Democracy Promotion in the Context of Democratic Opportunities and Politico-economic Crises
Chatham House, London, United Kingdom, 24th May, 2012
On 24th May, Chatham House, a London-based internationally renowned think-tank, hosted an event attached to the European Research Council-funded research project 'Political Economies of Democratisation'. This four-year project, which investigates the latest dynamics in democracy support and specifically the politico-economic models of democracy that are currently promoted, is based at the International Politics Department at Aberystwyth University, UK.
This event brought together leading policy-makers and academics to discuss the opportunities and problems presented for democracy promotion in the context of the Arab Spring and the current global financial crisis. The speakers at this event feature some of the most important and prominent policy-makers and analysts on democracy promotion.
Download the full report: Rethinking Democracy Support - UNU Policy Paper
Abstract
The conference featured three consecutive panels:
Panel 1: Surfing the Wave? Democracy Promotion in the Age of Democratic Revolts
|
Chair: Christopher Hobson (United Nations University)
|
Speakers: Paula Dobriansky (Harvard University) Sarah Mendelson (USAID) Roland Rich (UNDEF) Katerina Dalacoura (London School of Economics) |
Summary
The last year and a half has brought with it unprecedented challenges for democracy promotion, assistance and support. There was talk of a ‘recession’ of democracy promotion in the context of the mid-2000s ‘backlash’, and the initial reluctance of the Obama administration to embrace democracy promotion as a foreign policy focus seemed to prove that democracy promotion was on its way out. Yet, the Arab Spring has single-handedly brought democracy back to the top list of concerns of Western foreign policy-makers. But what kind of a ‘return’ is democracy promotion making today and what, if anything, has changed in democracy promotion in recent years?
The ‘Political Economies of Democratisation’ project has found that already over the last 15 years some interesting shifts have been taking place in democracy promotion. First, there have been tentative shifts towards more flexible and locally-owned perspectives in delivery of democracy assistance and support, even as donor-driven technical demands and technocratic managerial agendas continue to constrain aid delivery practice. Second, if in the 1990s there was agreement on a singular liberal democratic model, this consensus today is breaking, even if tentatively. Not only are recipients calling for more social democratic and participatory – even radical democratic reforms – but some donors are moving, if warily and unsystematically, in the direction of exploring the promotion of such ‘alternative’ models of democracy.
We invite the speakers to reflect on shifts and dynamics of democracy promotion over the last 15 years and especially in relation to the Arab Spring. Has democracy promotion really experienced shifts in shape and content? What are these shifts, when did they take place and why? Has the hold of ‘big-L Liberalism’ in 1990s democracy promotion waned today and if so why? Is the ineffectuality of democracy aid a key driver of change? How successful has democracy promotion been? As for the Arab Uprising, has it opened up new ‘windows of opportunity’ for democracy promotion? What kinds of challenges are now faced by those who promote democracy in the Middle East and North Africa? Has there been a genuine shift from democracy promotion (democracy-push) to democracy support (democracy-pull)? What do the anti-authoritarian protests in the Middle East demonstrate about calls for democracy globally today and what do they tell us about the requirements Western democracy support needs to meet today? Can democracy support work as it did before or do the democratic challenges in the Middle East (or elsewhere) raise new kinds of operational, and perhaps even conceptual, challenges?
Panel 2: Structural Damage? Democracy Promotion and the Global Financial Crisis
|
Chair: Jeff Bridoux (Aberystwyth University) |
Speakers: Richard Youngs (FRIDE) Teivo Teivainen (University of Helsinki) Jacqueline Hale (OSI Brussels) Milja Kurki (Aberystwyth University) |
Summary
If the Arab Spring is raising new opportunities and challenges, what is the role of the global financial crisis in shaping democracy support today? In the 1930s the stock market crash created some significant reversals in the fortunes of democracy, as well as important rethinking on the relationship between democracy and the economy. What is then the significance of the politico-economic context today for democracy and democracy promotion? In the early 1990s, the democracy industry developed its global reach in the context of a very conducive ‘business-friendly’ environment. Not only was there demand for democracy by the publics in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, but also the funds for its promotion were gradually made available through development aid and other budgets. Furthermore, the model of economic and political governance promoted – liberal market democracy – went by and large unquestioned by recipients as well as donors. However, the successive financial crises of the recent years seem to raise some deep challenges to democracy promotion’s role and character in foreign policy and development aid frameworks.
First, the financial crises have called into question the funding for democracy projects in the context of aid budgets. It is important to ask: To what extent are development and democracy support budgets under threat today? To what extent do changes to budgets directly affect the ability of democracy supporters to act in defence of democracy and to what extent is their general leverage in target countries affected? Is democracy support still ‘worth’ the money and how is this money best spent in the context of a financial crisis?
Second, the ideational pull of democracy, and the exact meaning of this ideal, may also be affected today as in the 1930s. This panel asks then: To what extent has the global financial crisis brought into question the self-evidence of the democratic ideal? And crucially, has the liberal model of economic and political governance traditionally endorsed by democracy promoters been called into question? Has there been a move to facilitate recognition of the ‘contested’ nature of the idea of democracy as a result of the crisis? If so, how? If not, should there be more conceptual contestation and debate in democracy promotion scene on the meaning of democracy? Should traditional core of ‘liberal democracy support’ (facilitation of fair elections, separation of powers, liberal minority-protecting constitutions, party political development, transparent state bureaucracy, efficient rule of law structures, and sceptical entrepreneurial civil society) be augmented with promotion of ‘extra-liberal’ ideals (social democracy, participatory democracy etc)? What is the relevance today of rethinking of the state-economy relationships in democracy support? Does the financial crisis push for new kinds of conceptual shifts in democracy promoters’ understandings of ‘democracy’ and ‘markets’?
Finally, is the financial crisis also raising questions about wider power shifts in the world order? Indeed, are there crucial shifts in (liberal) world order dynamics today, away from Western dominance, and, if so, do these shifts need to be considered in democracy support? Can liberal democracy support compete in the new world order arising today? If Western ideas on democracy are to compete in the global market place of ideals, how should they respond to the current structural challenges raised by the financial crisis and the rise of emerging powers?
Panel 3: Proactive or Reactive? The Future Agenda of Democracy Promotion
|
Chair: Peter Burnell (Warwick University) |
Speakers: Thomas Melia (US State Dept) Balthasar Benz (EEAS) Helen Kavanagh Berglund (International IDEA) Carlos Hernandez Ferreiro (European Partnership for Democracy) |
Summary
Democracy promoters are busy reforming their promotion, support and assistance structures. The EU is rewriting its commitments and the US is reconsidering its position in democracy promotion. Even international organisations and NGOs are reconsidering their approaches, modalities, and framings of democracy support. More than one democracy promoter is calling for a ‘paradigm shift’ in democracy promotion.
What are we to make of these reforms? How have democracy promoters responded to the recent challenges and crises and how adequate are such responses? What do these reforms mean exactly? Are there signs of real shifts in approaches to democracy promotion/support, or are they mainly rhetorical reforms? Are some reforms more far reaching than others?
Further, how is meaningful reform to be achieved, constituted and assessed? Who measures the successes or failures of meaningful reform?
This final panel invites the contributors to reflect on the current reform attempts. We invite the commentators to assess the reforms (from their perspective) and to set out what count as the most relevant, significant and interesting reforms. We also invite them to brainstorm about future policy initiatives: What policy initiatives would they like to see? Which actors should respond and in which ways? What kinds of practical, and conceptual, shifts should take place and why? How are reform agendas to be achieved and completed?