Democratization

Talk about European Union Negotiation Project.  (EU Intro here.) 

Transitions from Authoritarian Rule

   and the Consolidation of Democracy

Scholars do not agree on what makes a democracy, how long a transition takes and what needs to be accomplished, or when one can say definitively that a transition to democracy has been completed.

Present one view:  Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation.

When is a transition complete? "A democratic transition is complete when sufficient agreement has been reached about political procedures to produce an elected government, when a government comes to power that is the direct result of a free and popular vote, when this government de facto has the authority to generate new policies, and when the executive, legislative, and judicial power generated by the new democracy does not have to share power with other bodies de jure."

Consolidated democracy occurs when democracy is “the only game in town." 

How do we know when democracy is "the only game in town?"

• Behaviorally, no significant group attempts to overthrow the government or to secede.

• Attitudinally, even in the face of political and economic crises, people believe change must come from within the democratic system.  Citizens cannot imagine the government being organized any other way.

• Constitutionally, all actors expect political conflict to be carried out through established institutions and norms. Violations are ineffective and costly to those who violate the rules.

Biggest dangers to a transitioning country are that the transition will prove so painful (often accompanied by wrenching economic changes as well, Iraq also by insurgent attacks and sectarian fighting) that the people will look to a savior from the military or a populist demagogue, and democracy will be overturned.

Process of consolidation has to take place in what the authors call five “arenas:”

• (Prerequisite: stateness)
• Civil society—formation of organizations, autonomous space from state, free press.
• Political society—political parties, electoral rules, legislative institutions, peaceful competition.
• Rule of law—constitution, law applied, some redress.
• State apparatus—ability to tax, provide basic services.  Have to have a functioning state to have a democracy.  If people can vote, and nothing happens, not much of a democracy AND not likely to be a sustainable system.
• Economic society—economic activity outside of the control of the state.  Bigger issue in some consolidations (post-Communist) than in others.

Democratization in Russia

Why has democratization been difficult in the post-Soviet Russian context? 

• Unpopularity and pain of economic reform (shock therapy) which undermines democracy and reform.  Some, living on old fixed pensions in desperate straits (drop in life span, increase in alcoholism).
• Russia’s decline associated with democracy and reform, not positive, nostalgia factor for the greatness of the old Soviet Union when Russia was a superpower (exploited by revived Communists and by former president, now Prime Minister Putin)
• Pipes polling: 10/03 Q: "how react if Communist coup?"  23% actively support, 19% would collaborate, 27% would just try to survive, 16% would emigrate, and only 10% would actively resist)
• Pew Polling (2011): Prefer strong leadership or democracy?  57% prefer strong leadership; only 32% prefer democracy.  Is it a great misfortune that the Soviet Union no longer exists? 50% yes, @35% no.  Have the changes since 1991 helped ordinary people? Almost 70% no, just about 25% yes.
• Reformers look like Westernizers, selling out to the West (nationalism exploited by Communists, Liberal Democrats, and Putin). 

Khodorkovsky (See, pro-Khodorkovsky clip at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dmsw9BPWwNE)

• As 98% state-run economy was given "shock therapy," firms wound up in the hands of new "oligarchs" such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky of Yukos ("insider privatization" and "loans-for-shares").  Putin has since acted to bring many of these assets back under state control, re-nationalization.
• Weak political parties that appear and disappear from election to election.  Putin has used the United Russia Party as vehicle of his rule, party widely known as "the party of crooks and thieves."  Yeltsin’s attempt to stay “above” the parties.
• Unfair elections.  Protests in December 2011 over United Russia's stealing of the parliamentary ballot earlier in the month (One monitor kicked out of polling station said "I thought I would die of shame . . . I did not manage to save your votes . . . forgive me."
• Weak legislative institutions.  Putin has attempted to craft a party/parties under his control that would carry out his bidding.  Legislative institutions have become more of a rubber stamp for the executive.
• Weak legal institutions.  Political murders go uninvestigated.  Attacks on media, human rights activists.
• Weak NGOs.  Press less free than it was a decade ago (consolidation under state control).  Human rights activists risk murder to bring to light abuses by Russian government/military forces in Chechnya or Russia more broadly. Putin attacks NGOs "grant receivers" as "Judas."  Russian state television presented a film about Golos, an independent election monitor, framing staff as Western agents.
• Strong president—difficult/traumatic for other institutions to confront.  Putin roll back some democratic reforms (election of regional heads, tv controlled) to consolidate power.
• Influence of siloviki, former KGB/FSB, in politics and business.
• Choices made by Putin: project Russia as great power, himself as a great ruler echoing great Soviet era. Putin: "One who does not regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart; one who wants to bring it back has no brain," roll back democratic freedoms a choice made by an individual, not everything conditioned by the institutional environment.
• Institutions fungible.  When Putin was president, president dominated. Now that Putin is PM, PM dominates.  Real authority coming from Putin's person.

Is Russia now democratized?  How do the different arenas look?

• Pre-requisitie: stateness
• Civil Society (Orthodox Church, state, and competition, state control of NGOs through registration, tax, harassment)
• Political Society (parties of power)
• Economic Society
• State Apparatus
• Rule of Law

Some countries never make it to democracy: return to authoritarianism, achieve "feckless pluralism," live in "gray areas."

What about Afghanistan?

• Consolidation? Still in transition?
• How about the arenas?

• Pre-requisitie: stateness
• Civil Society
• Political Society
• Economic Society
• State Apparatus
• Rule of Law

Last updated January 3, 2012.

tanp@uncw.edu

Return to Dr. Tan's homepage: http://people.uncw.edu/tanp/