Explaining setbacks for democratization

Eric Witte October 2nd, 2008

Writing for The New Republic, Joshua Kurlantzick has a thoughtful article on a series of setbacks for democratization over the past few years, as has been documented by Freedom House.  In part Kurlantzick attributes backsliding and lack of progress in Central Asia, Africa, Latin America and East Asia to the Bush administration’s selling of the Iraq war under the banner of “democratization” (which gained prominence once weapons of mass destruction failed to materialize) and to the administration’s naked hypocrisy in dealing with countries from Azerbaijan to Equatorial Guinea:

As members of the Bush administration eye their legacies, they can be sure that their embrace of democratization has tarnished the very idea. In a 2006 report on the backlash against democracy, the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy, which funds democracy promotion around the world, admitted that some of its grantees overseas did not want to meet with NED program officers for fear of being tainted by association. The Iraq war, which was rationalized as an exercise in democratization, has also inspired new faith in authoritarian rule by linking the idea of democracy with the chaos in Baghdad. “What happened in Iraq makes the entire region afraid,” Haitham Maleh, a former president of the Committee for Human Rights in Syria, told Salon.com. “People don’t want to risk foreign occupation, chaos, and sectarian bloodshed.”

Worse, the administration has not even stuck by its guns. After having earlier emboldened some Middle Eastern democrats with promises of a “freedom agenda,” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on her most recent trip to the region, barely mentioned the word “democracy.” At times, the Bush administration has gone out of its way to assist autocrats, aiding the Ethiopian regime over the past three years in exchange for promises to help fight terrorism in Somalia and welcoming the leader of Azerbaijan at the White House after he rigged a national poll. The administration has even embraced leaders like Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema, who has been accused of abhorrent crimes, overseeing a regime under which political opponents are tortured, starved, and raped (Obiang himself has even been accused of eating the body parts of rivals). Still, in April 2006, Rice met Obiang at Foggy Bottom and–no doubt aware that Equatorial Guinea is becoming one of the largest oil exporters in West Africa–told him, “You are a good friend, and we welcome you.”

Beyond American policy failures, Kurlantzick also attributes democratic backsliding to the weakness of new democratic governments and the increasing savvy of authoritarian leaders.  China and Russia, alarmed by the color revolutions, are now offering training to authoritarians around the world in how to resist and co-opt democratic opposition.  The whole sobering article is must reading.

The EU’s waning influence at the United Nations

Eric Witte September 17th, 2008

The European Council on Foreign Relations released a report today, A Global Force for Human Rights? An Audit of European Power at the UN [PDF], which finds that the influence of the European Union at the United Nations has markedly declined over the past ten years.  At 80 pages, I haven’t had time to read more than the press release and executive summary, but it looks to be well worth the read.  Authored by Richard Gowan and Franziska Brantner, the report finds that support of EU positions in the General Assembly has declined from around 70% to around 50%.  They detected a similar drop-off in EU influence on the Human Rights Council and in the Security Council.  The shift has been accompanied by corresponding increases in the influence of China and Russia, each finding their support in the General Assembly rising from around 50% to around 75% over the same period.  The authors note several reasons for this troubling dynamic, including these (from the press release): “Europe has lost ground because of a reluctance to use its leverage, and a tendency to look inwards - with 1,000 coordination meetings in New York alone each year - rather than talk to others. It is also weakened by a failure to address flaws in its reputation as a leader on human rights and multilateralism.”

Chinese investment in Liberia brings risk

Eric Witte August 23rd, 2008

The Economist provides a nice overview of Liberia’s gradual recovery under President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf*, who took office in January 2006.   While she has tackled corruption and sought to spur economic growth to the advantage of average Liberians, Liberia has received substantial aid from the United States and Europe, as well as benefitted from mounting international investment.  As The Economist notes, China is among the countries putting cash into Liberia:

The Chinese are getting involved too. They have resurfaced the decrepit William Tubman Boulevard, Monrovia’s main artery, named after the country’s longest-serving president, and will take on similar projects throughout Liberia.

China’s influence across Africa is growing, which has rightly sparked concern.  In such places as Sudan, Chinese investment serves as a crutch for dictatorial (and in Sudan’s case, genocidal) regimes.  By contrast, Chinese investment in democratic Liberia seems unproblematic at first blush.  Yet it still poses a potential risk.

If Liberia’s fragile new democracy were to falter, there is a decent chance that western aid would be used as leverage to keep democratic governance on track.  The response of the United States and European Union to the August 6 coup in Mauritania, for example, could eventually create real pressure for the restoration of democratic order in that West African nation.  It is evident that Western defense of democracy in the region (and beyond) is far from guaranteed.  Witness, for example, the West’s appalling, passive acceptance of outright dictatorship in Liberia’s bauxite-laden neighbor, Guinea, or its cozy diplomatic relationships with the despots of oil-rich Gabon and Equatorial Guinea.  

While use of the established democracies’ leverage cannot be taken for granted in pressing for democratic change or seeking to prevent democratic backsliding, it is clear that China doesn’t care about democracy or good governance at all.  As long as natural resources from African countries continue to fuel China’s rapid economic development, Beijing will maintain support for the most odious of regimes.  To the extent that China becomes a major player in Africa, potential leverage from established democratic governments for maintance of human rights and democracy declines.

Liberia remains one of the poorest countries in the world and obviously cannot afford to turn up its nose at any aid or investment.  But China’s no-strings-attached approach to investing in Africa raises the stakes for Liberia by cutting away part of the safety net under President Johnson Sirleaf’s impressive high-wire act.

*Most media organizations - including The Economist - hyphenate her last name, but in interviews President Johnson Sirleaf has said that it isn’t hyphenated.

Rights Abuse Olympiad

Eric Witte July 29th, 2008

Yesterday Amnesty International released a new assessment of the human rights situation in China.  Amnesty finds that the situation has deteriorated as the Olympic Games in Beijing approach:   

“In the run-up to the Olympics, the Chinese authorities have locked up, put under house arrest and forcibly removed individuals they believe may threaten the image of ’stability’ and ‘harmony’ they want to present to the world.”

The organization has called on world leaders to condemn rights abuses when they attend the opening ceremonies.  One would think that western leaders and international media might find it difficult to engage in the biennial prattle about an “Olympic movement” while ignoring thuggish policies organized around the games.  We’ll soon see.

Because standing up to a major trading partner would have been the easy thing to do?

Eric Witte May 19th, 2008

The Dalai Lama ended a lonely five-day visit to Berlin today, with Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul the only German government minister agreeing to meet with him.  She reportedly did so against the wishes of Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.  In explaining his snub of the Tibetan spiritual leader, Steinmeier offered up this gem of an explanation: “It takes a lot of courage not to meet with the Dalai Lama these days.”   

Olympic torch relay turns into a public relations nightmare for China

Eric Witte April 7th, 2008

Despite 3,000 police and other security measures, the Olympic torch was extinguished three times in Paris and the Tibetan flag was flown briefly from the Parisian city hall today, following similar protests in London.  China’s economic, diplomatic and demographic weight may make it difficult for democratic governments to make protest of the crackdown in Tibet (or Darfur, or…) a top issue in their relationships with Beijing.  (This was perhaps in evidence over the weekend when the French government distanced itself from remarks on Tibet attributed to President Sarkozy.)  But China may be learning that it will be impossible to control popular sentiment around the world.  Indeed, the Olympic torch relay appears to be turning into a “Free Tibet” relay.

Update: Even before the Olympic torch arrives in northern California, protesters today scaled the Golden Gate Bridge to hang “Free Tibet” banners and a Tibetan flag. 

Briefly noted…

Eric Witte April 5th, 2008

  • Morgan Tsvangirai, the Movement for Democratic Change candidate for Zimbabwe’s presidency, is warning that President Robert Mugabe is preparing to deploy his security forces around the country to intimidate the population ahead of a run-off vote as the election commission still has not released official results from the first round. With Zimbabwe on edge and the MDC calling for international action to prevent violence, President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, which surely has the greatest external leverage over Mugabe, is arguing that “it’s the time to wait.” Mbeki has been waiting in deference to Mugabe ever since he succeeded Nelson Mandela.
  • According to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Burma’s proposed new constitution has leaked to the press and public. It would leave the military in ultimate control and ban Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from the presidency. How will the international community respond if this report is accurate?
  • French authorities have arrested Mohammed Bacar, the renegade leader of Comoros who refused to leave power and prompted an intervention by the African Union and Comoran troops. Bacar was arrested in the French territory if Reunion following an extradition request from the Comoran government.
  • France’s Human Rights Minister, Rama Yade, is denying that she told the newspaper Le Monde that President Nicolas Sarkozy had placed three conditions on his attendance at the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics - all related to Tibet. Meanwhile Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, is calling on President George W. Bush to consider boycotting the opening ceremonies. According to the New York Times, Pelosi said “that if the International Olympic Committee wanted to portray the Games as a gathering that transcends sports, its members should hold the host country to high human rights standards.” The White House continues to insist that Bush will attend.

China may lose more face - Europe considers responses on Tibet

Kurt Bassuener March 26th, 2008

On his current trip to Great Britain, French President Nicholas Sarkozy has called on Chinese authorities to engage in a dialogue with the Dalai Lama.  Prime Minister Gordon Brown, prepares to meet the Dalai Lama in May, and Sarkozy may follow suit, depending on how the situation in Tibet progresses.  The European Parliament’s President, Hans-Gert Poettering, invited the Dalai Lama to address the body and questioned the attendance of the Olympic opening ceremonies.  Former Czech President Vaclav Havel and five others in his Forum 2000 group suggest an even stronger response: 

Even as we write, it is clear that China’s rulers are trying to reassure the world that peace, quiet, and “harmony” have again prevailed in Tibet. We all know this kind of peace from what has happened in the past in Burma, Cuba, Belarus, and a few other countries – it is called the peace of the graveyard.

Merely urging the Chinese government to exercise the “utmost restraint” in dealing with the Tibetan people, as governments around the world are doing, is far too weak a response. The international community, beginning with the United Nations and followed by the European Union, ASEAN, and other international organizations, as well as individual countries, should use every means possible to step up pressure on the Chinese government to

  • allow foreign media, as well as international fact-finding missions, into Tibet and adjoining provinces in order to enable objective investigations of what has been happening;
  • release all those who only peacefully exercised their internationally guaranteed human rights, and guarantee that no one is subjected to torture and unfair trials;
  • enter into a meaningful dialogue with the representatives of the Tibetan people.

Unless these conditions are fulfilled, the International Olympic Committee should seriously reconsider whether holding this summer’s Olympic Games in a country that includes a peaceful graveyard remains a good idea.

U.S. President George Bush also phoned Chinese leader Hu Jintao to “engage in substantive dialogue with the Dalai Lama’s representatives.”

The death toll of the wide Chinese crackdown in Tibetan-populated areas in western China is estimated by exile groups as well over 130.

As of now, there is little reason to hope that the violent repression will be softened by international criticism.  But China’s Olympic coming-out party, already dogged by jusitified criticism of its Darfur, Burma, and Zimbabwe policies, may well be less joyful and universally hailed than the Chinese Communist Party leadership had planned.

Neighborly complicity in Tibet crackdown

Eric Witte March 18th, 2008

China’s crackdown on Tibet continues. The extent to which government forces are provoking or reacting to the attacks on Chinese-owned shops that have taken place in addition to the peaceful protests since March 10 is unclear. What is clear is that Chinese government reaction has been brutal. Troops continue to stream into Tibet and house-to-house searches are reportedly underway.  Meanwhile, today the Dalai Lama threatened to resign if anti-Chinese violence in Tibet continues, saying that violence in the name of Tibetan autonomy is “suicidal”.

As the protests have spread, not only to the bordering Chinese provinces of Gansu, Qinghai and Sichuan, but into other countries, Beijing is receiving the support of its neighbors. Moscow’s enthusiasm for brutality in squelching the demands of an oppressed minority is hardly shocking, but it is disappointing to see the world’s largest democracy, India, follow suit.  On Friday, India arrested Tibetan protestors seeking to march to Tibet. Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherje assured parliament yesterday that this was all part of a longstanding policy of “non-interference” in Chinese affairs, but it sure looks a lot like complicity. Mukherje was similarly unimpressive when Burma’s regime was killing, beating and detaining monks last October, stating: “It is up to the Burmese people to struggle for democracy, it is their issue.”

In Nepal, an ongoing police crackdown on peaceful Tibetan protestors yesterday became so brutal that the local UN office has protested and the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is also investigating.  The beating and arresting of peaceful protestors is a major setback for Nepal’s own tentative democratic progress, coming as it does after the April 2006 restoration of its parliamentary government.

China may have less luck in containing outrage elsewhere. European Parliament President Hans-Gert Poettering has raised the prospect of politicians’ boycotting the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympic Games that begin in August.  French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner today called that idea “interesting”.  If China’s violent repression of Tibet continues, it’s hard to see how such calls won’t escalate and expand. The mounting international debate over whether the Olympic Games should be boycotted in part, in whole, or not at all, is not a debate that China wanted to be engaged in just five months from the games.