Welcome to Layalina Productions

The Layalina Review

VOL. V NO. 9, April 10-April 27, 2009

Rethinking Democracy Promotion

Despite democracy promotion being at the forefront of US foreign policy under the Freedom Agenda, The New America Foundation says that "not only has the [agenda] failed to fulfill its promise, it has likely set back America’s overall promotion efforts." The Foundation is skeptical of the Obama administration’s ability to transform America's image abroad, arguing for extensive changes in the understanding of democracy promotion and foreign assistance.

While "the global spread of democracy [serves] America’s political, diplomatic and economic interests," and is consistent with deep-rooted social values, "the challenges inherent in democracy promotion will not be met by creating new programs. What is needed is a bureaucratic brush clearing."

The Foundation recommends revitalizing, not eliminating, US democracy promotion by placing international development as the focal point of US foreign policy and empowering the US Agency for International Development. It suggests channeling funding more effectively into development or humanitarian assistance, and supporting the work of civil society abroad.

In other debates on the role of democracy in foreign policy and American hegemony, Walter Rogers for the Christian Science Monitor asserts, "Our world is changing far more rapidly and profoundly than we, or our politicians, will admit. America’s own triple-A rating, its superpower status, is being downgraded as rapidly as its economy."

Rogers cites the lack of progress in Afghanistan, the disintegration of nuclear-armed Pakistan, the empowerment of Iran as a consequence of the Iraq war, "Washington’s uncritical support of Israel at the expense of the Palestinians," and importantly, the use of torture, which "shattered whatever moral edge America enjoyed before 2003."

"Americans need to acknowledge that war, like politics, as the art of the possible, and both have their limits…It is time to lower our geopolitical sights and end America’s unrealistic crusade [for democracy] . We shouldn’t expect ‘them’ to be like ‘us.’" he concludes.

El-Sayed Amin Shalabi, executive director for the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs, writes for Al-Ahram Weeklythat is not the goal of democracy but the methods to achieve it that alienated and marginalized potential reformers in the region.

Since the US views democracy as an issue of national security and pushed for greater activism in Arab nations, there was a drive for "societies to evolve and governments to accommodate." However, Shalabi notes that the Americans "balked" as reforms began bringing "anti-American Islamists to power," contrary to Washington’s goals, thereby shifting the promotion of democracy to individual cases.

Matt Duss for Think Progress concurs, arguing against Andrew Exum’s assertion that the neoconservative era discredited the "right" end of democracy in the Arab-speaking world and in domestic politics.

"I don’t think it’s really "politically incorrect" to say that Bush’s democratic rhetoric energized the discussion of representative government and human rights abroad as much as it is simply dishonest not to mention that most of that discussion revolved around how incompetent and counterproductive his actual policies for doing these things were," writes Duss.

Shalabi says that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s promotion of defense, diplomacy and development, rather than "that one last ‘d’, namely democracy," does not indicate that the administration values democracy less than before. Rather, it "prefers a softer approach that involves the improvement of economic and educational conditions, and not just the holding of elections."

Michael Signer for The New Republic contends, "'Democracy fatigue' might be an understandable reaction to the Bush administration. Yet turning away from freedom as a touchstone of our national security policy – especially today – would be dangerous." While the structural elements of democracy were supported by Bush, the "cultivation of constitutionalism – a vibrant, anti-authoritarian civic culture" should be the current goal in order to avoid the "illiberal democracy".

"A foreign policy grounded on constitutionalism would invest substantially in a constellation of concrete policy goals, including the expansion of civic education, market economics, and election training." While supporting advocacy of political freedom, free exchange of ideas and tolerance, Signer hastens to add that this approach must differ in different cultural and political contexts, as well as remove "democracy as a pawn in regime change" in order to build trust among peoples and institutions.

Back to articles