oversees the civil service and foreign policy but is constrained—policy priorities, candidate vetting, and key appointments can be overturned or blocked. Consequences: faster, centralized decision-making and regime stability for the theocratic elite; weaker checks and less accountability for top power holders; limited legislative independence and competitive democratization; and potential tensions over legitimacy and civil liberties that can fuel protests. For AP exam prep, know these institutional differences and how they affect legitimacy, stability, and policymaking (see the Topic 2.3 study guide: https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY). Practice related questions at https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government.

Good question—“formally appoint” sounds powerful, but in the UK it’s mostly ceremonial. The monarch is head of state and has the formal power to appoint the prime minister, but constitutional convention and parliamentary reality limit that choice: the monarch appoints whoever can command a majority (or coalition) in the House of Commons. That means real power comes from parliamentary confidence, not royal whim. In practice the monarch acts on the PM’s and Cabinet’s advice and only uses reserve powers in extreme, rare crises. This fits the CED: the UK monarch is ceremonial and the PM is the de facto chief executive and de facto commander-in-chief (Topic 2.3 PAU-3.C.2.f). If you want a quick refresher on how this shows up on the exam, check the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).

Some systems split commander-in-chief and head of government to create checks, civilian control of the military, or to reflect historical roles; others combine them for clarity and quick decision-making. Parliamentary systems (UK example) often separate symbolic head of state (monarch) from the head of government (prime minister), which keeps the military under a nonpartisan figure and prevents concentration of power. Presidential systems (Mexico, Nigeria) usually combine head of state, head of government, and commander-in-chief—this centralizes authority and can speed policy but reduces institutional checks. Semi-presidential or dual-executive systems (Russia, China’s party-state fusion) mix roles so political control, legitimacy, or party dominance shape who commands the military and runs the bureaucracy. Which design a country chooses depends on history, concerns about stability, fears of military coups, desire for efficient crisis response, and whether the constitution prioritizes separation of powers or centralized leadership. For AP review, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-comparative-government/unit-2/executive-systems/study-guide/dDQcnwREgI0YRpscsZsY) and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-comparative-government).