Democracy, Democratization and the Challenges of Sustaining and Promoting

Democratic Governance
Paper presented by Dr. Ronald Meinardus* at the Democratic Pacific Assembly (DPA) Taipei, Taiwan, 12-25
August 2004

Abstract: The term democratization defines a political process; likewise

democracy once attained is never static, but continues to evolve. Beyond
successful democratization, consolidating democracy remains a major
challenge in most - if not all - parts of the world. Democratic rule is
inconceivable without elections. Still, political elections alone are no
guarantee for democratic governance. Liberal democracy is characterized by
competitive elections, the rule of law, the separation of powers and the
protection of basic political liberties. In past decades, liberal democracy has
made great advances in all parts of the world. In contrast to democratic
progress in other parts of the world, little headway toward fundamental
democratic change is reported from the Arab world. Importantly, the
situation regarding democratic rights is much brighter in many of the 31
non-Arab predominantly Muslim countries. One main challenge today is to
promote democracy in those countries where it does not exist. At the same
time, the consolidation of democracy in existing democratic societies
remains an ongoing challenge. International democracy promotion is
justifiable only as long as it occurs in close cooperation and upon explicit
invitation of relevant political forces of the host country, and is limited to
legitimate methods. It is a fallacy to assume that a democratic society can
be established by decree or with guns and canons.
1. Democracy and democratization as processes
Democratization may be defined as the process that leads to democracy. This is a complex political, social
and also cultural procedure or development that has taken different shapes in different parts of the world.
The term democratization defines a political process; likewise democracy once attained is never static,
but continues to evolve. The evolution of democratic societies is never a one-way-road. In his acclaimed
book The Third Wave in which he analyzes the transition of some thirty countries from non-democratic to
democratic systems in the late twentieth century, Samuel Huntington writes:
The democratization waves and the reverse waves suggest a two-step-forward, one step-backward
pattern. 1
In other words: Beyond successful democratization, consolidating democracy remains a major challenge in
most - if not all - parts of the world. In the real world, there exists no such thing as the end of history, as
some would have liked to believe following the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and other parts of
the world some 15 years ago.
The title of this session highlights correctly in my eyes the existence of more than one perception
regarding democratization. We have assembled to discuss various perspectives on democratization. Just as
there are different perspectives regarding democratization, there exist different variants of democracy:

Political scientists differentiate between parliamentary or presidential democracy, others draw the line
between liberal, social, yes even Christian democracy.
At the same time, it is important to define certain minimum criteria of what constitutes a democracy. Before
I move on to this in a little while, I wish to emphasize that so called Peoples democracies ruled by one mostly communist - monolithic party do not meet the standards of what is generally considered a
democracy.
2. Elections are not enough for democracy
Translated into English, the originally Greek word Democracy means rule of the people. The selection of
political leaders by the people is the very basis of democratic governance. In most democracies today,
popular political participation is confined to this selection of leaders on election-day every few years.
Elections and democracy are like two wheels of a cart. If you remove one wheel the vehicle cannot move
forward.
Democratic rule is inconceivable without elections. A ruler who does away with elections is rightfully called a
dictator. The very essence of democratic rule lies in the limitation of political power. In democratic orders,
various methods are applied to curb power.
In a democracy, the power of the government is always limited by time. All democratic constitutions include
provisions that limit the terms of political leaders; in some democratic countries, political leaders are even
explicitly excluded from running for office after a stated period.
In essence, elections and democracy are about sharing and checking political power and control. I would
argue that the better the system of checks and balances functions, the better the quality of democracy in a
specific country. In most democracies today, the division of power is not limited to the classical separation
between the three traditional powers the legislative, the executive and the judiciary. In addition to what
political scientists have termed horizontal division of power (the separation of the parliament, the
government and the courts), what may be termed a vertical division of power is important. This refers to the
splitting up of power between the central government and the different units of local autonomy.
The most advanced system of political decentralization is federalism. While I have heard many arguments
for and against this model, it is undisputed that a federal set-up enhances the system of checks and
balances which is so vital for democratic governance.
While on the one hand democracy is inconceivable without elections, political elections alone are no
guarantee for democratic governance. Put differently, one cannot be a democrat without supporting
elections, but one can very well conduct elections without being a democrat. In many parts of the world,
democratically elected governments ignore constitutional limits and deprive the people of basic human rights
and freedoms. In his book The Future of Freedom. Illiberal Democracy, the US-American journalist Fareed
Zakaria enumerates a long list of what he terms elected autocrats. He writes that,
Over the past decade, elected governments claiming to represent the people have steadily encroached on
the powers and the rights of other elements of society. 2
The author draws a clear line between liberal democracy and the illiberal deviation which he calls illiberal
democracy. While liberal democracy is characterized by competitive elections, the rule of law, the
separation of powers and the protection of basic political liberties, illiberal democracy may well permit
competitive elections, but shows little respect for the aforementioned basic liberal rights.
3. The global proliferation of democracy

In past decades, liberal democracy has made great advances in all parts of the world. The success of
democratization is well documented empirically. For many years, the US-based Freedom House has
published an annual survey with comparative data on the evolution of political and civil liberties. The annual
surveys have become the primary source for anyone who is interested in monitoring the trends of
democratic development on a global level.
For the supporters of democracy, the general trends outlined in the recent report 3 are good news. Since
1972 when the survey begun those countries rated free have more than doubled. According to the
survey, The highest-ever proportion of the worlds population is living in freedom today.
According to the Freedom House-survey, important democratic progress has been registered in the AsiaPacific region:
In 1972, less than a third of the regions states, 8, were Free, while there were 13 Partly Free countries and
11 Not Free states. Today, there are 18 Free countries, more than double the number thirty years before,
while the numbers of Partly Free and Not Free states are 10 and 11, respectively.
In spite of the democratic progress, in some Asian countries influential circles continue to contend that
democracy and human rights are Western concepts not suitable for the political and social order of this part
of the world. The available empirical data refutes this claim. As in other parts of the world, it is not cultural
values that stand in the way of liberal democracy in Asia but political and local interests of local elites who
are afraid of losing their unmerited privileges once democracy sets in.
4. The Arab versus the Muslim Democracy gap
In contrast to democratic progress in other parts of the world, little headway toward fundamental democratic
change is reported from the Arab world. In this context, political analysts refer to a democracy gap 4, as
none of the 16 Arab states deserves to be termed democratic. This is not a recent phenomenon but a
tradition in that part of the world:
Among the countries of the Middle East and North Africa, there has been virtually no significant progress
toward democratization in the three decades of the survey 5, writes Adrian Karatnycky of Freedom House.
Still, the prevalent authoritarianism in the Arab world in no way suggests that democracy and Islam are
incompatible. Importantly, the situation regarding democratic rights is much brighter in many of the 31 nonArab predominantly Muslim countries than in the Arab world. In many of the non-Arab Muslim countries
competitive elections with a genuine impact on the composition of the respective governments have been
conducted repeatedly. In their study An Arab more than Muslim Electoral Gap, Alfred Stephan and
Graeme B. Robertson mention the following Muslim countries with relatively high levels of political rights:
Albania, Bangladesh, the Gambia, Malaysia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan and Turkey. 6
In an update regarding countries with Muslim majorities and genuine electoral processes one should add
Senegal and Indonesia, the country with the largest Muslim population, where after decades of dictatorial
rule a democratic order is presently in the making.
While these cases refute the notion that Islam and democracy are incompatible they do not explain the lack
of democratic development in the Arab world. In his essay published together with the 2003 Freedom in the
World-survey, Adrian Karatnycky attributes the democratic deficit in the Arab states to three factors:

the persistent influence of regimes that came to power through military coups

the persistence of monarchies that resist democratic devolution

the phenomenon of personal authoritarianism.7

Alfred Stephan and Graeme B. Robertson highlight two international factors that, in their view, have
prevented the proliferation of democratic rule in the Arab states: The prevalence of the Arab-Israeli conflict,
and related to this the all but democratizing effects of the sole superpowers hold on the region:
The United States contributes to the support of authoritarianism by subsidizing some Arab regimes such as
Egyptbecause it helps to buy peace with Israel or maintain U.S. geopolitical influence in the Arab-Israeli
conflict.8
5. Key elements of Democratic Consolidation
Although to some it seems otherwise, there exists no compelling correlation between religion and democracy
and also no necessary linkage between democracy and economic development. While conventional wisdom
teaches that economic development spurs democratization (and typically Taiwan and South Korea are
mentioned in this context), there exists no proof of an automatism: we know of economically highly
developed countries that are not democratic (such as Brunei or Singapore or Saudi Arabia). At the same
time, economically underdeveloped countries have attained a high degree of democratic governance, such
as India, Bangladesh, Mali, and the Philippines.
One main challenge today is to promote democracy in those countries where it does not exist. In this part of
the world, I would mention foremost the PR China, Myanmar (Burma) and the Democratic Peoples Republic
of Korea (North Korea).
At the same time, the consolidation of democracy in existing democratic societies remains an ongoing
challenge. Experience from all parts of the world teaches that the establishment of democratic rule is not a
punctual act; to the contrary, the consolidation of democracy is a never ending process and demands
perpetual vigilance and commitment from the democratic forces.
Importantly, in many democratic countries majorities of the people are far from convinced that the
democratic order is at all times the most suitable model for the solution of political, economic and social
challenges.
At this point, democratic civic education (and also the mass media) plays an important role in educating the
masses on the virtues of democracy. Apart from this educational dimension, there exist a series of structural
or institutional factors crucial for the consolidation of democratic rule.
In a talk to leaders from liberal parties from all over the world this March in Kaohsiung, Lord RusselJohnston, the former president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, defined five key
features which from a liberal vantage point are necessary for the consolidation of democracy 9:

First, the electorate should be offered a political choice. In this context political parties with clear cut
ideological programs or platforms are of importance.

Second, the opposition must be an integral part of the democratic contest. For democracy to
flourish, the opposition too must defend the political structures and be loyal to the constitution.

Third, the bureaucracy must be reliable, and

Fourth, the rule of law must be respected by everyone.

According to Lord Russel-Johnston a final prerequisite for a liberal democracy is the existence of civil society
made up of non-governmental organizations, trade unions and other interest groups. Alongside the elected
political establishment, the state institutions and the political parties, these non-governmental groups play
an important complimentary role in a liberal democracy, as they form a bridge between the people and the
state. NGO's offer an avenue for political participation which representative parliamentary rule and elections
with intervals of some years cannot possibly provide.

6. Challenges of promoting democracy in an international setting

For some time, the promotion of democracy has become a part of international relations: Most industrialized
countries have elaborate programs for promoting democracy beyond their own borders. This intervention
into the internal political affairs of other countries at times poses serious problems. In my eyes, international
democracy promotion is justifiable only as long as it occurs in close cooperation and upon explicit invitation
of relevant political forces of the host country, and is limited to legitimate methods.
A completely different situation has been created since the governments of leading Western nations have
turned to military means with the declared aim of promoting democratic values. This so called liberal
imperialism originated in the late 90ies of the last century with the bombing of Serbia; it has reached a
high point with the ongoing military occupation of Iraq. According to the perpetrators of the military
strategy, the ultimate political objective of the war is the democratization of the greater Middle East. For me
as a liberal, bonding the words liberal and imperialism is an unbearable provocation. Liberalism always
aims at the increase of freedom, while imperialism stands for the exact opposite: domination by a foreign
power.
I could mention numerous tactical and fundamental arguments why the Anglo-American strategy of liberal
imperialism in the Middle East is misguided and will fail to reach the stated political objectives. While,
indeed, the democratic world cannot sit by idly when gross human rights violations are happening, the
selectiveness in the application of the imperial doctrine has discredited it even before it was implemented.
While US soldiers are killing (and dying) in Iraq for the promotion of democracy, their government has
turned a blind eye on - and even cooperated with - other tyrannies not far away.
Finally, it is a fallacy to assume that a democratic society can be established by decree or with guns and
canons. Democratization of undemocratic societies is a highly complex social, political and cultural process.
For democracy to blossom, certain elements are indispensable. Among these are pluralism, the evolution of
an educated middle class, the emancipation of women, the independence of the judiciary and the presence
of independent media. In summary, the modernization of society is a prerequisite for democratization.
Therefore, if foreign governments truly wish to promote democracy in foreign lands (and not their own
imperial ambitions) they should first focus their efforts on modernizing said societies.
Otherwise, if they continue the bellicose strategy of forcing democracy on the people with the barrel of the
gun, they might be up for an unpleasant surprise: if given the chance to express themselves in free
elections the people might end up electing the likes of Osama bin Laden and other terrorists into
government.

* Dr. Ronald Meinardus is the Resident Representative of the Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation in the Philippines and a
commentator on Asian affairs. Comments are welcome at liberal@fnf.org.ph.

1 Samuel Huntington: The Third Wave. Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century, Norman/London 1993, p. 25.
2 Fareed Zakaria: The Future of Freedom. Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad, New York/London 2003, p. 102.
3 Freedom House (ed.): Freedom in the World 2003. The Annual Survey of Political Rights and Civil Liberties, Washington
D.C. 2003 (viewed in: http://www.freedomhouse.org/research).
4 Alfred Stepan and Graeme R. Robertson: An Arab more than Muslim Electoral Gap, in: Journal of Democracy,
Washington D.C., July 2003 (Volume 14, Number 3), pp. 30-44.
5 Adrian Karatnycky: Libertys Expansion in a Turbulent World, in: Freedom House, ibid., p. 2.
6 Stepan and Robertson, ibid, p. 32.
7 Karatnycky, ibid., p. 6.
8 Stepan and Robertson, ibid., p. 42.
9 Lord Russel-Johnstons speech at the Liberal International Asian Conference in Kaohsiung/Taiwan is documented in
Liberal Aerogramme, London, Issue 48, June 2004, p. 4-5.

*Dr. Ronald Meinardus is the former resident representative of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation
Philippines