This paper examines whether Saddam Hussein’s execution has led to establishment of democracy in Iraq. War on Iraq was mainly in search of weapons of mass destruction ultimately not found. It is argued that his execution was not necessary to establish democracy in Iraq.
Saddam Hussein became the president of Iraq in 1979 after having been a major force in Government from mid-1970s. Iraq experienced extreme autocracy under his regime for nearly twenty five years during which almost 1/3rd of the present Iraqi population was born, thus rendering a full generation to grow without any democratic attitudes, democratic minded leaders, democratic institutions and proto-democratic civil society.
Democracies arising from established autocracies have to develop from the scratch. The present leadership who was born after coming to the power of Bath has no idea of pre-Bath era (Moon).
It is almost six years since Saddam Hussein was executed, yet nothing much has changed there. Scholars of are of the opinion that Iraq can never have democracy since no such system ever existed in that country. People in Iraq are not used to democratic system and they do not even know what democracy is. Iraq’s hoarding of weapons of mass destruction had also been disproved even before 2003. And until now, the U.S.A. has not been able to find them.
That the world could be better off without Saddam Hussein also has no rationale. In fact, in his absence some parts of the world have become more dangerous. Even within Iraq which is now under the U.S. control, school children are unable to go schools without fear. Under Hussein’s control, Iraq had been relatively peaceful. But it now witnesses violence almost daily.
The U.S. has already lost 4,000 soldiers which is not worth the cost of eliminating Saddam Hussein. Iran which is a Shi’ite nation is now emboldened to interfere in the affairs of Iraq, a nation of Sunni majority. Under his regime, Hussein had kept Iraq stable. Military experts believe that Iraq war was a lost war without clear objectives right from the start (Hubpages)
Iraq was invaded by the U.S. without U.N. Security council resolution and as a result the U.S. is not able to convince other countries that it can play a constructive role in bringing peace back to Iraq. Dethroning of Saddam Hussein could only help his sect’s arch rival Shiite sect settle scores with him.
The world cannot forget the scenes of his execution presided over by group of Shi’tes who appeared to be fanatics. The frequent airing of his execution scenes dominated by the voices of Shi’ites worried both Sunni and Shiite communities alike as it could further escalate violence in the country. Clearly, Saddam’s execution exposed the misplaced efforts of the U.S. in bringing peace to Iraq.
Though at the beginning, the Bush administration wanted to take control of Baghdad in order to put down growing insurgency and unite Iraqis; the U.S. troops were outnumbered and found themselves unable to stop looting and sabotaging of Iraq’s physical, economic, and institutional infrastructure. Saddam’s loyalists and foreign fighters have been still able to stage insurgency. By 2006, suicide bombings had become a daily occurrence.
A 2007 poll by BBC revealed that Iraqis had no confidence in the U.S ‘s ability to bring peace to Iraq. 53 % of those who voted informed that they had no confidence in their own Iraqi government. For the question whether Saddam’s execution would help bring about reconciliation in Iraq, only 62 % of Shi’ites felt that it would and 96 % of Sunnis felt that it would not(Stover, Sissons and Pham).
Bringing democracy in a country after removal of autocratic regimes depends on transitional justice mechanisms such as passing amnesty laws, pardoning past offenders or by pursuing criminal trials.
The new administration could offer apologies to victims, create memorials for the dead, locate and identify bodies of those missing, return stolen properties, and carryout legal and institutional reforms to achieve human rights standards. These are but a few of components of transitional justice. Six conditions are required for transitional justice to be effective.
The above measures are practicable only in a secure environment.
The majority of population must perceive that implementing authorities are “legitimate and impartial”.
There must be political will on the part of new authorities.
Such measures must be implemented in a way that does not manifest in collective guilt.
Such measures must have been formulated through the due process of consultations with those affected by violence.
Measures will be effective only in conjunction with programs of political, economic, and social reconstruction as also freedom of movement, rule of law, access to correct information and educational reform (Stover, Sissons and Pham).
A 2003 article states Saddam’s record as a protector of Iraqi’s territorial integrity is in poor light. He failed to bring together the disintegrated of components of Iraqi society. On the other hand, he aggravated domestic factionalism. On many occasions, he had “brought his county to the brink of complete disintegration”. (Karsh).
With the harsh brutality of Saddam Hussein, no one would have shown him sympathy at the end of his life. But the execution of the Muslim leader took place in the midst of Hajj pilgrimages. The insensitivity of his hanging on the eve of Eid al-adha also was deplored. As a political analyst Nazem Jassour commented ““[t]here was no good reason why the execution could not be delayed until after Eid.
It’s going to be perceived by Iraqi Sunnis as one more example of how the Shia government is trying to humiliate them” The trial of Saddam Hussein would have been a positive experience had it been under the auspices of independent and international institutions (Falk and Milbank).
From the above analysis, it becomes clear that Saddam’s execution under the auspices of the U.S.’ puppet regime in Iraq has not helped bring democracy in Iraq. He need not have been executed for the sake of democracy given the fact of long history of rulings by the dictators in Iraq.
Saddam’s execution has only helped his rival Shiite groups to settle scores with him. Saddam Hussein should have been tried in the international justice institutions. Such international initiatives alone would deter autocratic minded leaders from unleashing violence against their subjects. The U.S. involvement and the ultimate execution of Saddam might have served its own interests but not the interests of Iraqi people. The execution was only to punish him for his misdeeds and not for establishing democracy in Iraq.
Works Cited
Falk, Richard A and Albert G Milbank. The Flawed Execution of Saddam Hussein. n.d. Web.
Hubpages. Saddam Hussein’s Death was not worth it. 2011. Web.
Karsh, Efraim. Making Iraq Safe for Democracy. 2003. Web.
Moon, Bruce E. Can Iraq democratize? How long will it take? 2006. Web.
Television is one of the main tools of communication in mass media. Technological revolution has seen increased global television coverage (Marling, 2006). Companies such as Cable News Network (CNN) have extended their global coverage, resulting in increased global audience. The 2008 US presidential elections generated a lot of global interest. Democrats had two candidates contesting for the party’s presidential ticket (Museuam TV, 2010).
They included the current President, Barrack Obama and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. The presidential election was deemed historic for two reasons. First, Obama won, he would be the first African-American president. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton won she would be the first woman president. Subsequently, Barrack Obama won and thus became the first ever African-American President of the United States.
Television coverage of the 2008 US Presidential elections
After the 2008 Democratic Party primaries, Barrack Obama won the party’s presidential nomination race. He was pitted against John McCain, the Republican Party candidate. The election race between the two candidates generated increased media coverage. Cable News Network (CNN) enjoys heavy local and international presence. The company, which is based in Atlanta, Georgia, comprises of CNN/US and CNN International.
CNN covered the 2008 presidential elections comprehensively where the company hosted several debates during both parties’ primaries. Also, the company introduced a new dimension to the presidential debate. Through CNN-You tube, ordinary citizens were in a position to submit questions prior to debates between the two presidential candidates (Associated Press, 2009).
This increased CNN’s viewership by 48%. Increased coverage of the presidential polls right from the primaries has several advantages. One advantage is that the electorate is in a position to scrutinize the candidates’ responses to specific issues affecting them. Therefore, they can make an informed decision based on the suitability of the candidates’ responses in relation to their needs.
This model has been replicated in other countries although not in the same form. It is highly regarded due to increased transparency in the process of nomination.
Increased scrutiny from television coverage has also acted as important tool in voter education. In 2008, 18 to 24 year olds voter turnout increased by 2% where it was reported at 49% compared to 47% reported in 2004 (Associated Press, 2009).
Through televised debates for example, issues affecting the nation including issues affecting young people were discussed. Some of the issues addressed include an increasing level of unemployment in the country. The presidential candidates gave their varied opinions and solution to such issues. As a result, young voters were able to identify the candidate who best promises to provide viable solutions to their problems.
International coverage of the 2008 American presidential triggered several issues. One of the issues that emerged from the election is ability of presidential candidates from minority groups to assume key government positions. In 1966, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave the famous ‘I have a dream ‘speech.
He envisioned a society where judgment would be based on an individual’s character, as opposed to his/her biological and cultural background. The 2008 elections was therefore a litmus test for the United States as a society and levels of tolerance within the society. The election of Barrack Obama thus was a reflection of increased levels of cultural tolerance. Also, it epitomized political maturity.
The United States is therefore seen as a model democracy across the globe (Marling, 2006). With the aid of increased international television coverage, people across the globe were able witness this landmark development in the United States politics. Therefore, this historic election was a challenge to other countries to emulate the United States in exhibiting such levels of cultural tolerance. This provides a level playing ground for all candidates thus enhancing the democratic values.
Effects of 2008 US Presidential Elections on Italy
Obama’s victory in 2008 was seen as a ‘small revolution’ across the globe (Associated Press, 2009). It gave individuals from minority groups’ hope of ascending into high political office. One of the main effects of the outcome of the election was minority group leaders are willing to take more political risks including running for high offices. These leaders are ready to work closely with their kin with the objective of advancing their interests and political ambitions.
The outcome of the 2008 US presidential elections was also a challenged to the Italian society to integrate immigrants into their political institutions. Therefore, through their leaders, these groups will be in a position to contribute comprehensively towards the achievement of national policies. Also, minority groups will be more enthusiastic towards participating in the electoral process. In 2008 US Presidential elections, black and Hispanic vote was very crucial in swing states such as Nevada and Colorado.
In April 2008, Silvio Berlusconi assumed the premiership in Italy. He was very enthusiastic about Obama’s victory in the elections. US-Italian relations thus have continued to flourish with several notable developments. Italy has always been a close ally of the United States. Italy, for example, hosts United States army, air force and navy across in different bases across the country. Italy, also, was part of multinational force that was deployed in Iraq from 2006.
The United States has been very instrumental in the Euro zone crisis which affected the Italian economy adversely. President Obama has played a crucial role in soliciting help for the ailing Italian economy. His confidence in the current administration’s ability to get the country’s economy is a significant boost to the administration’s efforts. The above is based on cordial relations existent between the two countries.
Impact of technological advancements in coverage of the 2008 United States
Presidential Election in Italy
Television industry in Italy has been dominated by two major players. Mediaset, owned by Silvio Berlusconi, is one of the major players in the industry. The company runs several television stations including Italia 1, Canale 5 and Rete 4 (Associated Press, 2009). Access to the channels is free and as such, the Italian public is in a position to access the channels. The second major player in the television industry is RAI (Radiotelevisione italiana). This is the state-owned broadcaster which runs television channels such as Rai 1, Rai 2 and Rai 3.
The above companies have enjoyed a duopoly thus controlling 90% of the market. However, developments in the Italian television industry have seen entry of new players keen on breaking the duopoly. One of new players in the industry is Cable News Network. CNN launched CNN Italia which broadcasts in Italian and was integral in the coverage of the US Presidential elections in 2008.
Major television networks in Italy have been accused of laxity in the coverage of various political events (Mediabistro, 2009). Due to increased stranglehold by the political class, these television stations have not been comprehensive in delivering accurate political analysis to their audiences.
The 2008 US Presidential elections received limited coverage from the major networks including Rai and Mediaset television channels. However, the pay television channels including international channels such as Sky Italia and CNN Italia were able to deliver to the audiences. For example, CNN was able to employ new technology in order to enhance coverage of the elections.
One of the key technologies introduced during the elections is the use of holographic technology. Holographic technology was used to relay results using 3D technology and this made it easier for the viewer to identify the winner based on the illustrations (Mediabistro, 2009).
This was very crucial to the international audience as the images enhanced their understanding of the results. Another aspect introduced by CNN was the ‘magic wall’. This was a topographic representation of the different regions across the United States. The technology was also quite effective in enabling the Italian public to follow election results and also identify the location of the different States from where the results were reported.
Conclusion
The United States is considered a model democracy across the globe. It is based on strong electoral institutions and systems. This promotes transparency in the voting process. The 2008 US presidential polls were a landmark in the country’s history. The election saw Barrack Obama being elected as the 44th President of the United States. The event marked renewed energy for minority groups towards assuming key positions in the government.
The ‘Obama effect’ was also experienced in Europe where minority groups experienced renewed vigor towards achieving the same feat in their countries. Authoritative coverage by international networks including CNN enabled viewers including those in Italy to monitor and understand the results. Therefore, advances in technology were very critical in ensuring that viewers understood the content of the election results.
Developments from Failure of Referendum on EU Constitution until Euro Zone Crisis of late 2011-2012
The period between 2007 and 2011 has been a challenging one to the European Union (EU). As a response to the increasing pressures on Greece imposed by the international financial market, the Union extended a loan of 110 billion Euros to save the nation from sovereign default.
After that, a huge fund amounting to 750 billion Euros was established to halt the contamination of Greece’s debt crises to other weaker European economies in the south. This was a deliberate move by the EU to signal to the international markets that the union would cover the debts of its member states. In addition, the European Central Bank began to buy euro-dominated sovereign debts to assist in stabilizing the markets.
Consequently, member-state governments decided to allow Eurostat (European statistics agency) to review the accounts of member states as well as vetting the annual budgets of member states. Moreover, other EU member states all over Europe started a calculated move to cut their spending so as to reduce deficits and clear public debts. Towards the year 2011, Ireland was compelled to seek a loan from EU while similar pressures were experienced in Portugal and Spain.
Currently, the Euro Zone is in an existential crisis. This crisis include but not limited to weak fiscal policy; intense disparities in labor market and housing associations; failure in fiscal regulations and general interest rates have resulted in unsustainable internal discrepancy in the common currency zone (Muellbauer 1). These are evident in the disagreements on unsustainable government, competitiveness and private debts to gross domestic production (GDP) ratios and in other signs like relentless deficits in balance of payments.
Thesis
As many scholars and commentators talk, the Euro Zone crisis appear to have a myriad of casualties that relate more to the economic dimension ignoring the significance path of democracy (Black 1). Despite the conception of the Euro Zone being based on creation of a common market and monetary union, EU has failed on its constitutional mandate during the crisis which further heightens the democratic deficit debated by scholars. This statement leads to a number of questions:
Does the Euro Zone crisis contribute to Democratic Deficit?
What is Euro Zone?
What Accounts as “Democracy?”
What is Democratic Deficit?
Why should Democracy be valued?
History of the Euro Zone
Start of the Euro Zone
Euro Zone was established through the signing of the treaty of Maastricht in 1992 by the fifteen member states of the European Union (Horst 229). According to the agreement, all EU countries were to use the euro currency by 1999. Denmark, Sweden and United Kingdom fulfilled the requirements of the agreement, but decided not to participate. In addition, Greece had not met the requirements of the treaty by the designated year, but did join the zone one year later.
Therefore, in theory, eleven countries were using the euro by 1999. However, the transition was slow and by the designated year the single currency was for computerized transactions only until 2002 when the currencies of the twelve nations participating were replaced by the euro. The countries currently using the single currency are: France, Germany, Spain, Greece, Belgium, Luxemburg, Portugal, Italy, Slovenia, Ireland, Finland, The Netherland and Austria.
Purpose
The Euro Zone was established in an effort to create a common market as well as a fiscal and economic union, and executing common activities or initiatives to promote throughout the zone a balanced and harmonious expansion of economic activities, sustainable and non-inflationary development (Moravcsik 58).
This was to be done in respect of the environment, a high degree of employment and a socio-economic protection, improving the standards of living as well as quality of life. The creation of the Euro Zone was also an effort to bring social and economic solidarity and cohesion amid the member states.
Standards of Legitimacy
The internal legitimacy of the EU
The scheme of European integration obtains its enduring attractiveness and weight mostly from two steering forces that operate in harmony: the forces are the manifest interest of the nations involved in reaping benefit from the creation of a common market as well as the gracious ambition to defeat the convention rivalry and conflicts among European nations via peaceful cooperation.
Throughout its continued widening and deepening, the Union successfully has set more extensive goals, which might roughly be split into two types: economical and political objectives (Archer 60). In this case, the political goals include but not limited to the maintenance of peace, the safeguarding of human rights, the conservation of democracy, liberty and the rule of law, endeavoring for common security policy and cooperation in fighting criminality.
Amid the continually expanding number of economic goals include establishing free-trade structures, conserving rural regions, developing a common economic market, attaining a balanced and sustainable growth of all member states, stimulating employment, enforcing gender equality, ensuring social security, increasing competiveness, nurturing economic growth, protecting the quality of life, safeguarding the environment, nurturing solidarity among European citizens and enhancing education and research (Gerven 237).
The external legitimacy of EU
In this context, EU has constantly understood itself as an enlarging peace project which is intended to warrant security and stability on Europe due to its effort to reinforce democracy, legality and liberty in the continent and in so doing contribute to global peace (Zweifel 133).
Other demanding goals of international security policy have been away from its reach since it lacks both the power and means to pursue them. However, currently there are increasing trends to reinforce this policy of EU, its cornerstone, which is mostly directed towards attaining these goals: to protect the common values and basic interests of EU, to reinforce its security as well as global security, to support internal cooperation, to create and strengthen democracy, respect of human rights and the rule of law.
All these objectives of the Union’s policies, including international trade policy, seem defensible as much as their appearance is concerned. They might be even regarded as a model of justifying the legitimacy of other large communities. When the EU policies are judged in the light of their practical impacts on the two orders, it appears that the external policy deserve a positive assessment. Its most significant accomplishment is that it has added to the sustenance of global peace and safeguard of human rights (Koller 321).
The Democratic Deficit
Standard of the Democratic Deficit
The term “democratic deficit” has been widely used yet there is no consensus on its definition. In most case, the term is used to describe the weakness or pitfalls of democratic legitimacy of EU. There is also a standard version of the expression, which is closely related to ‘federal state’ theory of democratic legitimization. This version asserts that the fundamental problem of EU lies in the fact that there is a change of political governance from the democratic parliamentary structures of government to executive-centered structure of government (Majone 15).
For democratic deficit, there is a concern that EU has distanced itself from citizens such that its processes of decision making do not involve the public and its institutions are doing nothing to pass on its decisions to citizens (Koller 319). Another observation is that the uneven strength of lobbies who exercise an influence on the Union institutions behind the scenes have led to biased predilection for the interest of business people, enterprises and elite groups when compared to ordinary people and workers.
Influence
The casualties of Euro Zone financial crisis are indeed many: the instant economic depression led to continued output losses and cleared a large share of wealth, specifically in the most developed economies; a sequence of social reverberations aggravate widespread huddles of poverty and pressures in the labor market as well as pension system; and expensive bank aids have left public finance in a depressing state and partly eliciting a disturbing sovereign debt crisis.
These have apparently steered the common currency (Euro) and the entire continent into a political void. However, there is a developing feeling among people that the long-term injuries to the societies are claiming another casualty: democracy and representation- one on which many things depend on.
This trendy anxiety is steered by the discernment that the burden of adjustments to the crisis remains factually jagged. According to Grygiel, the international influence of political financiers, bankers and regulators, who triggered the financial crisis in the first place, has not changed in any way, yet many ordinary victims find themselves constricted to unbearable levels (1). Among the emerging social unrest, especially in Greece, discrimination is set to increase across much of the European continent.
Actually, anger has also been directed to the broader institutional arrangement which is blamed of involvement and worsening the situation. At the international realm, the International Monetary Fund has come under augmented examination, especially from the emerging economies.
Crucial questions regarding its ability to ensure financial solidarity across the world and respond to different fears of its stakeholders are being asked. A debate is opening out in Europe about the disorderly concentration of control that is held by big multinational firms and their effect on local businesses and communities. However, this debate is restricted to both the economic and policy making realms.
Against this milieu, recent talks about EU’s perceived, suspected or real democratic deficit is not new. Researchers have been debating about the issue for years. On one side, it is debated that EU activities are usually just democratic like those in its members and that for example, low participation of European electorates, the negative referenda in some member states (France, Ireland and the Netherlands), and the technocratic of politics expose the legitimacy issues (Follesdal and Hix 535).
This observation is somehow supported by information from Eurobarometer, asserting that confidence in European institutions is usually much higher than trust in state governments.
In another perspective, the increasing influence of non-political players such as the European Central Bank (ECB) and European Court of Justice, the emergence of anti-EU political parties, or the common weaknesses of parliaments are proposed to underscore the questionable state of representation and accountability for Union affairs.
Moravcsik observes that with outstanding policy problems such as demands for tax synchronization and immigration steadily taking the center stage, the lenient accord on European integration appears to be opening up fast (348).
Prior to Euro Zone crisis, as long as the EU relied on the resultant metrics of its legitimacy, this discussion in spite of a reasonable level of public acknowledgement, elicited just limited reaction.
In essence, ambivalence towards this dilemma is demonstrated by studies which disclose that many people are both cynical towards the union and would like it to work more on several policy areas especially foreign affairs and environment change. Thus, it can safely be argued that EU by proficiently getting on with its key business of securing wealth in its member countries was somewhat success at disregarding any vital concern about its democratic principles.
However, the emergence and subsequent implications of Euro Zone crisis have substantially challenged this postulation. There are great doubts regarding whether EU’s democratic politics can deal with the key socio-economic problems at stake. The crisis management which is dominated by the goal of saving the common currency instead of assisting the countries in need is apparently impacting on the room for democratic politics within the Euro Zone.
Resolutions
A whole collection of EU tools and initiatives have been tailored to lift policy conditionally and union to new levels. All the reformed strategies such as EU-2020, the Euro-Plus-Pac and the European Semester attempt to press on member state to take a more practical path of monetary policy by tightening budget rules and coordination dealings, while supporting deeper reforms on the supply side to make the economy of Europe more sustainable and competitive (Muellbauer 1).
As a matter of fact, the previous efforts along these dimensions have failed due to weak or ambiguous enforcement rules: there was no likelihood of a member state punishing another in the council or imposing fines on members under pressure.
ESM designed as a fiscal fund parallel to the IMF, its main purpose is to protect the stability of the common currency as a whole. Even though, the ESM privileged task is the ability to provide emergency funds to members under pressure in case of liquidity issues, its consent strongly incentivizes the application of direct leverage on national economic policy by providing sober evaluations when the stability of the Euro Zone is actually under pressure. Formal competences are therefore replaced by widespread informal ones which might generate a new momentum. This means that the ESM is designed to become the backbone of EU economic control.
This reinforced conditionality organization as well as the demeanor of current bail-outs will impact deeply on European democracy. The Union has gone into unchartered political environments in its effort to clear the sovereign debt crisis and evade disintegration. It is not clear whether such a discipline will be considered appropriate by the people. Much depends on whether the political mainstreams can efficiently occupy the changing room for EU politics by offering important choices with reference to European integration.
Conclusion
The referendum on EU constitution appeared justifiable legitimate and in particular for the internal and external policies. However, the union failed and adverse developments accumulated resulting in the Euro Zone crisis.
The zone which was started with a purpose of creating a common market and currency union experienced a crisis that added to the Democratic Deficit that was associated with EU. These developments have compelled the Union to reinforce its policies and take stern measures which could contain the situation once and for all.
Works Cited
Archer, Clive. The European Union. Oxford, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2008. Print.
Follesdal, Andreas, and Hix, Simon. “Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: A response to Majone and Moravcsik.” Journal of Common Market Studies, 44.3 (2006): 533-562. Print.
Gerven, Walter. The European Union a Polity of States and Peoples. Stanford, UK: Stanford University Press, 2005. Print.
Grygiel, Jakub. One market, One Currency, One People? The Faulty Logic of Europe. 2012. Web. <https://www.fpri.org/>.
Horst, Ungerer. A concise history of European Monetary Integration. Westport, CT: Quorum Books, 1997. Print.
Koller, Peter. “On the Legitimacy of Political Communities: A General Approach and its Approach to the European Union.” Perspectives in Moral Science 0.4 (2009): 304-325. Print.
Majone, Giandomenico. “Europe’s Democratic Deficit: The Question of Standards.” European Law Journal 2.1 (1998): 5-28. Print.
Moravcsik, A. Centralization or Fragmentation. New York, NY: Council on Foreign Relations, 1998. Print.
Moravcsik, Andrew. “Is there a ‘Democratic Deficit’ in World Politics? A framework for Analysis.” Government and Opposition, 39.2(2004): 336-363. Print.
Muellbauer, John. “Resolving the Eurozone Crisis: Time for Conditional Eurobonds.” Policy Insight 59 (2011): 1-10. Print.
Zweifel, Thomas. International Organizations and Democracy, Accountability, Politics, and Power. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Pub, 2006. Print.
The word democracy is famous in the world today. It is used to describe a form of government that allows equal opportunities to all its citizens. Also, it is used to influence the policies and laws of a nation. In such administrations, people who meet certain standards are free to convey their views.
As Abraham Lincoln once said, “democracy is a government of the public, this government works for the citizens and it is administrated by citizens”. In America, democracy is demonstrated in the exercise of democratic procedures such as voting for the president or members of congress. Before any democratic government comes into power, people have to be enlightened. In other words, enlightenment precedes democracy.
Immanuel Kant claims that “enlightenment is man’s liberation from his self-incurred immaturity” (Kant, 1784). Immaturity in this text is the inadequacy of a man to make his own decisions without the input of other people (Kant, 1784). It is said to be self-imposed when people choose to lie not because they lack understanding but because they do not have the will and courage to make a personal decision (Kant, 1784).
For this reason, it is necessary for the public sphere, civil society and state to be enlightened to strengthen democracy. Enlightenment will help them to reason publicly and express their opinion while keeping the state in check. The success or failure of democracy is determined by the state, civil society and the public sphere. When these institutions are functioning properly democracy succeeds. This paper examines how these three institutions influence the democratic process.
Public sphere
The public sphere is a key component of democracy because it represents the opinions of the people. It determines whether democracy succeeds or fails. Jurgen Habermas (1996) in his article “Civil society and the Political Public Sphere” claims that the public sphere is a social experience. It is similar to a collectivity but different from an organization.
It does not embrace the principles or frameworks of an institution. It has no membership or leaders. The public sphere is a system that represents the opinions or views of different people. The opinions of people in different social spaces vary. All these views are synthesized and combined to form one common opinion (Habermas, 1996). These opinions are reproduced in the course of communication. There are different forms of the public sphere: political, religious, scientific, and art among others.
Democracy requires freedom of speech and this freedom can be found in the public sphere. Influence is a vital element of the public sphere that affects democracy. It is based on a mutual understanding of individuals in a social space (Habermas, 1996). Consequently, public views can be used to influence the voting behavior of the jury, government organizations or citizens.
The influence of the public sphere in a political realm can be used as political power when it follows institutionalized processes (Habermas, 1996). This power can be controlled by political leaders or other parties. On the other hand, this influence usually attracts a power struggle.
Some leaders or organizations that have the influence of the public sphere can capitalize on their power for their own selfish gain (Habermas, 1996). Such actions destroy democracy because power is transferred to a minority instead of the public. According to Habermas, the public sphere should recognize problems, categorize them and find a feasible solution (Habermas, 1996).
If the communal opinion is manipulated, then it means that the solutions will meet the needs the few people in power. Therefore, democracy thrives where the public domain is free from manipulation or blackmail. In addition, the system of communication must capture the views of the citizens without biases. The public sphere enlightens the citizens. It provides an avenue where people think for themselves without considering the views of others.
Civil society
Civil society has a decisive role in preserving democracy. In the past, civil society was defined in terms of the Marxian theory. It represented the Bourgeoisie class. However, civil society has undergone a revolution. Habermas describes the civil society as organizations that are distinct of the government or any economic affiliations (Habermas, 1996).
They include institutions of learning, religious groups, and mass media. They are voluntary groups that secure the systems of communication that make up the public sphere. Religious groups typically provide moral boundaries as opposed to political. According to Tocqueville, associations help to fight individualism and promote freedom in politics (Habermas, 1996). Civil society exists only in civilized communities that allow liberation and freedom.
Otherwise, different organizations can arise without a cause. Unlike public spheres, civil societies can only find influence and not political control. This is because civil groups seek power for the people and not themselves. Additionally, these organizations must meet certain requirements. They have to respect the rights of people and the rule of law.
The function of the civil society is to represent the people and regulate the authority of the state (Habermas, 1996). The can do this by ensuring that the state uses its power efficiently. One of the vices that lead to the failure of democracy is corruption.
Once the state is corrupt, people will be denied the opportunity to express their opinion and build the nation. Corrupt officials control public issues in order to benefit. For that reason, the civil society holds the key to democracy. They have the ability and power to educate the public on issues concerning their rights and duties as egalitarian citizens.
In this process, civil society provides enlightenment. Moreover, civil society can help citizens, and the government to develop critical values such as respect for divergent views, concession, acceptance, and control. Civil society brings people from different social and symbolic spaces together based on their common interests. By encouraging people to come together, civil society curbs individualism. Civil society is a key partner of a democratic state.
State
Although a democratic government refers to a government managed by the people, the state is equally significant. A successful democracy requires a dependable state. Such a state must promote equality and not dictatorship. It also requires the support and reverence of its people. Tocqueville in his book Democracy in America compares democracy in two states, France and America (Tocqueville, 1835). He claims that one of the dangers facing democracy is extreme devotion to equality.
According to Tocqueville (1835), if everyone is equal then no individual has the right to regulate the affairs of another. The only opinion would be majority rule, but this will lead to authoritarianism. If multitudes control power they will acquire despotic tendencies and the minority will suffer. The role of the state in democracy is to ensure that citizens are not trapped in individualism and materialism.
Hence, to minimize or avoid these tendencies, the state can endorse institutions such as the Supreme Court and the jury (Habermas, 1996). These institutions may be flawed, but they provide balance. Such systems allow individuals to respect other people and use their freedom wisely. Additionally, the state can support other non-institutional organization like the media and religious group.
Causal relationships and social mechanisms
Democracy demands equality. However, equality has two consequences. First, individuals are enlightened and allowed to express their opinions. Individualism and oppressive characteristics can emerge.
Secondly, equality can prevent an individual from thinking and instead depend on the decisions of others. Kant describes this as immaturity. Such people allow others to think for them. Fascism and Nazism developed because people allowed other people to make decisions. The state, civil society and the public sphere offer a balance for equality and promote democracy.
Conclusion
The views of Kant, Habermas and Tocqueville are relevant and credible in strengthening democracy. Tocqueville in his book recommended the democratic system in America because it embraces the elements of the public sphere, civil societies and the state. All these institutions and prodigy have to function well for democracy to flourish. The public sphere communicates the opinion of the people. The civil society anchors the public domain by supporting them.
It also checks on the state. Similarly, the state provides a framework for the civil society and the public sphere to succeed. These associations combat despotic and individualism tendencies. The question as to “what makes democracy succeed (or fail)?” is determined by the achievements of the public sphere, the civil society and the state. If these key institutions prosper then democracy will succeed.
References
Habermas, J. (1996). Civil Society and the Political Public Sphere. In J.C. Calhoun & J. Gerteis (Eds.), Contemporary Sociological Theory (pp. 388-405). New Jersey: Blackwell Publishers.
Kant, I. (1784). What is Enlightenment? In J.C. Calhoun, J.Gerteis & J. Moody (Eds.), Classical Sociological Theory (pp. 39-43). New Jersey: Blackwell Publishers.
Tocqueville, A. (1835). Democracy in America. In J.C. Calhoun, J.Gerteis & J. Moody (Eds.), Classical Sociological Theory (pp. 55-71). New Jersey: Blackwell Publishers.
One of the most important inquiries that should be made is on how democratic consolidation can be understood especially from the political point of view. It is apparent that research has revealed that there is no serviceable or specific definition of the concept “democratic consolidation” (Schneider 215).
Therefore, the concept has become common in comparative politics whereby scholars have been in haste to derive a fully satisfying definition. However, it is important to understand that democratic consolidation denotes the transition that occurs in liberal institutions to a point that leaders conform to democratic rule (Schneider 215).
While the latter statement may appear holistic and largely appealing in any given democratic setting, it is imperative to note that it may be hardly be achieved as an ideal situation in political governance. From a careful review of literature, it has been confirmed that democratic consolidation is the means by which young democracies mature to ensure that they do not risk reverting to authoritarianism (Lim 117).
Notably, this process is mainly underpinned to promote the ideology that political actors embrace democracy, a factor that will make political institutions secure against the threats of authoritarianism (Lim 220). Therefore, it is arguable that this concept is meant to foster stabilization of regimes by eliminating challenges that can bring about breakdown of the social fabric. However, the concept of democratic consolidation especially among young and growing democracies may still be a mirage and an idea from reality.
It is vital to note that democratic consolidation entails numerous political aspects such as diffusion of democratic rules, legitimization, neutralizing anti-political actors and fostering civilian supremacy (Schneider 215). If the aforementioned elements are to be embraced and indeed implemented in any political governance, then it implies that a lot of political goodwill ought to exist. Moreover, it also entails eradication of authoritarian enclaves and stabilizing electoral rules in order to avoid election irregularities bearing in mind that no single democratic government can boast of democracy if its leaders are not freely and fairly elected into political offices. Research has revealed that the process cannot be complete without decentralizing state power and establishing judicial reforms (Andreas 94). In line with this, political actors also need to introduce mechanisms that will foster direct democracy in order to safeguard the functional interests of the civilians. Notably, different scholars have dissimilar understanding of the concept (Lim 118). In this case, the meaning and usage of the concept basically depends on the context and goals in which the political actors stand for (Schneider 215).
At this point, it is also worthy to analyze some of the major characteristics of regimes in the “gray zone” especially in regards to the principle of democratic consolidation. It is important to note that regimes in the ‘gray zone” are those that are in the third wave of democratization (Rapley 35). From an empirical point of view, it is evident that these regimes have not yet experienced full transition from authoritarianism into full democratization.
Therefore, in terms of the ideals put forward by the political ideology of democracy, they are largely at standstill and majority of such governments often reverse towards authoritarianism. It is arguable that these regimes cease to become outright authoritarians yet they are not fully democratic.
On the other hand, it may not be automatic for all the regimes in the ‘gray zones’ to revert to autocratic rule bearing in mind that in the event strong democratic institutions are set up, the likelihood of reverting to authoritative rule may be null and void altogether. In addition, these regimes appear ambiguous due to the fact that they are semi-authoritarian (Lim 221).
In this case, these regimes have liberal political institutions that uphold political liberty. Nevertheless, they still portray some traits of authoritarian rule. This kind of scenario has been the case with certain young economies although a similar scenario may be replicated even in well developed economies.
The other characteristic is that such regimes give little space for political competition, a factor that significantly decimates government’s accountability and transparency when executing its roles and responsibilities. Research reveals that they avail limited space for press freedom to function freely.
Besides, political parties with divergent or opposing views are not easily accommodated in such regimes since in most cases, they command majority rule and as such they may dilute the strengths of ruling parties (Rapley 95). Needless to say, the latter scenario is what may be described as political immaturity.
In addition to this, since these regimes are not fully democratic, they are often unable to produce effective governments. This is due to the fact that democratic processes of electing a government are often manipulated by authoritarian traits that adversely violate the basic tenets of transparent governance.
Then, why would it be difficult for regimes to move out of this zone? Empirical evidences have shown that it is normally difficult for ‘gray zone’ regimes to move out of this type of governance. One of the possible factors that make it pretty cumbersome for the regimes to get out of the zone is due to deep-rooted individual differences. Notably, after the end of the Cold war, there emerged leading intellectuals who were against the outfits of liberal democracy.
In line with this, most of political actors in such regimes have cultural bias on the concept of liberal democracy (Rapley 102). Moreover, there are only few governments that are willing to abandon authoritarian rule and adopt democracy. In this case, they fear strict limitations imposed by democracy. Research has revealed that there is a possibility that ‘gray zone’ regimes will definitely increase in number since most states have had problems coping with political transitions (Andreas 99).
For instance, countries that have embraced democratic consolidation have ended up having weak democracies. In this case, majority of world states prefer semi-authoritarian regimes, a factor that makes it difficult for them to shift from the ‘gray zone’. Furthermore, it is important that there should be moderate political conflicts in states.
According to Lim (235), consolidation of democracy cannot take place with frequent confrontations. Therefore, it is important to ensure that there is peace or else the civilians will disregard the values and interests of democracy.
Apparently, there are myriads of conditions that are necessary for democratic consolidation to take effect. The factors that affect consolidation of democracy should be realigned by all costs (Lim 221). It is agreeable that most of these factors are non-economic such as illiteracy and squatting levels of human development that is common in poor economies.
Therefore, one of the essential conditions for consolidating democracy is by ensuring that there is effective human development through public awareness in order to strengthen social cohesion. Research has revealed that there is need to eliminate all forms of procedures, traits, expectations and institutions that seem to be incompatible with the outright ideas of democracy. In line with this, new institutions and procedures should be established in order to create a favorable aura for consolidating democracy (Andreas 101).
It is important to have numerous and political actors participating in politics and decisions who will win other people to embrace the new regime. Another important element to note is that new institutions should establish the act of favorable political balance through power sharing. This wills lure civilians to shift their mind from the previous regimes.
Poverty has been considered as a major social-economic problem, a factor that is attributed to its extended negative impacts that directly and indirectly threatens the very existence of human beings. Sandoval, Rank and Hirschl argue that the state of poverty in most places in the world today is very shocking. Poverty has also raised deep concerns over its increasing levels and equally high resilience of negative implications (720).
The question that lingers in many minds is whether different states across the globe are playing an effective role in addressing the rising levels of poverty. As this paper analyzes, rationalists are of the opinion that the practices and policies adopted in most states have greatly contributed towards poverty. While some may seem to oppose their own views and quickly defend their actions, steps to address the underlying threats posed by poverty are yet to be seen.
Definitely, various states across the world have played profound roles in promotion and fighting of poverty. Lenagala and Ram argue that the rising levels of poverty in many states today should be viewed as a factor that is contributed by existing leadership (923).
Many nations wallowing in the miasma of absolute poverty almost unanimously share a common factor called poor leadership. A state whose leadership is pitiable lacks the ability to effectively prioritize essential needs, effectively allocate resources and create an ego-centric model that facilitates economic growth.
While some opponents of this view may argue that poverty is a personal aspect and individuals must bear the responsibilities of their destinies, it is important to note that a state should be concerned with the welfare of its citizens. Take for instance, a country like North Korea where the development and welfare of citizens has been given special priority.
The practice promoted in this state is that its leadership has put the affairs of its citizens third after creation of weapons and their acquisition. Therefore, citizens in this nation are left to fend for themselves and most often forced to go without basic needs.
Environmentalism is becoming less realistic to the present states as focus towards conservation, the imminent dangers to the planet and its occupants, as well as methods to address them fail to take the urgency required to save the planet and its occupants. The endless cry of people in hunger, continued loss and extinction of biodiversity, strange and incurable infections, and loss of lives from warfare are a clear indication of individual and administrative sycophancies on environmental concerns.
The major question whose answer appears to be elusive to many is why states today do not clearly conceptualize the damage they are doing to themselves, citizens and most importantly, to the future generations. Besides poor leadership as indicated above, Icel argues that many governments have ignored the importance of conserving the environment, a factor that has seen a rise in pollution, global warming and subsequent poverty (500).
When the Kyoto Protocol was established, the globe got a sigh of relief that the disaster had at last gotten a long term solution. However, the force that initially propelled the establishment of Kyoto Protocol appeared to slowly but surely fade away as more countries clung to their conservative models that are highly selfish and sycophantic. Even after the problem was justified scientifically, Yanagisawa explains that many countries’ leadership saw the issue as a carefully drawn model to stall their development (316).
In the US for example, administrations over the years have failed to gather enough political goodwill to sign the protocol while most implementing countries fail to their mandated emissions reduction levels (Icel 505). Though countries such as the US indicate efforts being undertaken to address global warming, accruing efforts are largely undermined by its continued emission of green house gases.
Other countries such as China have hidden under the umbrella of being developing nations largely because by the time Kyoto Protocol was drawn, the country was not grouped in the industrialized category. Indeed, just like the US and China, many other states lack the much needed proactive approach that can be used to identify future environmental problems and subsequent poverty levels that could befall nations.
Sandoval, Rank and Hirschl observe that pollution is one of the greatest threats to environmental conservation and sustainability (720). Many states have however turned away from acknowledging pollution and its effects on poverty as a way of either avoiding accruing responsibilities or evading related complexities.
Environmentalism requires society to be able to interpret the interconnectedness of the different spheres of the environment (aquatic, lithosphere, atmospheric, and the biological). Despite the fact that over 2.8 billion people globally lack access to clean water and basic sanitation, states continue to heavily pollute the remaining water resources.
The ever rising number of industries releases some of their wastes into water systems and ultimately affects its quality for domestic, agricultural and other uses. This problem is metaphysically rhetoric in that either from industries, agricultural practices, or even domestic chores, pollutants continues being released into the environment at rates higher than ever experienced in the past.
This discussion would not be complete without mentioning the high global poverty levels that have plagued the globe for long. Jeppesen explains that to poor people, the immediate concerns are neither conservation nor environmentalism (490). However, they are mostly concerned with basic survival that puts the global and state resources into great pressure. A good example is the continued use of biomass as the main source of fuel in most developing countries.
This coupled with intensified mechanization of deforestation has resulted into extremely high rates of forest cover removal. Jeppesen estimates that about 13 million hectares of land are cut down every year (500). Even if it is for reasons of alleviating poor economic status or the need to promote greater development, the role played by many states only enhances poverty levels.
To sum up, the ability to develop effective poverty eradication mechanisms by states forms a major pillar that will support the fight against poverty. One would surely agree with rationalists in the sense that many states have overlooked the importance of eradicating poverty in a more holistic manner. One of the major efforts that cannot go unnoticed in fighting poverty is facilitating good governance.
Works Cited
Andreas, Schedler. “What Is Democratic Consolidation?” Journal of Democracy, 9.2 (1998): 91-107. Print.
Icel, John. “Why Poverty Remains High: The role of income growth, economic inequality, and changes in family structure, 1949-1999.” Demography 40.3 (2003): 499-519. Print.
Jeppesen, Sandra. “From the “War on Poverty” to the “War on the poor”: knowledge, power, and subject positions in anti-poverty discourses.” Canadian Journal of Communication 34.3 (2009): 487-508. Print.
Lenagala, Chakrangi and Rati, Ram. “Growth elasticity of poverty: estimates from new data.” International Journal of Social Economics 37.12 (2010): 923-932. Print.
Lim, Timothy. Doing comparative politics: An introduction to approaches and issues. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2005. Print.
Rapley, John. Understanding development: Theory and practice in the Third World. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. 2007. Print.
Sandoval, Daniel, Mark Rank and Thomas, Hirschl. “The increasing risk of poverty across the American life course.” Demography 46.4 (2009): 717-737. Print.
Schneider, Ben Ross. “Democratic consolidations: Some broad comparisons and sweeping arguments.” Latin American Research Review, 30.2(1995): 215. Print. Yanagisawa, Anton. “Poverty: social control over our labor force.” International Journal of Social Economics 38.4 (2011): 316-329. Print.
Denmark has put in place initiatives, policies, and programs aimed at improving the welfare of the developing and undeveloped countries in the world. As a result, Denmark is ranked as the world’s largest donor country for offering the highest aid to third world countries. The main beneficiaries of this donor aid are the countries in Africa.
Africa is characterized by high poverty levels, poor democratic systems, and bad governance. All these have led to the need by western nations to offer aid to Africa. The country has had a long standing relationship, interest, and commitment to the welfare of Africa (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark 2008B2, p.12).
Danish aid is regulated and controlled by more than fifteen humanitarian organizations with origin in Denmark (Buchanan-Smith & Rhode, 2002, p. 1).
To avert the risks associated with corruption and embezzlement of funds, the Danish government has put in place systems that oversee the distribution, management, and usage of the aid (Buchanan-Smith & Rhode, 2002, p. 2). These systems also oversee the implementation of policies and proposed programs for assisting African nations.
Danish aid is usually offered in four major forms. According to the Economic and Social Research Foundation (1997, p. 5) these methods include capital goods, Danish commodities (BOP support), technical assistance, and international knowhow. The latter is administered through contracting and financing to the United Nations agencies (Africa Commission 2009).
In the 1960s and 1970s, Danish aid was geared towards improving the transport and the agricultural sectors (Economic and Social Research Foundation, 1997, p. 5). Because of Denmark’s reputation in emphasizing on poverty reduction through aid programs and projects, it has been termed as a humane internationalist and “a front-runner in aid giving” (Lancaster, 2006, p.190).
However, aid and humanistic nature has not always been the driving forces for Denmark; it has also been driven by commercial reasons, achieved through bilateral aid. Currently, the largest recipients of Denmark’s bilateral aid are Ghana, Tanzania, and Kenya.
Methodology And Delimitation
The research on Danish aid in Africa is based on past studies, reports from the Denmark government, and past observations made in different countries within the African continent. The literature from these materials will be used to expound on the implications of the Danish aid on civil society and democracy in Africa.
Basically, because it is impossible to draw research information all over Africa, the research is categorically based on few case studies where Danish aid has been awarded to the donor nation.
The research study confines itself to Africa, drawing nations from southern Africa, Eastern Africa, central Africa, and West Africa. It limits itself specifically to regions where Danish aid has been applied.
It also confines itself to two major issues that form the basis for the current study. These are democratization and civil society promotion. In delimiting the study to these areas, this makes it possible to answer the research questions more accurately and effectively.
Theoretical Framework
The research study draws its analysis from political theory and the big push theory with regard to foreign aid. Based on the big push theory, foreign aid is believed to be a catalyst for development (Abuzeid, 2009, p. 17).
The author adds that the aid is seen as a way for solving some of the social economic problems that have afflicted the society. With respect to the current research study, these aspects are democratization and civil society enhancement.
Economic development forms the platform for realizing democracy through the civil society. However, the big push theory adds that foreign aid does not always lead to economic development owing to the enhancement of some of the social and economic attributes; it sometimes lead to corruption, dependency, and lack of self reliance.
On the other hand, the political theory holds that foreign aid is usually politically motivated. The major reason why aid is given is for purposes of humanitarian relief, social transitions, promoting democracy, and mitigating conflict (Lancaster, 2007, p. 5). Domestic politics determines the purpose for giving aid. In this case, the international relations between the donor and the recipient play a great role (Lönnqvist, 2008).
The Danish aid is predominantly used for policy implementation in developing nations (Lancaster, 2007, p. 20). “The dynamics of the aid relationship determines the extent to which a PRS process has effected, shifts in the social relations of governance and changes in the structure of political opportunity” (Gould & Ojanen 2003, p.141).
Therefore, poverty reduction strategy (PRS) has influence on the country that gets an aid (Robinson & Friedman 2005). For example, Tanzania is one of the African nations that have maintained a close relationship with donors (Holtom, 2007:233).
However, a restructuring of the relationship between the country and the donors has created tension. Drawing upon the push and the political theories, we can be able to analyze the implications of Danish aid on democracy and civil society.
Definition of terms and concepts
This part of the research study looks at the concept of civil society and the term democracy in relation to foreign aid, or from a donors’ perspective.
The concept of civil society
Different scholars have defined civil society differently. According to Hearn (1999, p. 3) the concept is notoriously slippery as it has become a common donor terminology. However, he has not emphasized on its definition. On the other hand, the current definitions have merged to share common key characteristics.
Some of these characteristics are “multiplicity, autonomy and organisational diversity” (Robison & Friedman, 2005, p. 5). As defined by Cheema and Shabbir (2010, p. 3), a civil society is seen as a body or space formed by private individuals who coherently share premeditated reasoned arguments that are made for the benefit of the public.
A group of people share common goals with the aim of fulfilling some public good, thus forming a public sphere.
Hearn (1999, p. 3) supplements this definition by noting that it has occasionally been used to present “a set of ideas related to participation, good government, human rights, privatization, and the public sector reform.” Therefore, civil society is a wide range term that with many definitions depending on the agenda of the donor.
The commonly applied definition is that a civil society forms the immediate sector found “between the family and the state where people associate across ties of kinship” (Cheema & Shabbir, 2010, p. 3).
Therefore, civil society constitutes organizations and people who are not dependent on the state, are voluntarily formed, and enjoy autonomy. According to Carothers (1999, p. 20), civil society is concerned with governance and democracy.
The major aspects concerned with democracy are its development and practice in the society. Based on the democratic aspect, a civil society is basically a voluntary organized life with shared rules (Cheema & Popovski, 2010, p. 3). It also implies that they are self-governing and self-generating.
The difference between a society and civil society is that civil society involves citizens in collective mode from where they share their interests, ways of achieving mutual goals, exchange ideas, “and make demands on the state, and hold state officials accountable” (Cheema & Shabbir , 2010, p. 3).
The US assistance towards the civil society is in the form of NGOs advocacy and organizations that foresee and monitor the electoral processes (Hearn, 1999, p. 3-4). What makes a civil society unique according to the U.S is the ability to have influence over governmental issues.
Another definition of civil society based on the UN is that a civil society is composed of NGOs, faith based organizations, labour unions, charitable organizations and foundations among other organizations (Carothers, 1999, p. 21; Ministry of Foreign Affairs Denmark, 2008A, p. 27).
Others that have emerged include religious nongovernmental organizations which play roles like fighting for human rights and governance in governments (Berger, 2003, p. 30). Based on this last definition, donor agencies have been able to engage civil societies in the implementation of policies that are concerned with democracy and poverty eradication (Howell & Pierce, 2001, p. 2).
However, the operations of the civil society in the 21st century are threatened by the capitalistic platform from where it operates. For instance, the civil society is expected to operate where markets and power interact. For example, a number of countries in Africa are led by dictators, or lack proper political mechanisms. In essence, poor political systems threaten the existence of civil societies.
Generally, civil society offers a platform for donors to provide assistance in the form of aid to the developing and the third world nations. However, the civil society is supposed to represent the interests of these groups, and express the needs between the state and the market without any financial fain (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Denmark 2008A, p. 27).
It should be noted that a civil society should never overshadow the existing democratic institutions and public authorities. The functionality of the civil society is based on the relationship that exists among different stakeholders in the society. For instance, it should collaborate effectively with the press, the state, donors, the local people, and other organizations, in order to achieve its goals.
Nonetheless, the civil society has been accused of opposing the power, policies, and functionality of the state (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Denmark 2009 A, p. 27).
Civil society has benefited immensely from the Danish aid over the past years in terms of governance, democracy, poverty eradication, and enhancement of human rights, among other undertakings. Civil society has played a great role in Uganda, Ghana, and South Africa Robison & Friedman, 2005, p.7).
Democracy
The term democracy is ambiguous contested (Hearn, 1999, p. 14). The word resonates in the minds of people as they keep struggling to gain freedom or better living conditions. Democracy has many meanings but it all depends on the context in which it is being applied. For instance, its definition of polyarchy lies on a political sphere (Hearn, 1999, p. 15).
In this context, democracy addresses the issues of inequality, unjust, unequal distribution of resources, and political freedom. It also implies a scenario where accountability, multi-parties, political and civil, and open political contesting is realised or practiced.
But this kind of democracy need to be build and developed. The social society comes in to ensure that the power existing between the society and the states is destabilized, accountability is improved, and liberal democracy values are promoted into the political system. In addition, the social society assumes the position of a mediator between the society and the state (Hearn, 1999:15).
The views of democracy or what results from it is reflected differently by various donors (Newberg & Carothers, 1996, p. 98). This is because each donor has different objectives and goals and their predetermined interests occasionally influence its applicability and meaning.
Some see democracy as an end or a process through aid or support to electoral mechanisms, political parties, and institutions of the government (Newberg & Carothers, 1996, p. 98). The support to educational systems, promotion of minority voices, or the dissemination of information to the masses qualifies as democracy.
The assistance of the civil society through technical expertise, information, and funding is believed to be the inception of democracy. In this context, the civil society empowerment pressures the government to develop and implement policies that are either related to good governance, human rights, and equitable power sharing. The ideology of pluralism ensures that the power of the government is reduced or limited.
The definition of democracy is more pronounced where non state organizations like NGOs or media that enjoys freedom, challenge the governmental policies, represent the ideology of pluralism and occasionally challenge the power of a state (Newberg & Carothers, 1996, p. 98).
Some of the African countries where democracy has been necessitated by the presence of donors include South Africa, Uganda, and, Ghana, among other countries. Based on a report by Julie Hearn, all these have been carried through donor intervention in Ghana, South Africa, and Uganda. For example, South Africa achieved its democracy through the initiatives international civil society that was funded by donors.
NGOs are part of the civil society and play a great role in the realization of democracy in developing nations (Carothers, 1999, p. 20). They aid in shaping policies through the exertion of pressure on several governments. It is also realized through furnishings of the policymakers by technical experts. Leadership training democracy is achieved by the involvement of people in civil education.
Because of the lack of expertise and funds, the Danish aid has been used to propel the civil society in ensuring the realization of democratic efforts and initiatives. Most of the authoritarian regimes have been overpowered by the driving force of the civil society to initiate democracy.
Chandhoke (2007, p. 608) note that donor agencies and the multilateral agencies have accoladed the civil society as the recipe for ensuring democracy and good governance.
Problem Formulation & Research Question
Donors give aid to developing or third world nations with the intention of achieving development and eradicating eradication. Africa is one of the largest recipients of foreign aid from the western donors. However, the major driving force for donors has been to fulfill their interests and goals. Therefore, it is important to analyze whether foreign aid is offered with the interests of the recipients at heart.
With regard to Danish aid in Africa, it would be necessary to determine whether donors just fulfill their needs or have the interests of the continent in their agenda.
Since Denmark is one of the largest donors in Africa, there is need to determine the implications of the aid it offers the African continent on civil society and the democratization process. The following research question has been formulated to justify the study problem. The research question is “Has Danish aid in Africa enhanced democratization and empowerment of the civil society or not?”
Case study
The research study is based on a case study drawing on several countries in Africa. The countries of the case study have been chosen based on the level of application of the Danish aid. The countries form the basis for the discussion, analysis, and the conclusion of the case study.
The countries that have been extensively analysed in the case study are Tanzania, Ethiopia, Uganda, Ghana, and southern Africa. Kenya and the Democratic Republic of Congo have been used for reference purposes. The discussion entails the major arguments on the issues of democratization and civil society from these case study examples.
Discussion
Danish aid to Africa and Civil society Enhancement
The decision by the Danish government to offer aid to Africa has been informed by increase poverty levels, wars, unequal distribution of natural resources, and poor practice and acknowledgement of human rights. These social and economic problems require a platform and funding to ensure that they are eliminated or minimized.
Through the collaboration of the civil society, Denmark has been in a position to offer aid through the support of the civil society (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Denmark, 2008A, p. 2). The assistance offered by Denmark to the African civil societies has led to their empowerment. For example, the involvement of Denmark in Ethiopia made it possible to fight poverty and famine.
Through the Danish Joint Programme in Ethiopia, health issues, agriculture and education were to be promoted with the aim of enabling the involved parties to acquire food security and improve their livelihoods (Sorensen, 2004, p. 3). However, to achieve these objectives, Danish aid had to empower several civil society organizations.
For example, a number of Ethiopian NGOs, DANIDA, and other civil societies who were involved in support of the initiatives. The reason why NGOs have been preferred more than governments is because of the bureaucratic systems and corruption associated with governments (Lewis & Kanji, 2009, p. 17).
In the 1990s, the civil society was actively involved in enhancing African policies through democratic consolidation (Hearn, 1999, p.14). During this period, western governments were seen to have greater interests on the civil society in Africa (Hearn, 1999, p. 2). This was necessitated by the fact that civil society had been liberated from the hegemonic grip of the African states.
The major role that civil society can play in widening democracy is through the promotion of pluralism. Democracy can be deepened by the civil society by embedding liberal democracy in institutions. Denmark policy has been geared towards the achievement of the interest of the civil society (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Denmark, 2008B, p. 15).
The emergence of civil society was seen a symbol of antistatism, democracy, and a mechanism to defend democracy (Howell & Pearce, 2001, p. 2). Donors saw this as a key factor that was required for governance. The belief led to the development of programs that were meant to promote the existence of civil society (Howell & Pearce, 2001, p. 2).
To bring development to societies, the involvement of civil societies was necessary because of their autonomy and separation from the governments. Civil societies can work independently without interference from the state. For example, NGOs have high public exposure and have credibility because they can be more accountable than the state (Lewis & Kanji, 2009, p. 21; Mitlin, Hickey & Bebbington, 2007, p. 1700).
In a way, the funding of the civil society has led to democratization of many states in the world. The civil society is known for the initiation and the restoration of some norms and values to the society (Howell & Pearce, 2001:29).
For instance, the concept of civil society has been embedded deeply in the grassroots through the formation and funding of actively involved grassroots organizations and foundations. However, this begs the question, has Danish aid to Africa enhanced or demented the growth of civil society in Africa or it has it played both roles?
According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2008BI, p. 91), the establishment of the Denmark embassy in Ghana has led to support of civil society. It has “become more vocal during this period, with at least some impact on transparency and accountability” (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2008B1, p. 91).
Through the support of Danida, initiatives to bring together the civil society and other donors have been put in place Policies have benefited the social society with the help of Danida. Ethiopia is a country that has been characterized by poverty, famine, and poor governance.
Although the atmosphere in Ethiopia hardly allows the formation of civil society as seen after Mengistu Haile Mariam regime was overthrown in 1991 (Wilson, 2004, p. 16), Danish NGOs have been actively involved in civil society enhancement. Through programs like the Joint Ethio-Danish development programme in North Wollo, NGOs and other CSOs have had a common voice and agenda (Wilson, 2004, p. 19).
Because of the complexity in the country, the developed programmes were geared towards the achievement of achievement of a common agenda. Through the Danish aid, Denmark has been able to promote civil societies.
Danish NGOs have been actively involved in channeling funds to projects designed by the Ethiopian NGOs (Wilson, 2004, p. 16-24). The NGOs have been used because “operational control which bureaucracies or NGOs have over events and practices in development is always constrained and often quite limited” (Mosse, 2004, p. 646).
Not all the NGOs involved in donor aid to Africa have had a positive impact in enhancing the growth of the civil society. As it was the norm in other nations where civil societies played a great role in donor related activities, Denmark’s involvement in Tanzania had the opposite effect.
Both the civil society and the government were not involved in policy making or lobbying for the policies whose implementation needed to be prioritized. According to Knack (2004, p. 251) the involvement of donors or foreign aid in developing countries lead to the development of civil society organizations and the empowerment of the legislature.
Basically, Denmark had a sympathetic view over Tanzania and as such, the control of the Danish aid was not left to the locals (Bagachwa et al., 1997, p. 179). This prohibited the development and participation of the civil society in the development agenda. Based on the strategies of the Denmark on aid, the civil society should act as an intermediary between the state and the society.
However, in the case of Tanzania, neither the government nor the civil society was involved in the policy making, planning, and implementation process. In one way, Danish aid to Tanzania did not develop the civil society; instead the civil society was suppressed and never recognized.
Based on the attitudes of the Danish donors, it is clear that Tanzania donor relations were poor and the development agenda was entirely controlled by the donors (Bagachwa et al., 1997, p. 180). The behaviour of donors was contrary to the Danish aid policy that requires the recipient country and Denmark to prioritize dialogue and the policy on how the aid should be managed (Bagachwa et al., 1997, p. 180).
In most cases, the civil society is involved in ensuring that policies are implemented based on the priorities of the people; however, in the case of Tanzania, the aid beneficiaries were never involved in the decision making process. This left a very weak civil society in the country as it had no voice, power, will.
A weak government is not accountable, meaning that it is only accountable to the donors (Knack, 2004, p. 253) and at no time would this allow civil society development or expression. According to Robison and Friedman (2005, p. 1) for democracy to prevail, dialogue between the civil society, donors, and the different institutions is crucial. The dialogue lacked in the case of Tanzania hence the low levels of democratization.
The driving force of the Tanzanian scenario was driven by the fact that the Danish aid was geared towards the areas Denmark had interest in (Bagachwa et al., 1997, p.180). This implies that the areas that the government or the civil society saw as important and needed immediate aid attention were never considered.
The international paradigm on development downplayed the needs of the civil society and the Tanzanian government. In other words, donors intruded the policy making process in Tanzania, exposing it to dependence thus reducing the self-reliance aspect of a sovereign nation.
This observation can be supported by a report released by the IMF that states that the use of resources by the IMF controlled the recipient nations thus undermining the democratic processes and the sovereignty of those nations. Power is shifted from the recipient nation to the nation offering its aid.
In a way, this reduced the confidence in negotiators who are the civil society. The Danish aid in Tanzania was basically geared towards the fulfillment of the donors’ commercial interests (Bagachwa et al., 1997, p. 181).
For example, instead of promoting the locals, the aid was given in terms of tied and untied loan s and grants. This implies that the Denmark government had to import 25% of the required commodities from its country and dump them in Tanzania no matter the price.
Currently, Danish NGOs operate from a platform that is under the civil society strategy (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark 2009B, p. 17). The Danish based NGOs have been included in the new strategy that ensures that the civil society is involved in the development process.
Based on a 2009 synthesis report released by the Ministry of foreign affairs of Denmark, Danish aid has been instrumental in the installation and realization of democracy in some parts of Africa. For example, according to the report, Denmark has over the years supported Ghana in economic development and in democracy enhancement.
For instance, the donor has been supporting several policy changes that strengthen the civil society (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2009A, p. 35). Through the Denmark embassy and Ghana civil society funding, some bilateral programmes have been sponsored that promote self governance in the country.
Some of the strongest civil society groups in Ghana are the trade unions, INGOs, think tanks, media and the political parties (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2009A, p. 37). The civil society organizations have been involved in policy making and the development agenda processes in Ghana.
In the same report, it emerges that in Ethiopia, Denmark has been less involved in promoting the civil society and democracy. The circumstances in the ground do not allow the Danish NGOs, and other civil society organizations to get involved in the governance and democracy related issues and agendas (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2009A, p. 38).
For example, a civil society that gets more than 10% funding is not supposed to engage in democratic or governance issues in Ethiopia. However, during the 2005 national elections, Danish aid was channeled to democratization through some civil society organizations like the CRDA. Some of the engagements included voter registration awareness and civic education as well as the inclusion of NGO activists.
Subsequently, the confrontational approach led to political chaos and upsurge in the country (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2009A, p. 38). Several people were wounded and others killed, resulting in chaos. This outcome supports Knack’s (2005, p. 51) claim that some scholars have deduced that foreign aids assistance may led to chaos or coup attempts.
Because of the funding and the violence experienced, the civil society organizations presence has been diminished and democracy not prevailed. In one way or another, it can be opinionated that Danish aid in Ethiopia reduced the participation of CSOs and enhancement of democracy.
However, it cannot be blamed for this because the social sphere created in the country does not allow democracy or civil society growth.
Compared to Ghana, it is important to note that the civil society strategy (CSS) can only be realised in a nation that allows a civil society sphere to engage in development, governance, and democratic issues. Capacity building is a necessary part that ensures realization of policy advocacy in the civil society.
Danish Aid to Africa and Implication for democracy
Foreign aid has the capacity to install democracy to recipient nations. Some of the major ways include a focus on the electoral process where the civil society is empowered (Knack, 2004, p. 251). This helps in keeping check of the power held by the legislature. Through the funding of educational programs and investing in economic based programs that would increase the GDP, then democracy would be seen.
These sentiments of democracy achieved through foreign aid have been echoed by Newberg and (Carothers, 1996, p. 99). Newberg and Carothers (1996, p. 99) observe that democracy can be developed through democratic conditions, free and fair elections on regular basis, and the emergence of civil society organizations. Most of these have been achieved in many of the African states through foreign aids.
However, based on some authors, foreign aid has the capacity to undermine the government’s accountability levels which lead to the absence of democracy, or even facilitate the emergence of violent coup attempts (Knack, 2005, p. 251).
Overreliance on foreign aid subjects the government to donor accountability syndrome instead of being accountable to the tax payers. Violence and social strife is fueled by negligence of people’s woes and problems.
Through Danish aid in Africa, the civil society has managed to promote democracy. One of the main objectives of Danish support is to reduce poverty. The plan for the poverty reduction is through democratization where the civil society would be used to promote the rights of the people (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2008A, p. 7).
To create a cohesive society that promotes democracy, civil societies need some backing in the form of aid. Civil societies cannot manage the roles and attributes they belief in on their own. For example, in countries with weak institutions, social inequities and scarce resources Africa, the civil society requires aid.
In such instances, Denmark supports the civil society to ensure that democracy is prevailed (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2008A, p. 7). The aid is used to strengthen the policies development and programs that are required to empower the people at the grassroots.
The financial aid given is “channeled to civil advocacy groups working on behalf of minorities, peripheral populations, and issues beyond political mainstream” (Newberg & Carothers, 1996, p. 104). Most of these issues are usually beyond the ability of the state to be attentive on them.
In Africa, and particularly in Uganda, Denmark has played a great role in ensuring that its objectives are realized. For example, the Uganda Human Rights Education and Documentation Centre (UHEDOC), was supported by the Danish government to discuss prime issues related to good governance and democracy (Hearn, 1999, p.18).
Other funding went to the organization of seminars and symposiums that discussed the issues of multipartism in Uganda. The civil society played a great role in ensuring that the goals and the objectives of Danish aid were realized. The major reason why donors offer their support to the civil society is to build democracy (Hearn, 1999, p. 19).
Donors like Denmark use the civil society because of the closer link they hold with both the society and the state (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2008A, p. 27). They also rely on the belief that society functionality is based on the society’s own good and development. Through the Danish aid, Denmark has put in place a mechanism to build an effective civil society.
Denmark has developed strategies that uphold the principle of the Paris Declaration (PD) especially in the developing countries. One of the strategies is the “Promotion of civil society support in Danish bilateral and multilateral assistance” (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2008A, p. 15).
Based on this strategy, the Danish aid would assist the civil society to plan, formulate, implement, and monitor bilateral assistance offered to them. Some civil society organization like the FBO participate a lot in education and health intervention since most of the nations in developing countries lack the political resolve, resources, and capacity.
Through the Danish aid, organizations under the civil society will be in a position to carry out their programmes as anticipated. The support would ensure that the civil society plays its role in the society. The collaboration between the civil society and the Danish organizations has ensured that policies gave been developed and implemented.
Donors are required to carry out capacity building on the locals to ensure that they can take control and initiatives of the projects being carried or implemented. However, the Danish aid to Tanzania prohibited capacity building (Bagachwa et al., 1997, p.182). Although aid was given and policies planned and implemented, the locals had no idea what the policies entailed.
It can be concluded that lack of capacity building “suffocated the civil society” as no room was given for it to grow and play its role in development and policy making. Fear for aid withdrawal left the country with low levels of confidence, ownership of projects as well as limiting democratization. In this case democracy was never prevailed because of the asymmetric relationship between Denmark and Tanzania.
In such instances, transparency and accountability do not prevail at the end of the day. If the government has no voice over the donors, then the civil society and democracy are nonexistent. This is attributed to the fact that the governments pay much attention to the donors and do not account themselves to the tax-payers (Knack, 2004, p. 253). The institutions were incapacitated leaving them weak and powerless.
This claim can be supported by Knack (2004, p. 253) who notes that foreign aid has a way of weakening the governments accountability which retards the development of civil society. The authors further add that the rule of law and democracy in these instances are underpinned.
The anomalies experienced in Tanzania do not give room for democracy and civil society to develop. Instead, they suppress their ability to grow and even own the aid programmes as expected.
Other than the negative picture of democracy and civil society building by the Danish aid in Africa, its priorities have changed. Based on the Paris Declaration, it has now emerged that donor recipients can plan on their priorities (Hyden, 2008, p. 259).
According to an agenda plan, Denmark would be willing to initiate dialogue in developing nations and in ensuring the creation of democratic societies with freedom and administrative powers (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2009B, p. 4).
In fact, it has set aside financial aid that would ensure that these priorities are realised in a bit of Middle East states and African nations inclusive of Tanzania which was left in a detrimental state. Other prioritized agendas of the Denmark aid programs to Africa would be accomplishment and support of women human rights in Africa (Africa Commission, 2009).
It also has plans for ensuring gender equality is achieved in Africa by ensuring that women are empowered and have the same voice as men. For example, in 2011, DKK 430 million were planned to assist women in Kenya especially through the promotion of the health sector (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2009B, p. 5).
The intention was to ensure that women have access to family planning methods, modern contraception, and health information. The program would target the rural regions of Kenya. Based on the agendas it can be concluded that Danish aid in some way would promote democracy in Africa.
History can be revisited on the role that Denmark played in Ghana’s democratization process. A report by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2008B, p. 70) notes that Danish aid was used to support the process of democratization.
For example, various programs were trained on civil rights groups, and support given to civic groups and the electoral commission. In addition, the initiative also supported voter registration process. Denmark was actively involved in the campaigns to monitor and ensure that democracy prevailed in the country.
Through the Danish aid, self help projects and other civil society organization like the Danish –Ghanaian Friendship Association were able to initiate programs in 1987 (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark 2008B, p. 70). The latest strategy corporation was initiated in 2004 to 2008, and the policies touched on the areas of gender and human rights.
The programs led to the empowerment of the civil society as well as the development of governance in the country. Unlike in the case of Tanzania as earlier witnessed, Denmark was involved in the Ghanaian civil society and the government in the dialogue and harmonization process.
The community based organizations (CBOs) in Ghana have been empowered and as a result, they have been active players in various development programs (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2008B2, p. 79).
The program ensures that good governance, democratization, and human rights are observed and realized in the country. Based on the analysis it is clear that Danish aid has led to democratization and the support of the civil society in Ghana.
Because of the peace and the stability in southern Africa, Denmark has had exemplary support in the region. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2008B2, p. 36) report, the Danish five year development plan has focused on human rights, democracy, and good governance. The country aims at developing democratic frameworks in the region.
It has also involved and promoted civil society organizations in the region like the SADC which oversees elections and other legislative issues in the Southern Africa. So far, the region has had no coup compared to central Africa which has been had to penetrate. Lack of democracy and political stability has reluctantly affected the democratization process in the central Africa (Gould, 2005).
For instance, Grega (2007, p. 4) note that the Democratic Republic of Congo is regarded as the worst country in Africa in terms of democracy and good governance. However the country has been battling with the need to instill democracy and good governance in order to play a participatory role in civil society. Compared to southern Africa, democracy in the DRC is worse.
Ethiopia was hit by one of the worst famines in history between 1984 and 1985. As a result, Denmark established itself in the Wollo region and with the aid of Ethiopian NGOs and other organization it was able to offer its aid. However, the space offered by the Ethiopian regime does not allow for a lot of involvement by donors in the region.
For example, most of the Danish aid in Ethiopia has been in the form of relief food only and not democracy promotion or civil society enhancement. Because of the high aid dependency ratio, Ethiopia planned to escape this trend in the early 1990s (Wilson, 2004, p. 16). During this period the Danish aid organization Danida was also planning to withdraw from the country and end its aid programs.
However, sooner than later, a coup overthrew the Marxist regime of the then president Mengistu Haile Mariam in 1991 (Wilson, 2004, p.16). Knack (2005, p. 251) observed that foreign aid can lead to coup attempts and violence. The immediate government kept a closer watch on NGOs and other civil organizations.
The state’s relationship with the NGOs was reduced as the government concentrated on ethnic federalism and less on democracy. Democracy was not practical at the period as civic organizations were required to renew their registrations on a monthly basis (Wilson, 2005, p. 16).
Democracy and the civil society were not enhanced by the Danish aid in Ethiopia as the space for their enhancement did not prevail. This can be reflected by the 2005 attempts by the Danish aid agency Danida that led to riots, violence and death of Ethiopians (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2009A, p. 38).
Based on the definition of democracy with respect to equal human rights, Danish aid assisted in the formulation and implementation of democracy in Northern Ethiopia. For instance, Danish NGOs have been involved in the formulation of some human rights based on the 1989 UN convention (Wilson, 2004, p. 41).
The rights include the protection from human violation, child rights, and the rights to provision. Based on these rights, the government has the obligation to safeguard its citizens against their abuse, especially the child’s rights. The DanChurch Aid is part of the Danish aid agencies that was involved in the democratization process (Wilson, 200, p. 41).
The DCA believes that “a dimension of empowerment and democratization becomes increasingly prominent in all rural development projects” (Wilson, 2004, p. 41). This could be achieved through the rights based approach that has been adopted by the DCA. The approach removes obstacles that obscure the Ethiopians from enjoying the basic human rights.
The approach was adopted after the realization that the political and the civil rights in Ethiopia were problematic. Although the current regime has given the intention of achieving political and civil rights, nothing has been achieved.
Although Danish aid agencies like the DAC and the Danish NGOs have been involved in calling and lobbying for democracy, it still remains difficult for the autonomous movements to voice their opinions in a country where basic human rights are never practiced.
If the state cannot make it possible for political and civil rights to be of existence, the CSO are incapacitated. The CSOs based in Ethiopia fear losing their licenses as licenses are renewed on a yearly basis.
Conclusion
By and large, Danish aid to Africa has had a positive implicit in as far as civil society and democracy is concerned. However, in some instances (like in the case of Tanzania), the humanitarian and aid agency was not able to enhance the development of civil society and the realization of democracy. The commercial part of their bilateral aid to Africa propelled its urge and went off some of the requirements of the Denmark policy.
For democracy to be realized, the civil society need to be active and so is the government. When a country’s sovereignty is compromised for fear of losing aid, then democracy is suppressed.
The case of Tanzania clearly shows what foreign aid can lead to if the government becomes attached to the donors and complies with all its demands. With no proper transparency and accountability mechanism in which a state can claim its involvement in a project then it is next to impossible to have democracy or operational civil society.
Donors need to involve the recipients of the aid in policy making and implementation processes. They should not subject the recipient to reliance syndrome where all the decisions and actions are carried out by the donors. The recipients of the aids know better the projects that need priority.
Thus, the involvement of the state and the civil society in itself portrays the level of democracy that the donor has. Self reliance created by foreign aids leads to coup attempts, riots, violence, and deaths as witnessed in Ethiopia.
Other than the negative side of Danish aid in Africa, it has a positive side as well. In countries like Ghana, Uganda, and Kenya as well as in Southern Africa’s region Danish aid has necessitated the development and enhancement of democracy. It has collaborated with the local civil society and made them vocal.
In other instances, it has collaborated to initiate the formation and support of civil society in countries like Ethiopia, Uganda, and Ghana. On matters of democracy, the aid has been used to support several projects geared towards democracy. For example, the advocacy for basic human rights, political, and civil rights in Ethiopia. It has also overseen elections to ensure democratic voting and competition.
In other instances, governance and democracy has been demonstrated through voter registration, conducting civic education, and creating awareness and educating the masses on voting process and their rights. The promotion of democracy, good governance and the observation of human rights is a part of the Denmark’s agenda.
Generally, it can be concluded that based on the analysis of the few countries where Danish aid has been applied, democracy and civil society have been enhanced. They have been aided financial, through technical knowhow, and support of their views.
Collaboration of the Danish aid agencies and civil society is the road to achieving democracy. Lastly, the negative side has been averted as the country has adopted new agenda and portfolio to aid in dissemination of its aid in African nations.
Reference List
Abuzeid, F. (2009). Foreign Aid and the “Big Push” Theory: Lessons from Sub-Saharan Africa. Stanford Journal of International Relations, 11(1),17-23.
Africa Commission. (2009). Realizing the Potential of Africa’s Youth: Report of the Africa Commission May 2009. Secretariat of the Africa Commission Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark. Web.
Bagachwa, M. et al. (1997). Foreign Aid in Africa: Learning from country experiences. Stockholm, Sweden: Motala Grafiska.
Berger, J. (2003). Religious Nongovernmental Organizations: An Exploratory Analysis. International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 14(1), 16-39.
Buchanan-Smith, M., & Rhode, U. S. (2002). Danida’s international humanitarian assistance programme: a case study of accountability mechanisms. Background research for HPG Report 12. Web.
Carothers, R. (1999). Think again: Civil society. Washington: Carnegie Endowment.
Chandhoke, N. (2007). Civil Society. Development in Practice,17(4/5), 607-614.
Cheema, G., & Shabbir, P. V. (2010). Engaging civil society: Emerging trends in democratic governance. Geneva: United Nations University Press.
Economic and Social Research Foundation. (1997). Aid effectiveness in Tanzania: the case of Danish aid. Washington, D. C.: Economic and social Research Foundation.
Gould, J. (2005). Conclusion: the politics of consultation. London: Sage.
Gould, J., & Ojanen, J. (2003). Merging in the circle: The politics of Tanzania’s poverty reduction strategy. Helsinki: Institute for Development Studies.
Grega, P. (2007). Citizens’ Voice and Accountability Democratic Republic of Congo Country Case Study Final Report. Belgium: Federal Public Department for Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Cooperation for Development – Special Evaluation Service. Web.
Hearn, J. (1999). Foreign aid, democratization and civil society in Africa: A study of South Africa, Ghana, and Uganda. Nairobi: Institute of Development Studies.
Holtom, D. (2007). The challenge of consensus building: Tanzania’s PRSP 1998-2001. J. of Modern African Studies, 45(2), 233–251.
Howell, J., & Pearce, J. (2001). Civil society & development: a critical exploration. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Hyden, G. (2008). After the Paris Declaration: Taking on the Issue of Power. Development Policy Review, 26 (3), 259-274.
Knack, S. (2005). Does Foreign Aid Promote Democracy? International Studies Quarterly, 48(1) 251-266.
Lancaster, C. (2007). Foreign aid: Diplomacy, development, domestic politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lewis, D., & Kanji, N. (2009). Non organizations and developments. London: Routledge.
Lönnqvist, L. (2008). China’s Aid to Africa: Implications for civil society. Web.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2009). Thematic Evaluation of Support by Danish NGOs to Civil Society in Ghana and Ethiopia. Evaluation Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark. Web.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2008A). Strategy for Danish Support to civil society in developing countries. New York: ABE Books.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2008B). Joint evaluation of the Ghana-Denmark development cooperation 1990-2006. New York: ABE Books.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2008B2). Evaluation of Danish Regional Support to Peace and Security, Regional Integration and Democratization in Southern Africa. New York: ABE Books.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2008B1). Denmark’s Multilateral Development Cooperation Towards 2015. New York: ABE Books.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (2009B). Priorities of the Danish Government for Danish Development Assistance: Overview of the Development Assistance Budget 2011-2015. Web.
Mitlin, D., Hickey, S., & Bebbington, A. (2007). Reclaiming Development? NGOs and the Challenge of Alternatives. World Development. 35(10), 1699–1720.
Mosse, D. (2004). Is Good Policy Unimplementable? Reflections on the Ethnography of Aid Policy and Practice. Development and Change, 35(4), 639–671.
Newberg, P. R., & Carothers, T. (1996). Aiding–and Defining: Democracy. World Policy Journal, 13(1), 97-108.
Robinson, M., & Friedman, S. (2005). Civil society, democratisation and foreign aid in Africa. IDS Discussion Paper 383. Web.
Sorensen, P. (2006). The Impact of a Joint NGO Programme in North Wollo, Ethiopia: Enhanced Food Security for the Poor?. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies.
Wilson, F. (2004). The Impact Study Group of the Joint Ethio-Danish Development Programme in North Wollo. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies.
Democracy is being sought by almost everyone in the world especially Africans who find it as the only alternative for survival (Kasongo 2005). They believe that under a democratic system, there is nothing to lose since it has been a potential solution for the world political crisis.
India has been named as the world largest democracy. However, although it is the desired political form, it is found in less than 50% of the governments in the world. Some of these governments which have never experienced democracy include China, which has a fifth of the world’s population.
Democracy in general is viewed as the rights of individuals being equal participants in making decisions that influence their lives (Kasongo 2005).
Democracy is characterized by equality and freedom where every citizen has equal rights in the law and in the process of making and implementation of these laws. This ensures that there is no discrimination between citizens. In a democratic country, the people run the government through voting of representatives (Brown 1967).
Trends of democracy
Democracy was believed to originate from Athens, 2500 years ago (Held 2006). There were other alternative systems which included monarchy, which was the rule by individual, oligarchy, which was the rule by those who were wealthy, and timocracy, which was a rule by people of an elite class. In the 18th and 19th centuries, some countries adopted democracy as the system of their governance.
In 1755, Corsican Republic became the first country to adopt democratic constitution. In 1755, United States adopted a constitution which was characterized by freedom and equality (Newmyer 2005).
Australia adopted democracy in 1861 and they were the first to allow women to vote (suffrage) equivalent to men. New Zealand in 1893, also achieved universal suffrage by allowing women to vote but they could not allow them to stand for parliamentary seat till 1919 (Newmyer 2005).
In the 20th century, liberal democracy brought about various waves including wars, for example, World War I and revolutions. Although democracy flourished in the 1920s, severe economic depression (Great Depression) that was there worldwide changed some nations in Europe, Latin America and Asia to turn to dictatorship.
In the history of democracy, it was termed as the rule by the people (Held 2006), where various concepts are encompassed. This includes all people or representatives being part of the legislative process, making of laws and policies, and rulers being accountable to those that they represent.
The other concept of democracy is that the rulers are supposed to be elected by the ruled and act in the interest of the ruled. According to Held (2006),
“Democracy helps achieve the following fundamental values: rightful authority, political equality, liberty, moral self-development, the common interest, a fair moral compromise, binding decisions that take everyone’s interest into account, social utility, the satisfaction of wants, efficient decisions” (p. 2).
Forms of democracy
There have been various forms of democracy that have come about over time. A single system may consist of more than one form of democracy. These forms include: representative democracy, liberal democracy, direct democracy, inclusive democracy, participatory democracy, socialist democracy, anarchist, Iroquois, sortition, consensus, supranational, cosmopolitan and non-governmental.
Representative democracy is whereby the ruled select their representatives to be the government officials. The winner of the election is the person with the highest number of votes. The elected act in the interest of the ruled and have freedom of making judgements on behalf of the ruled.
The representative democracy consists of parliamentary representation, semi-presidential and constitutional democracies. The parliamentary democracy is where the government is voted in by the representatives (Baccus 2010).
The ruled do not participate. Under parliamentary democracy, a Prime Minister is elected by the representative and can be removed by a vote of no confidence (Brown 1967). Presidential type of representative democracy is where the people (citizens) elect their president during a fixed date. The president heads both the nation and the government (Baccus 2010).
The president serves the public for a fixed period of time. Semi-presidential democracy system is where there are shared powers between the president and the prime minister. Depending with the country, either of them may have more powers than the other over the government and legislature (Baccus 2010).
Constitutional democracy is whereby the selected representatives make decisions based on the constitution that is, set rules of law. The constitution contains the rights that protect the ruled. The majority will can be practised against the minority (Baccus 2010).
Direct democracy is where the individuals make decisions without relying on the representatives. The citizens have power to change the constitution and set referendums. An example of direct democracy in practice is in California where referendums are always done through voting (Buccus 2010). Inclusive democracy aims for direct democracy in social life. Decision making is done by assembly of demos.
Participatory democracy involves interaction between the citizens and their political representatives (Carey 1988). People with common interest meet and discuss things than influence the society and citizens have equal rights to air their views.
Participatory democracy aims at removing the hierarchical type of governance where lateral communication benefits the community as a whole. The participants come together to solve their problems and the community is empowered and can take a political action (Rheingold 1993).
The communication between the citizens and representatives can be one on one or through electronic networks where geographical distance may be a hindrance in communication. Che Guevara, a Marxist revolutionary in his speech said that democracy cannot be managed solely by the rich and professional politicians (Carlsson & Lindgren 2007).
Socialists believe in participatory democracy combined with representative democracy. The ideology of socialist democracy has both values and social theories. The values form the basis of social life and development. The social theory explains how the social development can influence the society to realize these values.
The values of social democracy include solidarity, freedom and equality which are expected to be created at the same time. Anarchists oppose the hierarchical authority and they accept direct democracy. They believe in majority rule. The majority rule does not consider the views of minority.
Apparently, democratic societies conduct elections with the aim of resolving the decisions of the majority rather than the minority. For example, the president is chosen based on the views of the majority in the society.
Furthermore, it is not possible to represent the public in decision making without holding democratic elections. As such, it is very critical to conduct the elections in a manner that represent individual views of the citizens to ensure that the decisions of the public are well represented.
Undoubtedly, the public decision making processes would be unproblematic if a mechanism which ensures everybody in the society upholds the same views is used in elections. Any election that satisfies the consensus principle would be a reasonable election.
This principle calls for election of those candidates who are agreed upon by different individuals and leaving out those who are not popular. This principle is however not easy to satisfy because in reality, many individuals differ in their views (Black 1948).
Different people have understood the word democracy differently. The origin of the word rather meant “the power of the people”. However, the sense of this power has remained an arguable topic in the recent times. In the modern times, democracy is commonly construed as the determination of the will of the majority through the voting rule.
The power to decide issues by the majority rule is thus believed to be the power of the people. Nonetheless, deification of democracy in this manner exposes it to a lot of social choice dilemma, including Arrows’ impossibility theorem and the Downs’ rational ignorance.
These theories finds out whether voting rule as a decision making mechanism is inherently flawed, and whether democracy as political system and based on a voting rule is reducible to a decision means respectively. Therefore, as critics have argued, as a political system, democracy is inherently flawed.
The social choice dilemma may however escape inherent flaws as a system if, at its core, democracy is perceived differently from decision mechanism based on voting rule (Raaflaub 1989; Ober 1998).
Rather than viewing democracy as a source of popular will and a preference for individuals, it can be taken as a deliberative process based on social decision rule. It can be argued that he social decision rule is rather democratic because it guarantees procedural fairness, which underscores conformity to the political equality principle.
Following election of a representative government, the social decision rule is used by this government to make laws. However, it is important to note that lack of transitiveness by the majority rule which allows cycling satiations leads to doubtful conclusion that justification of democracy can only be minimally justified.
Majority rule which if preferred by populists is recommended by the social choice as the only fair decision rule. This clearly undermines a populist’s justification of democracy (Dasgupta & Maskin 1999).
This rule that provides plenty of information on the popularly acceptable alternatives helps to know which ones to reject. Deliberative and pragmatist grounds can also be used to give justification to the rule of the majority. It is important to note that majority rule defines how the law makers negotiate, bargain, persuade, deliberate, and trade, based on the fact that the support of the majority will determine the final agreement.
Based on the fact that it is reasonable to look ahead to reasonable outcome as a result of the majority rule, then this rule can be justified normatively since it is procedurally fair. Democracy must undoubtedly be part of the agenda-setting procedure in order to satisfy political equality.
Although an open agenda procedure may satisfy political equality, it may sometimes turn out chaotic. Most parliamentary democracies develop procedures that combine stability with political equality, especially through negotiation of a coalition program and a governing coalition (Arrow 1951).
Cycling, which means that there exists numerous and inseparable potential winning coalitions, makes the current winning coalition replaceable. As such, the minorities can protect themselves without violating the majority rule, or rather without giving ways to vetoes that are exposed to abuse in a bid to extort advantages and protect unjust privileges.
In addition, strong spur for coalition building is created by the existence of multiple and potential winning coalitions. Even though, cycling is inherent in democratic process, it rather remains far from being solved (Butler, Miller, & Sargeant 2004).
Elections portray an imperfect procedure since it represents an infallible approximation of the meaning of the general rule. It is true that the rule of the social choice theory provides that no reasonable procedure can reasonably exist, that can guarantee an outcome that is acceptable by all others at all times.
It can therefore be argued that majority rule as a decision rule guarantees procedural fairness based on treatment of alternatives and all voters in a fair manner, and hence the results of the majority rule is not really arbitrary (Woodberry 2005).
The fundamental principle of democracy is the protection of the minority as well as the individual rights and the majority rule. Although it seems contradictory, this is the basic idea that forms a democratic government. Majority rule means “organizing government and deciding public issues without taking away the basic rights and freedoms of minority groups or individuals” (Goodin, Pettit, & Pogge 2007, p. 56).
By the virtue of their ethnic background, their religion, income level, geographic location or rather the losers of elections, the minorities are assured basic human rights that no majority or government should take away from them.
Therefore, with their rights guaranteed, the minorities have a say in the democratic institutions of their countries. Some of the primary purposes of democracy include upholding of the social practices, the cultural identity, religious activities, and individual conscience. Rather than treating differences in culture, identity and values as threats, democracy tries to strengthen them as it recognizes diversity as an asset.
Paul Bremer III, who was an administrator in Iraq coalition provision Authority among the black once claimed that “Democracy entails not just majority rule, but protection of minority rights” (Goodin, Pettit, & Pogge 2007, p. 152). This statement was made after reading a speech during the year end review of the America occupancy of Iraq. By then, the American allegiance to protecting the minority rights was a concerted effort.
Practically, all people in a political society participate in choice of a set of rules that defines the application of minority rights and the majority rules.
The manner in which the majorities are determined, the limits of speech and debate, the manner in which members of a society can propose a law, and whether the minority should be given freedom to guard their rights against abuse by the majority will are some of the problematic areas that are treated differently by different democracies.
Different countries however follow different rules of democracy such as Robert’s Rules of Order which offers succinct declaration of the democratic principle. Different parliaments are currently building ideal principles that will guarantee and respect the rights of the citizens, including the rights of the majority, the minority, absentees, and individuals, as well as collective rights which govern all (Raaflaub 1983).
References
Arrow, K 1951, Social choice and individual values monograph 12, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Black, D 1948, “On the rationale of group decision-making,” Journal of Political Economy, 56, pp. 23-34.
Brown, H 1967, The correspondents’ war, Charles Scribners’ Sons, New York.
Butler, A, Miller, D E & Sargeant, K H 2004, Dysfunction and the struggle for social progress, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Carey, J 1988, Communication as culture: essays on media and society, Routledge, New York.
Carlsson, I & Lindgren, A 2007, What is social democracy? Printing house, Borås.
Dasgupta, P & Maskin, E 1999, “On the robustness of majority rule,” Political Theory, 12, pp. 25–44.
Goodin, R, Pettit, P & Pogge, T 2007, A companion to contemporary political philosophy Web. Web.
Held, P 2006, “American allegiance to protecting the minority rights was concerted efforts” Journal of Politics, 65 (2), pp. 273-287.
Kasongo, T 2005, Liberal democracy and its critics in Africa: political dysfunction and the struggle for social progress. CODESRIA, Africa in the Millennium series, Dakar.
Newmyer, J 2005, “Present from the start: John Adams and America,” Oxonian Review of Books, 4 (2).
Ober, J 1998, Political dissent in democratic Athens: intellectual critics of popular rule, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Raaflaub, K 1983, “Democracy, oligarchy, and the concept of the ‘free citizen’ in late fifth-century Athens,” Political Theory, 11, pp. 517–44.
Rheingold, H 1993, “Electronic frontiers and online activists,” The Virtual Community, 5, pp. 241-275.
Woodberry, R 2005, “Forthcoming: exploring the relationship between pentecostalism and democracy,” Spirit and Power: The Global Pentecostalism, 2 (8), pp. 4-8.
It is possible to increase voters’ morale by reducing the number of restrictions in voter registration process. For example, extending the registration deadline will increase the number of voters in an election. In addition, if America declares the Election Day a national holiday, people will have time to spend on the voting queues, which will increase the rate of voter turnout.
Lobbying
It is necessary to increase the number of restrictions on lobbying. For example, the ‘revolving door’ phenomenon should change in order to increase restrictions. For a person to join lobbying, it is necessary to undergo a vetting process to check his or her credibility. In addition, a person who has left politics must spend at least 5 years before becoming a lobbyist. Such changes will decrease the influence of lobbyists on national matters.
Proposed National Primary
Politicians like Senator Spencer Abraham argue that a national primary is likely to create the phenomenon of frontloading. Aspirants will need to have huge amounts of money to fund their nation-wide political campaigns.
A national primary is the best way to conduct the US presidential primaries and caucuses because it will reduce the influence that outcomes of some states have on others. Normally, some candidates gain an upper hand in the outcome of certain states just because winning in other states create euphoria.
The Supreme Court and partisanship
In some cases, justices act from partisan positions, but this should never be the case. Permitting this will allow personal convictions take effect, with people getting the wrong justice. Although the American Supreme Court has the last say, Americans have some available recourse that could reduce partisanship in the courts.
For instance, the people have the power to vet the judges. The people, through mass actions and popular politics, can press for changes in the law. This will leave the congress and the senate with no other choice than to hear their public voices and amend laws in order to allow vetting of judges. This will determine their credibility and capacity to make partisan rulings.
American health care system
Although European democracies provide the government-paid free health care for their citizens that Americans lack, the American system is the best for the nation. It is not good to judge the American health care system in comparison with European systems because of some differences in their social and economic systems.
First, unlike the European nations, America faces the problem of illegal immigration, which makes it difficult to provide government-paid free health care to every citizen. Unlike Europe, America has low-income neighbors such as Mexico and the Latin America, where people are looking for any possible way to get into the US. If we adopt free healthcare for all citizens, American will attract a large number of illegal immigrants.
American core values
In an ideal America, equality, liberty and self-government should play an important role in national security policy. Liberty is a core value that should provide the people with their rights to security. Equality should ensure that every American citizen enjoys his or her freedom and rights, regardless of the ethnic, social, cultural, political and economic background.
Finally, the value of self-government should allow states and local authorities practice their jurisdictions to provide security to their citizens to the best of their ability and in respect to the constitution of the United States.
The Cyprus issue has been a major part of Turkey’s political agenda since 1974 with nationalistic sentiments and security concerns dominating the discourse about the problem. The importance of Cyprus to Turkey has remained significant with Turkey consistently asserting its national interests in Cyprus.
According to the Turkish ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Cyprus is an issue involving Turkey’s vital national and strategic interests”1. The Turkish government has therefore invested significant amount of effort and commitment to the issue.
Even so, there have been significant changes in Turkey’s handling of the Cyprus dispute as a result of moves by Turkey towards greater democratization. These moves have primarily been as a result of progress towards EU membership by Turkey. Turkey has undertaken substantial reforms to conform with the Copenhagen criteria which are a prerequisite to becoming an EU member state.
In addition to this, Turkey has displayed considerable enthusiasm to resolving the Cyprus conflict. This paper will assess how Turkey’s greater democratization has and continues to influence the handling of the Cyprus dispute.
This paper shall discuss how Turkey’s greater democratization has influenced the positive steps towards resolution of the Cyprus dispute. The paper shall demonstrate that by offering Turkey the possibility of full-EU membership, the EU propelled profound changes in Turkey’s domestic and foreign policy.
Brief Historical Overview of Turkey
Modern day Turkey traces its roots to the Ottoman Empire which was a powerful and important player in the European state system. This powerful entity was brought to an end following World War I and Istanbul was occupied by British and French forces. However, The Turks managed to gain freedom from European occupation under the 1920 Treaty of Sevres.
The modern Republic of Turkey was subsequently founded in October 1923 and its present day borders established.2 Turkey differs significantly from the other EU constituents in that it is not Christian, does not share Europe’s Greco-Roman cultural and historical heritage, and is not geographically located on the European continent3.
The guiding principles of the new Turkish state were secularism and homogenous nationalism. The newly formed Republic of Turkey was keen to elevate itself into a modernized state. Therefore, from its birth, Turkey embarked on a Westernization process so as to elevate its status and improve its security both at home and abroad.
The Cyprus Island was once under Turkish rule as a result of the conquest of the Ottoman Empire in 1951. The Island was then leased to Britain but following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, the island became a British colony hence marking an end of the Turkish claim.
Even so, there existed Turks on the Cyprus Island and hence Turkish interest in Cyprus continued. Another reason for this interest was because Turkey viewed Cyprus as strategically located and hence of military significance.
The Cyprus Issue
The conflict between the two ethnic groups which reside on the island of Cyprus: the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots has been a major part of international politics for nearly half a century. The Republic of Cyprus obtained international legal standing in 1960 through a compromise result negotiated by the governments of the United Kingdom, Greece, and Turkey.
Majority of the Greek Cypriots hoped for a union of Cyprus with Greece while the majority of Turkish Cypriots supported the division of the island between the two motherlands of Turkey and Greece.
Under such a foundation, it was agreed that the guarantor powers (United Kingdom, Greece and Turkey) could directly interfere with the domestic affairs of the newly formed state of Cyprus in the event that circumstances spun out of control.
Even after its independence, the Greek-Cypriot dominated Cyprus remained a volatile region. Greco-Turkish conflicts broke out in the new republic of Cyprus on 21 December 1963. These fighting broke off because of the lack of security for the Turkish elements in the government. As a result of this, the partnership government which had been formed by the Greek and Turkish Cypriots broke down.
Turkey planed an all out invasion of Cyprus in 1964 but the move was stopped due to US diplomatic pressure. Inter communal fighting continued between the two ethnic groups and an escalation of this fighting led to the break down of the constitutional order that had united the Island. In the summer of 1974, a Greek-inspired coup on Cyprus led to the invasion by Turkey of the northern part of the island.
The Turkish military intervention on the island was carried out in the face of strong objections and pressure from Turkey’s key Western allies. This demonstrates the significance that Cyprus holds to Turkey. The Turkish intervention of 1974 led to a partitioning of the island into two distinctive zones: the northern Turkish and southern Greek. In consequence of this invasion, Turk-Cypriots now hold 40% of the island’s territory.
In 1983, the Turkish Cypriots declared an independent Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) whose boundaries extended from the green line established by the UN separating northern and southern Cyprus.
However, Turkey is the only Nation which recognizes this self declared state.. Efforts have been made to try and settle the issue with the invention of Greece and Turkey to no avail. The United Nation and European Union have also made attempts to try and aid the settling of the issue to no avail.
Turkey and Greece Relations
Turkey’s relationship with Greece has a direct bearing on its handling of the Cyprus dispute. Since the Turkish invasion of Cyprus following the 1974 Cyprus crises, Greece regarded Turkey as a major security threat. This was because of the close proximity for Greece to Turkey and the much smaller population of Greece as compared to Turkey.
In addition to this, Turkey repeatedly rejected Greece’s proposal for a bilateral non-use of force pact. All this was under the backdrop of Turkey gradually increasing her military capabilities. The acquisition and deployment of the Russian s-300 anti-aircraft missile system by Cyprus lead to increase anxiety by Turkey over the intentions of Greek-Cyprus.
Greece-Turkey relationships are of major significance in Turkey’s EU membership goals. Turkey has historically had a clear adversary within the EU in the form of Greece. The enmity between these two states had served as a major blocking point to Turkish candidacy up until 1999. This is because even if Turkey were to meet all the conditions for membership to the EU, Greece would veto Turkey’s membership in the EU.
Relations between Turkey and Greece started to warm up during the Kosovo conflict when the two governments acknowledged the need for improved relationships. The catastrophic earthquakes that hit Turkey and Greece in August and September 1999 further improved relationships between the two nations.
Greece’s swift reaction to the Turkish tragedy changed the mood between the nations and resulted in similar good wiled reactions by Turkey following the Greece earthquake. Both countries through official and private initiatives sought to alleviate the plight of earthquake-torn Greeks and Turks. Following this events, Greece accepted the granting of EU candidate status to Turkey in the December 1999 EU Summit.
This was a monumental step since Greece had always been opposed to Turkey’s ambition to join the EU. Ker-Lindsay states that in view of the belief in the power of the EU to transform Turkey into a less threatening neighbor, Greece has since 1999 become one of the strong protagonists of eventual Turkish membership4.
The Cyprus Dispute and Europeanization of Turkey
The Europeanization process has assisted Turkey’s ambitions to join EU since. This is because Europeanization in essence implied adoption of an active approach towards the Balkans and advocating the region’s eventual integration into the structures of the European Union. Turkey’s ambitions to become an associate or full member in European institutes and the European Union in particular go as far back as the early 1960s.
These ambitions were best articulated in 1987 when Turkey formally applied for admission to the European Community in April 1987. At the moment, Turkey is an associate member of the EU, and has yet to accede to the EU and become a full member.
While political reforms have been ongoing since transition to civilian rule in 1983, their speed and magnitude has been catalyzed by the candidacy for membership and the start of accession talks with the EU. A big incentive for Turkey to join the EU was the huge economic crisis that Turkey experienced between 200 and 2001.
This crisis was an important force in propelling reforms towards EU membership. EU membership promised significant material benefits and in a time when Turkey was experiencing one of its worse economic crises, the potential benefits associated with EU membership looked promising.
From the very onset of Turkey’s EU membership aspirations, the Greek-Turkish conflicts over Cyprus posed a serious problem to Turkey being given candidate status. Turkey is a predominantly Muslim country and this had resulted in issues of bad blood as a result of the Islamophobia that is typical of much of the Western.
Painting an image of a democratic and peaceful Turkey has therefore been a key goal of the government over the past decade. These factors have influenced the stance taken by the AKP government with regard to the Cyprus issue. Turkey was determined to show that it was not the party refraining from reaching a solution to the dispute.
In order to gain the world’s support, Turkey was determined to achieve a lasting peaceful solution to the Cyprus issue. Çelenk asserts that a major motivation for Turkey’s willingness for peace was “to prove the rightness and good will of the Turkish side to the world”5. This would further aid in Turkey’s quest for Europeanization and integration into the EU.
Changes in Turkey’s Approach to the Cyprus Problem
Prior to the 1999 Helsinki Summit, Turkey’s Cyprus policy was based upon rigid nationalistic lines. The problem was thus perceived as one of “national cause” and indeed a matter of national security. A resolution of the Turkish Parliament of 1999 presented a solid framework for Turkish policies towards Cyprus.
The document stated that unless the reality of two separate states in Cyprus was acknowledged and equal treatment afforded to the two states, no settlement could be achieved. An internationally recognized TRNC would pacify Turkish security concerns hence increasing the likelihood of a settlement.
Turkey also asserted that the application of Greek Cypriots for EU membership on behalf of the whole island was against the founding treaties of 1960 which specified that the interests of each of the guarantors (Turkey and Greece) be respected.
Turkish leaders made it clear that Turkey would not relinquish Cyprus for the sake of EU membership and up to 2003, the Turkish government was threatening to counter EU integration with Cyprus by increasing integration between Turkey and the TRNC. Annexation of the TRNC was even considered by the Turkish government in several incidences.
Following the Helsinki Summit of the EU in 1999, the southern part of the island of Cyprus was allowed to join the EU despite the fact that there was no settlement of the Cyprus issue. Çelenk notes that the same summit imposed the settlement of the Cyprus issue as one of the necessary preconditions that Turkey had to address before joining the EU6.
This precondition accentuated the fact that an amicable settlement of the conflict on the island was inescapably tied to Turkey’s EU membership. By offering Turkey the possibility of full-EU membership in December 1999, The EU Helsinki Council provided a strong motivation for change in Turkey’s domestic politics7. This helped to propagate a series of radical reforms with regard to the democratization process
Çelenk reveals that Turkey’s political agenda have had significant bearings on the Cyprus issue with Turkish foreign policy uncompromising attitude towards Cyprus being countered by its willingness to adopt greater democratization and hopefully become an EU member state8.
Ulusoy explicitly states that the changes and alignments in Turkey’s foreign policy are closely related to democratization under the pressure of the EU accession process9.
Since her application to the EC in 1987, Turkey adopted a strategy that was based on rejecting any linkage between the Cyprus issues and EU-Turkey relations. However, the 1999 Helsinki Summit established a clear linkage between the progress of the nature of Turkey-EU relations and the resolution of Turkey’s conflicts with her neighbors.
The coming to power in 2002 of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) presented a new dawn in Turkey’s foreign policy. While the governments before AKP had strongly opposed any compromise in resolving the Cyprus issue. The policy adopted by the AKP government which demonstrated a willingness to pursue a solution through a positive attitude was a major breakthrough.
A crucial distinguishing characteristic of AKP from the previous governments was that it openly accepted the linkage between Turkey-EU relations and the Cyprus issue. An EU progress Report on Turkey issued on November 5, 2003 stated that “lack of a solution in Cyprus can pose a serious obstacle to Turkey’s EU process”10. This statement was the first official link of Turkey’s EU membership with the Cyprus issue.
The Turkish government therefore sought to support international efforts for the unification of Cyprus since the Cyprus issue had direct bearings on Turkey’s EU ambitions. The EU summit in December 2004 noted that Turkey had contributed positively towards the solution of the Cyprus problem.
The summit also recognized the improvement in Turkey’s relations with her neighbors. Following the failed referendum of the Annan Plan as a result of the Greek-Cypriots vote, Turkey’s policy on the Cyprus issue started to move toward delinking its membership perspective from the resolution of the conflict.
Accession talks could not begin immediately after the 1999 candidacy status of Turkey due to Turkey’s non-compliance with the Copenhagen political criteria. Beginning in 2001, the EU has published Accession Partnership documents that illustrate issues that Turkey should address in its bid to fulfill the Copenhagen criteria.
In December 2004, negotiations were deemed as being ready to commence since the European commission judged that Turkey had “sufficiently fulfilled the Copenhagen political criteria”11. IT should be note that Accession negotiations are not negotiations in the literal sense of the word, but rather the candidate county’s progressive adoption of EU laws and regulations.
Following this, Turkey embarked upon intensive legislative reforms so as to meet the Copenhagen criteria. These reforms were aimed at bringing Turkish democracy up to European standard by eliminating the authoritarian aspects of the Turkish constitutional and legal system.
Effects of Turkey’s Democratization efforts to Cyprus dispute
Turkey’s democratization efforts have had a significant positive impact on the Cyprus issue. Before the democratization efforts, Turkey was content to undertake a passive stance in the solution of the Cyprus dispute. The coming to power of the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP) in November 2002 marked a significant change in the Turkish government’s Cyprus policy.
Çelenk notes that right after the general elections, the leader of AKP, Tayyip Erdogan, pointed to the need for a fundamental change in the policies that had been in place for the previous 30 years12.
Erdogan argued that the passive policies that had until then served the status quo could not be expected to result in a solution for the Cyprus issue. A radical change in Turkey’s attitude towards the issue was proposed as the key to attaining a solution.
Democratization is characterized by voting rights and the primacy of civilian rule over military rule. Turkish politics traditionally represents a contest for power between civilians and the military which has historically exerted a lot of influence over the country’s politics.
The military through the National Security Council (NSC) often expresses its views on issues and has a huge influence on the policymaking process. Diez notes that as of 2000, features of Turkey’s political landscape continued to resemble those of the 1970s with the military playing a dominant role in Turkish politics via the NSC13.
Turkey’s EU membership process caused significant changes since the EU demanded for democratization in Turkey. This demand required that the TAF would no longer be a political actor or have immense influence on the policymaking process.
In essence, the EU membership ambitions called on the curbing of the influence of the army in the political arena. Due to the huge public support for EU membership in Turkey, the military could not openly oppose steps towards democratization.
The move by the AKP to restructure the foreign policy was the first major challenge on the values of the army since Turkey announced its ambitions to join the EU. This move challenged the policies and values that had for a long time promoted the influence of the military in the domestic and foreign affair policies of Turkey.
In fact when the government began to take a series of initiatives in line with the new stance regarding Cyprus, the TAF also came up with its plans. While the government’s plan was accommodating and in line with the Annan Plan, the military’s pan took a different attitude towards the Annan Plan and regarded it as unacceptable14.
The Land Forces General when as far as to state that “the UN Cyprus Plan was unacceptable, could lead to violence and it threatened Turkey’s interests and island’s security”15. Following this declarations, the army pledged its continued support for the Northern Cyprus leader and his approach to the Cyprus problem. This illustrates the power struggle that continued between the civilian rulers and the army.
As a democracy, Turkey’s leaders would have to rely more and more on the support of the domestic population to ensure their reelection. Increasing the political party’s powers presented one of the best ways to achieve this. As it were, there was huge public support for EU membership in Turkey. The ruling party AKP was keen to work towards achieving the desires of the people so as to increase its popularity.
The ruling Turkey’s party, AKP, adopted a different strategy in dealing with the president of the TRNC. While the previous Turkish foreign policy had praised the Turkish Cypriots leader and supported his methods for dealing with the Cyprus dispute, the AKP government criticized him and challenged his policies and attitudes towards the Cyprus Issue.
Turkey’s new policy was in line with the EU’s attitude since Turkey wanted EU membership. By restructuring the Cyprus policy in a manner that was supported by the EU, the AKP demonstrated to the people its resolve to achieve EU membership. This provided a means of protecting the interests of AKP by increasing the party’s power and domestic support.
Prospects of Turkey Democratizing and Solving the Cyprus Problem
Over the course of the last 10 years, Turkey has made significant progress towards democratization both as a result of public pressure but mostly so as to join the EU. Turkey has also increasingly shown its commitment to solving the Cyprus problem in line with the wishes of the US. The referendum to vote for the Annan Plan in 2004 demonstrated Turkish resolve to settle the Cyprus issue.
The Annan Plan was a United Nations proposal to settle the dispute of the divided island nation of Cyprus by creating the United Cyprus Republic under terms that were agreeable to all the key actors in the dispute. The Turkish Cypriots voted in favor of the plan with a 64.9% majority mostly as a result of the influence of Turkey.
It was the Greek Cypriots who rejected the Annan Plan with a 75.8% vote against. The negative response to the Annan Plan by the Greek Cypriots was a disappointment to most members of the EU.
This was because the resolution of the Cyprus problem was a major goal of the EU and it was always assumed that the leaders of the Turkish-Cypriot community were the main opponents of the unification of the Island.
Despite the positive developments made by Turkey, her prospects for membership still remain out of reach. The main reason for this is the slow pace of democratization that is exhibited in Turkey. The Turkish military and conservative politicians have been pointed out as the two parties mostly responsible for the slow progress.
These two groups fear that the extensive political freedoms that democratization in line with EU requirements would bring could endanger the unity of the country by empowering separatist groups. For Turkey, the Cyprus problem has not been a typical foreign policy issue but rather a “national cause” which has had clear repercussions on the power struggle in Turkey.
The Cyprus issue has been used as a populist tool by hardliners in Turkey due to the issues high nationalist resonance. Ulusoy reveals that the Cyprus issue has since the early 1950s been used by political elites for the purpose of inciting nationalism, populism and hence diverting the attention of the public from domestic, social, and economic problems.
Issues with the Cyprus situations became evident in 29 July 2005 where Turkey issued a declaration stating that its signature in the EU summit in December 2004 (where the decision to extend its Customs Union with the EU to al new member states including Cyprus) did not constitute recognition of the divided island.
This declaration was met by a counter declaration by the EU which clearly asserted that recognizing all EU member states was mandatory for the accession process to proceed16. This meant that Turkey had to recognize the Republic of Cyprus as a precondition to becoming an EU member state.
In addition to this, the 2005 framework of negotiations for Turkey included clauses that required Turkey to take steps to contribute to a favorable climate for a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus issue. Even with increasing pressure from the EU to normalize her relations with Cyprus, Turkey continued to show opposition to Cyprus.
Specifically, Turkey insisted that Cyprus be excluded from EU-NATO strategic cooperation in crisis management. In the late 2005, Turkey denied all Cypriot-flagged ships access to its ports and even closed its airspace to Cypriot aircrafts.
Turkey and the Middle East
Part of the reason why Turkey is so important to Europe is because of its strategic location as a buffer state between Europe and the Middle East. Turkey’s potential influence to countries in the Middle East is also monumental. Zucconi declares that the model Turkey is increasingly offering to Middle Eastern countries can have a great impact on their evolution towards democratic politics17.
A Turkey that is visibly integrated in the EU would have an even bigger political impact on Turkey’s immediate neighbors. Turkey’s integration would create a strong pressure for introduction of democratic politics through out the Middle East
The EU also deems Turkey as a key ally in the troubled Middle East region. As far back as 1946, the US regarded Turkey as an important military factor in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East and hence US provided the Turks with military assistance to wade off the Soviets. At the present, the regions volatility is accentuated by the growing power of Iran whose pursuit of nuclear weapons is cause for concern.
Turkey’s membership in the EU would stabilize the volatile Middle East by removing the likelihood of a confrontation between Iran and Turkey18. This is because Iran would be highly unlikely to challenge a Turkey that is an EU member.
Turkey’s Human Rights Situation
One of the EU accession requirements as articulated in the Copenhagen criteria is that a country’s political system be characterized by democracy and a respect of human rights. Before its candidacy to the EU, Turkey was characterized by gross human right violations.
Cases of police torture, extrajudicial killings and lack of a free press were rampant. Following its Candidacy status with the EU, Turkey has undertaken significant steps so as to fulfill the Copenhagen criteria. These steps have involved marked changes in the human rights scenario of the country.
The Criminal Justice System of Turkey was historically marred with allegations of human right abuses. In preparation for EU membership, Turkey has made substantial improvements in this area. To begin with, reforms of the prison system and creation of the Monitoring Boards and a new system of enforcement judges has been implemented.
There has also been the reduction in the length of time between arrest and trial so as to ensure that people do not spend too much time in police custody. Turkey also included provisions for retrial of individuals whose convictions were found by the European Court of Human Rights to be in violation of the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
In addition to this, reforms were adopted in 2002 that lifted the death penalty in peace time and expanded the freedom of expression and greater freedom for non-Muslim religious minorities.
There have been marked improvements in pretrial detention and Turkey’s new Penal Code, adopted in September 2003 and due to take effect in April 2005, defines torture and ill-treatment in accordance with international conventions. Members of security forces may not be held personally liable for judgments of torture or ill-treatment by the ECHR.
Despite these drastic improvements in Turkey’s constitutional and legal system through the above named reforms, the implementation process is slow. In the areas of individual rights, there have been continued cases of torture and abuse by the police. Ulusoy reveals that there were 11 cases of extra judicial killings reported in the year 200819.
Despite the alleged freedom of expression, there is still continued prosecution of writers, journalists, and publishers who are critical of the government. As of 2007, while allegations of police torture had declined markedly, abuses were still common especially in political cases.
Discussion
Turkey’s domestic and foreign policy have been undergoing profound changes since 1999 to the present time. These changes have included Turkey’s handling of the Cyprus issue. Undoubtedly, the greatest external force influencing Turkey’s handling of the Cyprus issue is its candidacy status with the EU.
Without EU membership aspiration, it is highly unlikely that Turkey’s political system would have moved so rapidly to reform Turkey’s political system into a democracy. The Cyprus issue is linked to the relationship between Turkey and the EU. This has a significant effect on the Cyprus issue since prospects of EU membership are an important factor in the construction of Turkey’s Cyrus policies.
From this paper, it is clear that the restructuring of Turkey’s policy towards Cyprus was as a result of the establishment of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government. The AKP’s ability to shape new policies concerning Cyprus was as a result of the army’s limited area of interference. This limited interference was due to reforms made for the sake of EU membership.
Greece is historically a dominant actor in the development of relations between Turkey and the EU and a cordial relationship between Greece and Turkey is helpful for Turkeys EU membership ambitions. The relationship between greater democratization and Turkey’s EU membership is that the more democratized Turkey becomes, the more it would adopt a more compromising style and a more EU-oriented outcomes.
As such, as Turkey becomes more democratized, the participation of various societal groups in the foreign policy-making process would result in the adoption of more co-operative attitudes towards other democracies.
However, there has been inconsistency of EU member states over Turkey’s place in the Union. For all its attempts at fulfilling the conditions set in order to become a member of the EU, Turkey still faces strong opposition from some of the major EU member states.
A number of influential European leaders most notable of whom are Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy have continued to openly oppose Turkey’s EU membership. The EU leaders who are against Turkey’s membership have advocated that Turkey-EU relations should continue on a partner that would not lead to full membership, but rather a status labeled as “privileged partner”20.
This is proposed to be the major factor that is undermining the reform process in Turkey. The anti-reformist forces in Turkey point to this mixed reaction as proof that EU membership is unachievable for Turkey and as such, the democratization process should be stopped.
Conclusion
The aim of this research was to analyze the impact that Turkey’s greater democratization has on the handling of the Cyprus dispute. It has been noted that Turkey’s domestic and foreign policy have been undergoing profound changes since 1999 to the present time as a result of EU membership aspirations.
There has been a significant change in Turkey’s handling of the Cyprus issue and specifically, the past decade has witnessed a surge in attempts to resolve the issue with Turkey playing a very dominant role. Turkey’s handling of the Cyprus issue has been influenced by the reconstruction of Turkey’s image in the international arena and the need to maintain good relations with the EU even as Turkey aims for accession into the EU.
The Turkish government has actively tried to resolve the Cyprus issue albeit with little success. The paper has also reviewed Turkey’s Human Rights situation and while Turkey’s status is not yet at par with EU standards, the current situation represents a marked improvement from the human rights state from the past decades.
However, this paper has taken care to point out that there still exists opposition to the democratization efforts and political reform in Turkey by some of the by political elites. This opposition may seriously undervalue the political transformation and progress that Turkey has made up to date. Even so, there is immense societal pressure for the Turkish government to join the EU hence the anti-reform forces are most likely to fail.
While the Cyprus issue is yet unsolved, this paper has demonstrated that the democratization process in Turkey as well as the goodwill and efforts of the Turkish government have broken the stalemate that surrounded the issue since 1974. A solution to the Cyprus problem is closer to being realized now than it ever was in the past three decades.
Bibliography
Çelenk, A. A., ‘The Restructuring of Turkey’s Policy towards Cyprus: The Justice and Development Party’s Struggle for Power’. Turkish Studies, 8:3, 2007, pp. 349-363.
Cizre, U., Secular and Islamic politics in Turkey: the making of the Justice and Development Party. Routledge, 2008.
Diez, T., The European Union and the Cyprus conflict: modern conflict, postmodern union. Manchester University Press, 2002.
Kabasakal, Z., Human rights in Turkey. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007.
Ker-lindsay, J. ‘The Policies of Greece and Cyprus towards Turkey’s EU Accession’. Turkish Studies, 8: 1, 2007, pp.71-83
Killias, C, et al., Greece and Turkey in the 21st century: conflict or cooperation, a political economy perspective, Nova Publishers, 2003.
Kinacioglu, M. & Oktay, G., ‘The Domestic Dynamics of Turkey’s Cyprus Policy: Implications for Turkey’s Accession to the European Union’. Turkish Studies, Vol. 7, No. 2, 261–273, June 2006.
Oguzlu, T & Kibaroglu, M., ‘Is the Westernization Process Losing Pace in Turkey: Who’s to Blame?’. Turkish Studies, 10: 4, 577 — 593, 2009.
Onis, z. & Keyman, Fuat., ‘Helsinki, Copenhagen And Beyond: Challenges To The New Europe And The Turkish State’. International Relations, March 2003.
Sozen, A., ‘A Paradigm Shift in Turkish Foreign Policy: Transition and Challenges’. Turkish Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, March 2010, pp. 103–123.
Ulusoy, K., ‘The Europeanization of Turkey and its impact on the Cyprus problem’. Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Volume 10, Number 3, December 2008.
Yesilada, A., Some expected and some not-so-expected Benefits of Turkey’s EU Membership for both Parties. European Union Studies Conference, May, 2007.
Zucconi, M., ‘The Impact of the EU Connection on Turkey’s Domestic and Foreign Policy’. Turkish Studies, 10: 1, 2009, pp.25-36.
Footnotes
1 T Diez, The European Union and the Cyprus conflict: modern conflict, postmodern union. Manchester University Press, 2002, p.57.
2 Oğuzlu, T & Kibaroğlu, M, ‘Is the Westernization Process Losing Pace in Turkey: Who’s to Blame?’, Turkish Studies, 10: 4, 2009, p.577.
3 ibid., p. 580.
4 J Ker-lindsay, ‘The Policies of Greece and Cyprus towards Turkey’s EU Accession’, Turkish Studies, 8: 1, 2007, p. 74.
5 A Çelenk, ‘The Restructuring of Turkey’s Policy towards Cyprus: The Justice and Development Party’s Struggle for Power’, Turkish Studies, 8:3,2007, p.351.
6 ibid., p. 351.
7 Z Onis & F Keyman, ‘Helsinki, Copenhagen And Beyond: Challenges To The New Europe And The Turkish State’, International Relations, March 2003, p.34.
8 Çelenk, op. cit., p. 350.
9 K Ulusoy, The Europeanization of Turkey and its impact on the Cyprus problem. Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Volume 10, Number 3, December 2008, p.313.
10 M Kinacioglu, & G Oktay, ‘The Domestic Dynamics of Turkey’s Cyprus Policy: Implications for Turkey’s Accession to the European Union’. Turkish Studies, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2006, p.267.
11 Onis & Keyman, op.cit., p.36.
12 Çelenk, op. cit., p. 351.
13 Diez, op. cit., p. 171.
14 Çelenk, op. cit., p. 356.
15 ibid., p. 357.
16 Ulusoy, op. cit., p. 318.
17 M Zucconi, ‘The Impact of the EU Connection on Turkey’s Domestic and Foreign Policy’, Turkish Studies, 10: 1, 2009, p.34.
18 A. Yesilada, Some expected and some not-so-expected Benefits of Turkey’s EU Membership for both Parties. European Union Studies Conference, May, 2007, p.4.
19 U Cizre, Secular and Islamic politics in Turkey: the making of the Justice and Development Party. Routledge, 2008, p.188.
Democracy as a structure of administration rests on measures and rules by which the general public can employ meaningful influence on the form of public policy. At one fell swoop, democracy is a policy selection and depends very much on the use of public authority. Various scholars have had diverse outlooks on the subject of democracy. This paper shall discuss the views of Rohr and Rosenbloom on democracy.
Function in Public Administration
Rohr (1982) justifies an activist public government. He offers a more multifaceted vision for the function of the proprietor. He grounds his ideas on the discussions of the past generations and considers both the Anti-Federalist and the Federalist points of view in depth. In his outlook, public administration would act to link what the division of powers values keep at a distance.
Rohr (1982) moves to correct the trouble of governmental authority According to Rohr (1982), the civil service must accomplish the tasks the Founders intended initially for the Senate. His prescription is for public administration to uphold principled autonomy as of the three distinct branches of government. He also argues that public administration must be the tool of the Constitution.
Rather than responding to democratically chosen officials he prefers specialized, statesman like administrators who reflect on delivering their actions to the master of their individual selection. Their selection would rely on which branch required the strength to uphold the correct Constitutional stability and attain the tops of the Constitution’s preamble.
Rohr (1982) accepts that public administration must stay subsidiary to all three branches. Nevertheless, in a specified instance and for specified matters, a Constitutional master would be selected by the senior civil servants.
He recommends public administrators to believe in Constitutional stipulations and not to pursue the stumpy art of directorial survival. According to Rohr (1982), the constitution is the steward of the citizens but not the president or his officials.
Responsibilities to Societal Ethics
The might administrative state is supposed to be accountable for societal ethics (Rohr, 2007; Rosenbloom et al., 2009).Civic virtue, as experienced by public workforce in the efficient execution of public law, would arbitrate the determination of a sole, prevailing executive (Rosenbloom et al., 2009).
The outcome, according to Rosenbloom et al (2009) would be regime workers, governed by a constitution, educating people on the right conduct of citizenship.
Tools of Collective Action
Rohr (1982) argues that the presence of a legislative body in public administration must be encouraged and impartial ability be rejected. He also stresses the significance of a constitutional guard of entity rights. Rohr (1982) disapproves the New Deal’s increase of presidential authority. At the same time, he believes that legal decisions during that period additionally malformed the founding fathers’ intent.
Rohr (1982) argues that the team, which incorporated public administration professionals, Merriam, Brownlow and Gulick, tried to exert the equivalent of a fresh Constitutional Convention.
The dominance of the executive branch made it possible for the presidents to increase the authority of their office to consolidate planning, human resources and financial administration, using the financial plan to manage general policy. This has resulted to a marring of the founders’ objective.
Rohr (1982) holds the view that the Framers essentially planned for the president to act as the head of Congress. Their trepidation of a legislative eddy absorbing the additional two branches directed them to create the two houses.
He also argues that the extension of the administrative control of the regime by the Executive Branch and the Brownlow Committee are in conflict with Constitutional blueprint. This explicates the transformation in American political outlooks between 1787 and 1937 which have destabilized governmental authority (Rohr, 1982).
Societal Learning as a Way to the Prospect
According to Rohr (2007) public administrators would be in a high position for guiding humanity in determining how to resolve conflicts over ethics, if not to make those choices based on a cautious understanding of the Constitution. According to Rohr (2007), humanity would rely on the professionalism, sovereign judgment, self-discipline and ethical character of the civil service.
He visualizes the constitution as making a society of political order. Through regimented communication, humanity can realize, refurbish, become accustomed to, and apply the basic principles beneath public order.
In conclusion, this paper provides plentiful insights regarding public administration in a democracy, which can be useful in studying prospect public administration. Rohr (2007) offers a formula for examining prospect public administration matters. Public administrators who have specialized capability and can build up a sense of what is constitutionally right, must learn policy issues.
He suggests that public administrators ought to be constitutionalists who scrutinize argument over law, history over the current and insight over advocacy. By use of this examination public officials will build up logic of decorum, function on a principled basis, and recognize when to curve and when to grasp.
Whether civic officials can center on didactic civic function instead of the necessities and errands to their specific agencies continues to be seen. Furthermore, to pursue Rohr’s lead and extend a public debate on Constitutional matters concerning popular sovereignty and personal rights will need major educational plans (Rohr, 2007).
References
Rohr, J. A. (1982). The Constitution in public administration: a report on education. The American Review of Public Administration, 16(4), 429–431.
Rohr, J. A. (2007). Ethics and comparative administration. Public Integrity, 10 (1), 65–74.
Rosenbloom, D. H., Kravchuk, R. S., & Clerkin, R. M. (2009). Accountability and ethics. in public administration: understanding management, politics, and law in the public sector. 7th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.