Democratization - The democratic peace theory posits that...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: The democratic peace theory posits that because well­ established democratic states do not fight each other, the diffusion of democratic governments around the world will reduce the probability of war. Democracies tend to form durable peaceful alliances and are less likely to be attacked by or lose a war with nondemocratic states. Immanuel Kant, PERPETUAL PEACE, 1795 negotiation, compromise, mediation, arbitration, adjudication rather than war Democratization as a Democratization as a Solution to Global Conflict http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm? page=22&year=2008&country=7519 1. 2. Democratic states are slow to go to war because of structural, institutional factors. Democracies commonly have multiple branches with checks and balances in place; this inefficiency makes them less likely to rush to war. Democratic states are accountable to the people via electoral systems. The public is slow to turn its attention to international matters and slow to anger. Since their sons and daughters will be sacrificed in war, democratic societies must be persuaded by politicians that war is necessary and in private citizens’ and the national interest. Six Possible Reasons Six Possible Reasons for the Democratic Peace 1. 2. Some believe that it is difficult for democratic societies to demonize other democratic peoples. It is generally necessary to demonize or dehumanize others to be willing to kill them. Some believe that shared norms and values make it unlikely that extreme disagreements will arise between democratic states so as to result in war. Con’t… Possible Reasons Con’t… Possible Reasons for the Democratic Peace Con’t…Possible Reasons Con’t…Possible Reasons for the Democratic Peace 1. 2. Some believe that democracies also tend to be economically liberal; free trade creates economic interdependences such that interest groups like transnational corporations will oppose war as detrimental to commerce. Democratic states form durable, peaceful alliances (e.g. NATO) and large winning coalitions. These factors tend to deter war, and when war breaks out, tends to lead to victory. Critiques of the Democratic Peace Theory Critiques of the Democratic Peace Theory 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Definitional problems “democracy” and “war;” positive versus negative conceptualizations of democracy, political versus economic empowerment There are many salient exceptions to the rule. The lack of war is more related to economic interdependence than democratic governments. Realists argue that democratic rhetoric is just used by states to justify pursuit of their national interests. Critics of the norms explanation ask: Are democratic states really peaceful? “the notion that democracies do not go to war with each other …has had a substantial impact on public policy…. There are very few propositions in international relations that can be articulated this clearly and simply, but when you have one, you can really cut through the clutter of the bureaucratic process and make an impact.” Joseph Kruzel, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, 1994 Freedom House indicators Freedom House indicators the rule of law free and open elections a competitive party system government accountability openness and transparency press freedom protection of human rights the right to peaceful assembly the existence of a civil society authoritarianism = a form of government without regard for human rights or representative principles, often military, without much ideological content but capable of brutality and savagery; a system of government not accountable to its citizens. totalitarianism = absolute control by the state of most aspects of the lives of its citizens according to the dictates of a ruling group that professes some comprehensive ideology, e.g. fascism, communism; a system of government in which the leaders of the state attempt to control virtually all aspects of society, including commerce, military affairs, artistic expression, and mass communication, in an effort to control and transform society. Some fundamentalist religious sects may aspire to this level of control. Why nondemocratic governments fail in poor countries… 1. 2. 3. 4. Modernizing economies and societies can’t be centrally managed successfully. Authoritarian regimes (military, party­driven, or personal dictatorships) are highly susceptible to corruption and nepotism because they are not accountable to the people Even if authoritarian regimes manage to achieve economic growth, a middle class and professional bureaucracy will emerge to agitate for democratic governance. Democratic transition seems to have a contagion effect. “democracy in Africa, a candle of hope that flickered briefly, is melting…. [C]atastrophic economic conditions were not on the side of democracy…. People have suffered a drastic fall in living standards. This has undermined the tolerance and patience necessary for democracy.” Richard Dowden, WORLD PRESS REVIEW, 1993, pp. 16­17. Civil society… Civil society… is composed of the totality of voluntary civic and social organizations and institutions that are the basis of a functioning society as opposed to state structures and commercial institutions. Examples of civil society organizations include charities, development non­ governmental organizations, community groups, women's organizations, religious organizations, sports clubs, professional associations, trade unions, self­help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions and advocacy groups. What can the global community do to promote democracy? provide technology, “know­how” in the general sense, as to how to “do democracy” use foreign aid to promote democracy Protecting human rights is the first step toward democracy. be willing to intervene in the face of gross human rights abuse. The UN Charter and Human Rights Preamble: “We the Peoples of the United Nations determined…to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women….” Article 1(3): “the Purposes of the United Nations are…to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.” Articles 55 + 56: members commit “to take joint action and separate action in cooperation with the Organization” for the promotion of “equal rights and self­ determination of peoples” including “universal respect for, and observance, of human rights.” Institutionalizing respect for human rights…. 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1961 European Social Charter 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1969 American Convention on Human Rights 1975 Helsinki Final Act (of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe) 1981 African Charter on Human Rights and Peoples’ Rights Humanitarian intervention by the United Nations… immediate violation of human rights large­scale violation of human rights The response should be multilateral rather than resorting to self­help solutions by individual states. The coercive measures employed should be proportional to the violations. UN motives must be transparent to affirm legitimacy; the response should be consistent and automatic rather than selective. The intervention should have minimal effect on the state and other authority structures. There should be prompt disengagement consistent with the purpose of the action. There should be immediate reporting to the Security Council and appropriate regional bodies. “we are in the midst of a global ‘associational revolution’.” Lester M. Salaman, Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies “We are not asking you to put your hand in your pocket, but we are asking people to put their fist in the air. This is your moment. Make history by making poverty history.” Bono, lead singer of U2 NGOs… NGOs… are increasing in number and power. They are joining forces with TRANSNATIONAL ADVOCACY NETWORKS and other principled actors committed to human rights and political, economic, and social cchange. are active in more sectors, taking on functions formerly the reserve of the state (e.g. providing microfinance, serving as legal monitors for arms control treaties). use tactics aimed directly at the public, transnational corporations, or intergovernmental organizations such as the World Bank and IMF rather than focusing their activities exclusively on states. are changing international politics and affect state sovereignty. Sources of NGOs’ power principled ideas (right and wrong, good and evil) information their reputations and the reputations of famous individuals (e.g. Bono, Lady Diana) the media and mass communications consumer power woman power noncelebrity individual activists network power ...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online