Chapter 11
Chapter 11: The Coming of a Democratic Century?
Chapter Review
In the heady days of the
late 1980s and early 1990s it appeared democracy was sweeping the world.
Francis Fukuyama coined the term the end of history to describe how the
world seemed to be experiencing "the universalization of Western liberal
democracy as the final form of human government." As the 1990s went on,
however, history came roaring back with conflicts throughout the world. Samuel
Huntington, in contrast to Fukuyama, argued the world was experiencing a "clash
of civilizations."
The end of the Cold War
did experience a wave of democratization. However, tremendous uncertainties
remain as to whether the gains made in many new democracies will be
consolidated and institutionalized. In Africa, a trend of strongman leaders leads
us to question if these men will allow democracy to take hold. A high
percentage of states in the Middle East are not free and the relation of
Islamic fundamentalism to human rights and democratization is particularly
controversial. Any complacency brought on by the spread of democracy in the
1990s in Latin America has been shaken by the instabilities of the region in
recent years. Amnesty International points out human rights violations
throughout the world, though the organization also notes that there are many
examples of positive change.
According to the theory of
the democratic peace, the United States should support the spread of
democracy not just because it is the right thing to do, but also because
history demonstrates that democracies do not fight wars against fellow
democracies. The Democratic Peace theory has had a major influence on actual US
foreign policy in both the Clinton and the Bush administrations. Proponents of
the democratic peace cite empirical evidence for their claim and focus on the
role of both domestic political constraints and the internationalization of
democratic norms. Four principal arguments, however, have been made by those
who question the democratic peace theory:
- The confusing of correlation with
causality and the possibility of a spurious relationship
- Doubts about the connection
between peace and trade
- States undergoing democratization
may be more aggressive
- Democracies may aggressively
pursue global democratization
American foreign policy
has repeatedly been faced with tensions and trade-offs between considerations
of Power and Principles. The war on terrorism is no exception. During the Cold
War, American foreign policy adhered to the "ABC" definition of Third World
democrats. In the contemporary context of the war on terrorism, we moved
towards an "ABT" anybody but terrorists definition.
American foreign policy
has also faced tension in the trade-offs between Principles and Prosperity.
These are most evident in recent years with the use of economic sanctions.
Though not the only purpose for which economic sanctions are used, democracy
promotion and human rights protection have been among their main purposes.
Policy-makers must therefore decide whether to impose limits on economic
relations with other countries to try to force political changes. Among recent
cases of economic sanctions were those against China, Haiti, and Iraq.
Democracy and human rights
promotion have also been of utmost importance to many international actors in
recent years. The array of actors involved in promoting democratization may be
broader than in any other area of foreign policy. Such actors include:
- The US government
- Other foreign governments
- NGOs
- International institutions
These actors implement a
variety of strategies in the promotion of democracy. This generally involves
five key objectives:
- Facilitating free and fair
elections
- Helping build strong and
accountable political institutions
- Strengthening the rule of law
- Protecting human rights
- Helping cultivate a robust civil
society
These policies require
serious and extensive attention.