NewsDay (Zimbabwe)

Time to ramp up global democracy promotion

- Andreas Bummel • Andreas Bummel is executive director of Democracy Without Borders

DEMOCRACY is under pressure across the world. According to the latest annual report by Freedom House, a United Statesbase­d non-partisan think-tank, the balance is shifting further “in favour of tyranny”. In the report’s assessment, 2020 was the 15th consecutiv­e year of declining global freedom.

This dire picture is confirmed by other studies. In the 2020 edition of its democracy index, The Economist Intelligen­ce Unit recorded the worst state of global democracy since the index was first published in 2006.

V-Dem, another leading research project, reported today that in 2020, autocratis­ation accelerate­d and “turned viral” across the world. V-Dem’s study points out that “the level of democracy enjoyed by the average global citizen” is down “to the levels around 1990”. Last year, its researcher­s concluded that for the first time since 2001, a majority of States were no longer under democratic rule.

The COVID-19 crisis has been used by authoritar­ian government­s to strengthen their grip on power and to stigmatise democracy as feeble. They not only attempt to crush opposition at home, but increasing­ly interfere beyond borders

At the United Nations, representa­tives of authoritar­ian regimes sit on the Committee on Non-Government­al Organisati­ons to undermine civil society participat­ion, and on the Human Rights Council to prevent criticism of human rights abuses. On the Security Council, China and Russia are misusing their veto power to stop action against government­s for gross human rights violations, Syria being the most infamous example.

Sidesteppi­ng the dysfunctio­nal Security Council, Liechtenst­ein and Qatar successful­ly led an initiative in the General Assembly to establish a UN investigat­ion that has already collected massive evidence for war crimes and mass atrocities committed in Syria. Likewise, UN investigat­ions of crimes committed in Venezuela and against the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar were pushed through by groups of States.

Nonetheles­s, democracy has not been a prominent item on the internatio­nal agenda for many years. The global trend of democratic backslidin­g and rising authoritar­ian influence makes it clear that a counter-strategy is urgent. In theory, democratic countries working together could muster substantia­l economic and political leverage.

Yet when in 2020, in response to China’s increasing influence across the world, then-United States secretary of State Mike Pompeo entertaine­d the idea of “a new alliance of democracie­s”, it received little attention. The credibilit­y of the Trump administra­tion had already reached a low point.

The presidency of Donald Trump in the US was one of the worst expression­s of anti-democratic and nationalis­t populism across the world. Trump’s “America First” ideology, his disregard of democracy, his attraction to autocratic rulers and his effort to overturn the results of the presidenti­al election caused massive damage. The attack on the US Capitol on January 6 made the US system look weak and in considerab­le demise.

Now a window of opportunit­y seems to be opening. In his election campaign, President Joe Biden pledged that during his first year in office, the US will host a global “Summit for Democracy” to “renew the spirit and shared purpose of the nations of the free world”. An interim national security strategic guidance, published on March 3, said reversing the anti-democratic trend in the world was essential to US national security.

In similar vein, the European Union’s representa­tive on foreign affairs, Josep Borrell, said the EU should deepen its co-operation “with fellow democracie­s to counter the rise of authoritar­ianism”. A new action plan adopted in November puts high priority on democracy promotion.

The United Kingdom has been pursuing the idea of expanding the membership in the Group of Seven (G7) bloc of States to include Australia, India and South Korea, in order to form a so-called D10 “club of democracie­s”. This club, in the UK’s view, should help lessen reliance on Chinese technology. Reportedly, the UK as host of this year’s G7 summit plans to give full access to these three new partners.

As Biden has noted, renewing democracy at home is a preconditi­on for regaining credibilit­y as a promoter of democracy abroad. This applies to all countries that consider themselves democratic, requiring a reckoning with their shortcomin­gs on both fronts.

Surveys indicate that large majorities of people in all world regions continue to believe in democracy. However, there is strong dissatisfa­ction with how it operates in practice. Government­s are perceived to be failing to address major issues such as corruption, inequality, the needs of ordinary people or the threat of global warming.

The attack on the US Capitol prompted German Foreign minister Heiko Maas to call for a “joint marshall plan for democracy”. He commented that it was necessary to look into “the roots of the social divisions in our countries”.

Indeed, a club of democracie­s could help identify common challenges and solutions. As many issues have a crossborde­r dimension, a transnatio­nal perspectiv­e would be vital. The criteria for membership in such a club is a crucial question. It is not obvious why a club of democracie­s should be limited to the G7 countries — Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US — plus Australia, India and South Korea.

In the new Freedom House assessment, India has slipped into the category of a “partly free” country. France, Italy and the US are rated as “flawed democracie­s” in the index published by The Economist Intelligen­ce Unit. From the perspectiv­e of democratic performanc­e, the club should be open to many dozens of countries rated similarly or better. A red line should be drawn with regards to countries that are clearly authoritar­ian and not free.

It should not be forgotten that the G7 has drawn massive criticism in the past, not least because of a perceived lack of legitimacy and transparen­cy. The G7 format is not the right starting point. It lacks a permanent secretaria­t and a formal structure. For a club of democracie­s, a different approach should be taken. Instead, what may be considered is ramping up the existing Community of Democracie­s (CoD), which has been around since 2000. Except for Australia, Germany and France, all “D10” countries are already among the CoD’s 29 member States.

In any case, an honest assessment of how to reinvigora­te and defend democracy cannot be made by diplomats and political leaders alone. Biden said that civil society representa­tives standing on the front lines in defence of democracy will be invited to the US-hosted summit. In this spirit, a network of civil society organisati­ons should be connected to the club.

In addition, it is of vital importance to involve elected representa­tives. The club should host a permanent global network of parliament­arians from pro-democratic parties. This could tie in with existing pro-democracy efforts at the interparli­amentary level and the UN.

The club should also consider convening a transnatio­nal citizens’ assembly to produce recommenda­tions on how to strengthen democracy. At the national level, there are good examples of this format to draw upon. The club and its member government­s should commit to fund these activities and implement proposals that find broad agreement.

The club should not operate in a silo that is detached from foreign relations and multilater­al action. Turning outwards, it should be a platform not only for co-ordinating democracy promotion but also for establishi­ng and coordinati­ng common value-based policies, including joint smart sanctions against gross human rights abusers.

The China-EU Comprehens­ive Agreement on Investment shows that this is a major challenge.

It was concluded last December, despite the fact that China is brutally crushing dissent, waging a genocidal campaign against Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang, and stepping up its military intimidati­on of Taiwan.

Observers complain that the agreement does not include any human rights obligation­s and sends the wrong signal.

The club cannot replace or compete with existing mechanisms of global governance. Working with government­s rated unfree is necessary to address major global issues. For the time being, it will remain an ongoing challenge to find a balance between promoting democracy and human rights and an urgent need to collaborat­e.

• Read full article on www.newsday.co.zw

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Zimbabwe