democracy! or democracy?

Funnily, I have never really followed politics in the Middle East outside of the Palestine-Israel conflict. The last couple weeks have really inspired and caught my attention.

What I am finding fascinating, and anyone reading this is probably sick of hearing me talk about it, is the current conflict between democratic “idealism” and realpolitik. President Obama, who many feel has fallen short of expectations( although I disagree), is now caught between living up to his democratic ideals, satisfying popular dissent over job creation and a poor economy, and attempting to ensure that American strategic interests are not destroyed overnight in the wake of the many, many political happenings currently going on.

All evidence in Egypt suggests that a million people or more will soon be protesting in Cairo, as of today, protests are now being seen in Jordon, despite a new pm and cabinet being appointed by the king: the situation in Tunisia is also not yet solved. Coincidentally, Barack Obama is looking older by the day. Israel is having round the clock emergency meetings to deal with possible repercussions of ‘revolutionary’ democracy in the Middle East and the US is caught between its long-term goal of global democraticization, support of Israel, and ensuring that their energy security is protected.

At this stage, Obama, may be able to significantly impact the onset of global democracy, provided that he lends his voice to the cause. At this stage, he is already being criticized for failing to predict the outcome in Egypt and responding with clear support of the revolution.

Is Malaysia next?

Democracy is an ambiguous term. As a theory it is often far different on paper than reality. As a catch-phrase it is regularly adopted by politicians to gain legitimacy. As a political system, it can often mean multiple things for multiple people depending on context and understanding of the word. In these ways, it proves difficult to provide a clear and universally accepted definition of what democracy is.

For myself, it is crucial that a democracy include these things: free and fair elections and accompanying participatory involvement in the election process, civil liberties and political freedom, the separation of military and state, judicial independence and rule of law, protection of human rights, transparency, checks and balances on political power, and popular support. It is equal parts political rights, civil rights, and checks and balances.

I would argue that because political systems are not static, but, rather constantly changing, a constitutional and institutional framework is also necessary to ensure that these processes remain honest and consistent in nature. In the case of countries with strong “democracies” or a relatively high level of democratic quality, it is evident that they fulfill all of these criteria within reason. Similarly, not all democracies are the same and their quality is dependent on unique historical and cultural circumstances that effect how the political process is run. In the case of Denmark, with a relatively small population, and among the highest levels of democratic quality, it is evident that the level of efficiency and institutional strength may not be as effective should say India adopt a similar framework for its own democracy.

Democracies are not perfect, rather they are imperfect and flawed. Often they are defined by competition between elite and lobby-groups, but, the ability of civil society to act as a counter-balance alongside the rule of law may be seen as a means of limiting the consolidation of absolute power and therefore, keeping politicians honest. Not all corrupt politicians are caught, but, some are and this is the best we can do.

This definition is not perfect, but, it allows a strong foundation to build on when examining democracy and should other countries be placed in this framework, and I would argue that a gradated approach is the most beneficial, it will give us a good idea of democratic quality.

A little late, but, better late than never. Last weeks assignment asked us to find two examples of adjective democracy in the news and analyze them using Collier and Levitsky’s concepts and terminology.

Example 1: In a recent letter to the European Union, a number of dissidents, anti-communists, opposition members and intellectuals have urged the EU to force Hungary to adopt tough democratic regulations following the implementation of highly restrictive media control law. They claim that Hungary has become a full-fledged illiberal democracy. In the context of the article, the labeling of Hungary as an illiberal democracy might be useful because it suggests that while a fair elective system is in place, another element of democracy, in this instance civil rights or freedom of speech, is missing. This example is clear in its avoidance of conceptual stretching, in this way.

Example 2: In a recent commentary on the political situation in East Africa , one writer has tongue-in-cheek used the term military democracy. It refers to the change of suit, where generals don civilian clothing, but, remaining, in effect, military leaders who preside over parliament. This is a clear example of conceptual stretching, where, assumptions are made that countries in East Africa are in fact democracies rather than authoritarian or military regimes. Contrary to the instance of Hungary, this also makes use of the minimalist definition of democracy as being defined by electoral systems.

To commemorate Indian Republic Day, it is fitting to briefly comment on the current state of democracy in India by elaborating on a recent article by Vijay Nagaraj, the current research director at the International Council on Human Rights Policy. In his article, Nagaraj, criticizes the increasing problems seen in India’s democracy characterized by a growing oppression of civil rights and the role of religious lobbyists in determining what should be secular policy.

Key points in the article:

Ten citizens were killed in 2010 for demanding their right to know under India’s Right to Information law, a toll likely to be higher given that authorities frequently understate threats faced by those demanding information likely to expose abuse of power.

The Free Speech Hub recorded 27 attacks and nine cases involving arrests or detention of journalists; writers and civil liberties activists also faced attacks and in four cases faced prosecution for sedition—under a legal provision of British vintage. . .

Author Rohinton Mistry’s Such a Long Journey was removed from the syllabus of Bombay University within 24 hours of an undergraduate student objecting to its portrayal of the Hindu radical Shiv Sena, a party led by his grandfather, Bal Thackeray.  Writer Arundhati Roy and two others face charges of sedition for their utterances at a public meeting in Delhi that Kashmir is not an integral part of India; precisely what most Kashmiris have been saying, for over five decades now. In Kashmir itself, a college lecturer faces charges of inciting secession because his English language examination paper included a question inviting students to discuss whether Kashimiri youth involved in recent stone throwing protests were heroes, and to translate into English a passage that mentioned their killing by security forces.  Then there is Dr. Binayak Sen—a physician awarded the prestigious Jonathan Mann award for Global Health and Human Rights in 2008 for his services to the rural poor. Arrested and denied bail for two years, Dr. Sen, now an Amnesty International Prisoner of Conscience,  was convicted of sedition, found guilty of acting as a courier for an imprisoned ideologue of Maoist rebels, one of the many prisoners he was treating as a visiting doctor. The flimsy nature of the evidence, the fact that key prosecution witnesses, including prison officials, turned hostile and numerous other inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case notwithstanding.

The Free Speech Hub study also revealed that books, cinema, television shows, mobile communication or theatre performances were subject to curbs or restrictions in 33 instances by vigilante groups and in 34 instances by state or judicial bodies respectively. The most high profile examples include cases involving a nude painting by the renowned artist MF Hussain and comments made by a South Indian actress on the prevalence of pre-marital sex in society. Though higher courts eventually settled both in favour of free speech, they led to a spate of criminal cases, protracted litigation and continued harassment, and in the case of Hussain it all but ended his chances of exhibiting in India, culminating in his emigration to Qatar.  In fact, some fanatical elements threatened Arundhati Roy with much the same fate following her remarks on Kashmir. At the extreme, expressions of love that defy caste or religious prescriptions can cost people their lives—according to CNN, five such couples were killed in one week in June alone. (http://www.morungexpress.com/write_wing/61094.html).

These are not new issues within India which has seen a turbulent history of civic inequality alongside reasonable political freedom. The question, then, arises why is India labeled a democracy by those in the West when it fails to meet many of the criteria that we take for granted within our own countries?

One possible explanation is the role of rhetoric within global politics. Very soon, we may seen India, the largest “democracy” in the world come into play as one of the most important emerging super-powers, both in respect to economic might- it will soon be on par with China in terms of GDP growth- and geopolitical influence. In this respect, it is advantageous for the West to have a democratic ally in Asia to counter the role of subversive “Chinese” influence.

This weeks articles raise a number of important points in respect to the measurement of democracy. Moreover, each makes a number of valid points regarding gradation and dichotomy approaches. In Collier& Adcock’s article, three important points are brought up:

(a) The absence of one attribute does not invalidate or diminish the meaning of other attributes in relation to the concept of democracy

 (b) The practice of giving explicit names to categories that group together similar cases is also a means of pinpointing and differentiating crucial attributes of regimes

( c) Decisions about gradations versus dichotomies are often built into the framing of research questions.

Something that I have been struggling with over the last two weeks has been the question of how to account for inconsistencies within “democracies”, especially in relation to the more inclusive definition of democracy given in the last readings. To give an example, Venezuela can, at least on a local level, be understood as far more democratic than Canada should participatory involvement in government decision making and fair elections be seen as the core of democracy- Hugo Chavez has until recently been exceedingly popular and won elections with an overwhelming majority. By the same account, executive power is absolute, there is little separation of military and state powers, freedom of speech or opposition is very limited, and there has been some attempt to limit judicial independence. Moreover, considering Chavez’s anti-elite rhetoric, he is a career-military man with almost no formal education, we could even say that within Venezuela rule by the many and minimization of the elite-minority is currently in effect.

In this regard, I agree with the article. A definition must clearly be given and context stated before either approach is adapted.

ADEN, Yemen – Drawing inspiration from the revolt in Tunisia, thousands of Yemenis fed up with their president’s 32-year rule demanded his ouster Saturday in a noisy demonstration that appeared to be the first large-scale public challenge to the strongman.

Clashes also broke out Saturday in Algeria, as opposition activists there tried to copy the tactics of their Tunisian neighbours, who forced their longtime leader to flee the country more than a week ago.

The protests in Yemen appeared to be the first of their kind. The nation’s 23 million citizens have many grievances: they are the poorest people in the Arab world, the government is widely seen as corrupt and is reviled for its alliance with the United States in fighting al-Qaida, there are few political freedoms and the country is rapidly running out of water.

Still, calling for President Ali Abdullah Saleh to step down had been a red line that few dissenters dared to test.

In a reflection of the tight grip Saleh’s government and its forces have in the capital — outside the city, that control thins dramatically — Saturday’s demonstration did not take place in the streets, but was confined to the grounds of the University of Sanaa.

Around 2,500 students, activists and opposition groups gathered there and chanted slogans against the president, comparing him to Tunisia’s ousted President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, whose people were similarly enraged by economic woes and government corruption.

“Get out get out, Ali. Join your friend Ben Ali,” the crowds chanted.

One of the organizers, Fouad Dahaba, said the demonstration was only a beginning and they will not stop until their demands are met.

“We will march the streets of Sanaa, to the heart of Sanaa and to the presidential palace. The coming days will witness an escalation,” said Dahaba, an Islamist lawmaker and head of the teachers’ union.

Making good on that pledge will be difficult. Like other entrenched regimes in the Arab world, Yemen’s government shows little tolerance for dissent and the security forces — bolstered by U.S. military aid intended for fighting the country’s virulent al-Qaida offshoot — are quick to crack down.

Police fired tear gas at the demonstrators, whose grievances include proposed constitutional changes that would allow the president to rule for a lifetime. Around 30 protesters were detained, a security official said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the press.

Since the Tunisian turmoil, Saleh has ordered income taxes slashed in half and has instructed his government to control prices. He also ordered a heavy deployment of anti-riot police and soldiers to several key areas in the capital and its surroundings to prevent any riots.

Nearly half the population lives below the poverty line of $2 a day and doesn’t have access to proper sanitation. Less than a tenth of the roads are paved. Tens of thousands have been displaced from their homes by conflict, flooding the cities.

The government is riddled with corruption, has little control outside the capital, and its main source of income — oil — could run dry in a decade.

Protests were also held in the southern port city of Aden, where calls for Saleh to step down were heard along with the more familiar slogans for southern secession. Police fired on demonstrators, injuring four, and detained 22 others in heavy clashes.

Military forces responded harshly to two similar protests a day earlier in four cities in the nearby southern province of Lahj, even firing mortar shells that killed one woman. The response forced residents to flee.

Besides the battle with al-Qaida’s local franchise, which has taken root in the country’s remote and lawless mountains, Yemen’s government is also trying to suppress the secessionist movement and a separate on-and-off rebellion in the north.

Adding popular street unrest to that mix could present the government with a new challenge, though it has shown itself to be resilient even to the occasional al-Qaida attacks to penetrate the capital’s defences.

In Algeria, meanwhile, helmeted riot police armed with batons and shields clashed with rock- and chair-throwing protesters who tried to march in the capital in defiance of a ban on public gatherings.

At least 19 people were injured, the government said, but an opposition party official put the figure at more than 40.

Protest organizers at the democratic opposition party RCD draped a Tunisian flag next to the Algerian flag on a balcony of the party headquarters where the march was to begin in the capital, Algiers.

Riot police, backed by a helicopter and crowd-control trucks, ringed the exit to ensure marchers couldn’t leave the building — and striking those who tried to come out to take part. Outside, some young men waved the national flag and chanted “Assassin Power!”

“I am a prisoner in the party’s headquarters,” said Said Sadi, a former presidential candidate who leads the Rally for Culture and Democracy party, said through a megaphone from a balcony window.

(http://ca.news.yahoo.com/thousands-protest-yemeni-presidents-32-years-power-call-20110122-110136-625.html)

After, finally, completing this weeks readings, I have to say that I agree with both articles. Self-admittedly my ability to digest academic rhetoric is sub-standard, but, from my understanding it seems the authors raise two important points.

Firstly, for Schmitter and Karl, expanding on Dahl and Shumpeter’s definitions of democracy, suggest that “Democracy does not consist of a single unique set of institutions”(76). Broadly speaking, it can be used to describe diverse cultures and contexts.

Secondly, Collier and Levitsky, seem to argue for the necessity[?] of subcategories in order to better describe the degree of democratization within respective states: this ties into the previous article. Because qualitative measurement of democracy within such a diverse range of states is often difficult, it may prove useful to adopt language that better helps to identify differences.

From my own perspective, one idea that is not addressed (as far as I know) and remains equally important in measuring democracy is the notion of how to measure consistency within emerging democracies. While it is acknowledged that democracy exists as an ideal, in many instances the level of democracy differs within different areas depending on pre-existing economic conditions, political or cultural alliances, ethnicity and proximity to government.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2042936,00.html?xid=rss-mostpopular

This past week, Tunisia has continued to make headlines following massive protests and the selection of an interim unitary government. Little has changed at this point and protests continue. This was to be expected and full democratization in the country is still premature.

Even so, the current “Jasmine Revolution” in Tunisia and both regional and global reactions to the movement provide an interesting perspective on international relations, perceived  strategic security interests and realpolitik.

Firstly, it has been argued that Tunisia has unique underlying characteristics that make copycat actions unlikely, but, it is clear that neighboring leaders, most of which share similar autocratic leanings, have realized the “powder-keg” nature of the movement and are showing some signs of worry. In Egypt, it has been reported that concessions may be made to help subsidize the cost of food for the poor. Syria has also announced over the weekend that it plans to provide financial support for as many as 415,000 low-income families starting next month. Even as Arab leaders met at a regional economic summit in Egypt, another man self-immolated himself in front of the government headquarters in Cairo: one of nine now reported at this point. A number have also been reported in Algeria.

What history clearly shows us is, that despite some differences, the overwhelming linkage between Middle-East and North African culture, religion and economic conditions make it easy for the region’s large, economically-marginalized population to find common ties with each other. While some argue otherwise, I feel the power of of a single Arab,Muslim psyche cannot be discounted. The notable example in this case is a shared regional hatred of Israel: something that has also raised red flags in Israel this past weekend.

The second point: the perceived threat of regional democratization has raised alarm bells in Israel. Free-elections pose the risk of putting Islamicist governments into power and trumping current security agreements now in place: worst case, provoking a unified Arab- Israeli conflict.

The United States government has also come to a similar conclusion and has remained uncharacteristically quiet in lieu of Tunisia’s uprising: Hilary Clinton when questioned responding, “We cannot take sides”. . .  For America, which had until recently supported the Tunisian dictatorship, it also provides an interesting example of realpolitik. While democracy as an ideal remains central to American foreign policy, it is not always the best choice for strategic interests. The Middle East remains a crucial source of energy for America. It is also the source of two lengthy wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: both of which the Obama administration is now trying to distance itself from. Much like Cambodia post-Vietnam War, further American involvement in regional politics is risky. Furthermore, the potential threat of politicized Muslim democracies that may prove unsympathetic, at the least, to American interests is also very real. Lastly, American support of Israel has and will continue to remain unquestioned.

The next few months may undoubtedly prove interesting…

After reading everyone’s introductions, I am really happy to find some common shared interests within such a diverse group.

For Thomas: I also really like jazz, I studied piano for 12 years, up until I was 16. I have often considered picking it up again as I really miss playing jazz- minus the theory. One of my favorite jazz musician’s, someone I am sure you have heard of, is John Coltrane. Here is a link to one of his better live performances( although they are all good)

For Kate: Thailand is an amazing place, one of the most epic experiences of my life was motorcycling through the Mae Hong Son loop, near death experiences aside( I got horribly lost, almost lost my bike off a cliff on a particularly steep incline, and came face to face with a giant rainbow viper that crossed my path:) ) For a few dollars a day these experiences and more can be yours.

Also, if you go to Thailand, I highly recommend, Laos, it is less touristy than Thailand, and the capital has some of the best Indian food outside of India( go figure).
Jon: That is great that you are into djing and electronic music! What type of music do you like best? I have been a dj for 12 years now, I quit playing a couple years ago and sold all my equipment and most of my vinyl records, but, I have recently decided to get back into it and bought turntables a couple weeks ago. I am not sure if you know much about the equipment Native Instruments is putting out, but, this is the future of turntablism. Also there is a great dj coming next month called Carl Craig: one of the original innovators of the Detroit Techno movement.

UNABLE to find a job after university, Muhammad Bouazizi moved to a big city and tried to get by, selling vegetables from a barrow. But police confiscated his unlicensed cart, slapping and insulting him. The 26-year-old returned to his home town in despair. Last month he stood in its main square, doused himself in petrol and struck a match. On January 4th he died of his injuries.

( http://www.economist.com/node/17862305)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12180954

Today I came across a really profound story: one in which a young Arab immolated himself after losing the sole means of providing support for his family. Some bloggers are now referring to him as “the most famous Arab in the world”.

His action, has tragically brought to light many of the longstanding problems Tunisia’s youth now face: government cronyism, corruption, restriction of civil rights, and an unemployment rate as high as 30 percent.

The country has largely prospered under the authoritarian government of elderly technocrat Ben Ali for the last twenty-some years, despite his heavy handed approach. Citizens grudgingly accepted their lack of democratic rights, provided that economic conditions within the country continued to improve. This acceptance has been slowly waning due, in part, to the inability of the Ali government to deal with the country’s mounting problems. This week protesters numbering in the thousands have forced Ali to flee the country, and an interim government has taken over promising to create a unitary government in the near future.

In context, the struggle in Tunisia is interesting. On one hand, it is comparable to other democratic movements seen in the last fifty years: growing pressure on repressive, undemocratic governments by a large, mobilized civil society culminating in meaningful political change.

On the other hand, it presents one of the few, if any, democratic movements in the Arab world that is not Islamized. It has drawn support from other country’s in the region, notably Egypt and Lebanon. Most importantly, it may signify a change in traditional organization methods within civil society vis-a-vis the state.

Tunisia, when analyzed, seems to present classic characteristics of a transitionary democracy. It has had a long period of moderate stability, a high level of education, and deteriorating economic conditions. What remains unique is the role of technology. Despite being rated among the worst in the world in terms of freedom of information, advancements in technology have allowed many of the daily internet users free access to information: one example being the recent Wikileaks release proposing American criticism of the Ali regime.

This “globalization” of technology has led to what may be deemed an online revolution within Tunisia: where social media and blogging sites, alongside Facebook, Youtube and Twitter, have been successfully used by pro-democracy activists to mobilize and spread information despite the best efforts of government officials to restrict access to them. Moreover, the huge number of internet users in Tunisia, estimates numbering 10 million, have limited the government in their efforts to repress information, for fear of a potential backlash.

This raises interesting questions: Will similar events occur in other non-democratic countries that share access to technology and high-education? What then are the necessary precursors for democratic transition?

Iregardless, it is possible that the social media trend may present itself as yet another means of creating political space in future battles for democracy..

AB

edit:  the facebook statement of Bazouzi can be found here>>>

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439×202453