Democracy promotion
-

About the Speaker:

Sheri Berman is Associate Professor of Political Science at Barnard College, Columbia University. Her research interests focus on issues of comparative political development, European politics and history, globalization, social theory, and history of the Left. Some of her recent publications include: "The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Ideological Dynamics of the Twentieth Century" (2006, Cambridge University Press); "Violence, Conflict, and Civil Society," Mittelweg, Spring 2006 (academic paper); "Islamism, Revolution, and Civil Society," Perspectives on Politics, 1, 2, June 2003 (academic paper). Berman received her B.A. (1987) from Yale, and M.A. (1990) and PhD. (1994) from Harvard.

About the Event:

The best way to understand how stable, well-functioning democracies develop is to analyze the political trajectories such countries have actually taken. For the most part, this means looking at Western Europe and North America. When we look carefully at these cases we see that the political backstory of most democracies is one of struggle, conflict and even violence. Problems and even failures did not mean that democracy would be impossible to achieve some day; in fact, they can in retrospect often be seen to be integral parts of the long-term processes through which non-democratic institutions, elites, and cultures were delegitimized and eventually eliminated, and their democratic successors forged. An important reason many do not seem to realize this is because of a lack of historical perspective: contemporary analysts often ignore or misread the often messy and unattractive manner in which the current crop of stable democracies actually developed. Understanding past cases better is thus a crucial step toward putting today's democratization and democracy promotion discussions into proper intellectual and historical context.

CISAC Conference Room

Sheri Berman Associate Professor of Political Science Speaker Barnard College, Columbia University
Seminars
Paragraphs

The European Union (EU) may be presiding over the most successful democracy promotion program ever implemented by an international actor. Among postcommunist states with a credible EU membership perspective, we can see a significant - though far from complete - convergence toward liberal democracy. This is all the more interesting since ten years ago many of these states had illiberal or authoritarian regimes. I focus in this article on the sources of political change in previously illiberal regimes before and after 'watershed elections,' especially in the Western Balkans. I argue that over time the EU's leverage strengthened the hand of liberal forces against illiberal ones by way of four mechanisms: creating a focal point for cooperation, providing incentives for adapting, using conditionality, and serving as a credible commitment for reform. Consequently, most political parties have eventually changed their agenda to make it compatible with the state's bid for EU membership. I investigate the domestic conditions that have caused these mechanisms to function only weakly in Serbia and Bosnia.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
CDDRL Working Papers
Authors
-

An invigorating day of addresses, debate, and discussion of major sources of systemic and human risk facing the global community.

7:30 AMREGISTRATION
8:00 - 9:00 AMBREAKFAST AND WELCOME
John W. Etchemendy, Provost, Stanford University
Coit D. Blacker, Director, Freeman Spogli Institute

OPENING REMARKS
Warren Christopher, 63rd Secretary of State
William J. Perry, 19th Secretary of Defense
George P. Shultz, 60th Secretary of State
9:15 AM - 12:00 PMMORNING SESSION
PLENARY I
Understanding, Measuring, and Coping with Risk: What We Know Coit D. Blacker, Director, Freeman Spogli Institute, Chair
Understanding and Measuring Risk Elisabeth Paté-Cornell
The Collapse of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime? Scott D. Sagan
Keeping Fissile Materials Out of Terrorist Hands Siegfried S. Hecker

CONCURRENT BREAKOUT SESSIONS
Food Security and the Environment Rosamond L. Naylor, Chair
Pandemics, Infectious Diseases, and Bioterrorism Alan M. Garber, Chair
Insurgencies, Failed States, and the Challenge of Governance Jeremy M. Weinstein, Chair
12:30 - 2:00 PMLUNCHEON
Infectious Diseases, Avian Influenza, and Bioterrorism: Risks to the Global Community
Michael T. Osterholm, Director, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, University of Minnesota
2:30 - 5:30 PMAFTERNOON SESSION
PLENARY II
Natural, National, and International Disasters Michael A. McFaul, Deputy Director, FSI and Director, Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law, Chair
Terror, U.S. Ports, and Neglect of Critical Infrastructure Stephen E. Flynn
Energy Shocks to the Global System David G. Victor

CONCURRENT BREAKOUT SESSIONS
Responding to a World at Risk: U.S. Efforts at Democracy Promotion in Russia, Iraq, and Iran Michael A. McFaul, Chair
The European Union: Politics, Economics, Terrorism Amir Eshel, Chair
China's Rise: Implications for the World Economy and Energy Markets Thomas C. Heller, Chair
Cross Currents: Nationalism and Regionalism in Northeast Asia Daniel C. Sneider, Chair
6:00 - 8:00 PMCOCKTAIL RECEPTION AND DINNER
Cocktail Reception 6:00 - 7:00 PM
Dinner 7:00 - 8:00 PM
8:00 - 9:00 PMA WORLD AT RISK
Peter Bergen, CNN Terrorism Analyst
Author of Holy War, Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Bin Laden
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University

Frances C. Arrillaga Alumni Center

Conferences
-

Trygve Olson is a political and public affairs professional who brings nearly twenty years of experience, working on five continents, to his profession. He has served in his present capacity since January 2001, and also served as IRI's Resident Program Officer in Lithuania in 1997.

Prior to rejoining IRI in 2001, Mr. Olson was a founding partner in the grassroots lobbying, political consulting and public affairs firm Public Issue Management, LLP. While a partner at Public Issue Management, Trygve managed a number of high profile grassroots lobbying campaigns for clients in the aviation, technology, and healthcare sectors. For two years he co-managed the grassroots side of a national campaign on behalf of several of America's largest technology companies and the Computer and Communications Industry Association. Also during this prior Mr. Olson served as the primary campaign consultant to a coalition that was victorious in the 2000 Lithuanian Parliamentary elections.

A native of Wisconsin, Trygve worked in the Administration of then-Governor Tommy Thompson and also ran a number of Congressional, State Senatorial and State Legislative campaigns during the early and mid 1990's. Over the course of his career in politics, Mr. Olson has worked on in excess of 100 campaigns for all levels of public office from the local to national level. Since first volunteering for IRI in 1995 -- when he went to Poland to run a get out the vote campaign for young people -- Mr. Olson has helped advise political parties and candidates in numerous countries throughout the world including nearly all of Central and Eastern Europe, Indonesia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria, Venezuela, and Serbia.

Trygve is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin. He currently makes his home in Vilnius, Lithuania with his wife, Erika Veberyte, who serves as the Chief Foreign Policy Advisor to the Speaker of the Lithuanian Parliament.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Trygve Olson Belarusian Country Director Speaker International Republican Institute
Seminars
Paragraphs

The democracy-promotion toolbox has been filled for more than two decades with various standard assistance programs, including technical support for reforming government agencies; training for lawyers, journalists, political party leaders, and trade unionists; direct financial aid for civil society organizations; and exchanges and scholarships for students. Today, the U.S. government, particularly the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and an army of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) often funded by USAID, the National Endowment of Democracy, or the Asia and Eurasia Foundations, continue to use such nonmilitary methods to promote democracy in dozens of countries around the world.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
The Washington Quarterly
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
-

Gideon Rose has been Managing Editor of Foreign Affairs since December 2000. From 1995 to December 2000 he was Olin Senior Fellow and Deputy Director of National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, during which time he served as Chairman of the Council's Roundtable on Terrorism. He has taught American foreign policy at Columbia and Princeton. In 1994-95 Rose served as Associate Director for Near East and South Asian Affairs on the staff of the National Security Council. He has written extensively on US foreign policy as well as co-editing with James Hoge, "How Did This Happen? Terrorism and the New War" (Random House, 2001). Rose received a Ph.D. from the Department of Government at Harvard University and a B.A. in Classics from Yale University.

CISAC Conference Room

Gideon Rose Managing Editor Speaker Foreign Affairs Magazine, Council on Foreign Relations, New York
Seminars
-

Thomas Carothers is a leading authority on democracy promotion and democratization worldwide as well as an expert on U.S. foreign policy generally. He is the founder and director of the Democracy and Rule of Law Project which analyzes the state of democracy in the world and the efforts by the United States and other countries to promote democracy. In addition, he has broad experience in matters dealing with human rights, international law, foreign aid, rule of law, and civil society development. He is the author or editor of six critically acclaimed books on democracy promotion as well as many articles in prominent journals and newspapers. He is adjunct professor at the Central European University in Budapest and serves on the board of various organizations devoted to democracy promotion.Prior to joining the Endowment, Carothers practiced international and financial law at Arnold & Porter and served as an attorney-adviser in the Office of the Legal Adviser of the U.S. Department of State.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Thomas Carothers Director, Democracy and Rule of Law Project Speaker Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC
Seminars
Paragraphs

This paper argues that it is difficult to understand the effects of American democracy promotion abroad without examining the bureaucratic context from which the policy emerges at home. Which actors within the U.S. government are involved in promoting political and economic change abroad? What strategies and conceptual models guide them? What tools and resources do they bring to bear? How does the interaction of American bureaucratic politics affect the impact of American democracy promotion? Articulating this mix of goals, strategies, and resources helps explain incoherent patterns of outcomes on the ground.

This paper explore these questions by reference to the U.S. government's most ambitious democracy promotion efforts of the past decade: the effort to rebuild its former Soviet enemies into a democratic allies in the 1990s. Yet the patterns of American bureaucratic politics are not unique to this democracy promotion effort. While American democracy promotion has changed in tone and substance under the watch of George W. Bush, American domestic politics has powerfully shaped American democracy promotion in similar ways in Iraq, Afghanistan, and beyond.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
CDDRL Working Papers
Authors
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
In a recent op ed, CDDRL's J. Alexander Thier discusses Afghanistan's landmark September 2005 elections. He notes, however, that while this is an encouraging sign, Afghanistan is far from out of the woods in terms of establishing itself as a stable state.

Afghanistan held its landmark legislative elections this Sunday. Almost exactly four years after 9/11, and the invasion that followed, Afghanistan will have, for the first time in its history, a democratically elected constitutional government. That is something remarkable, and cause to celebrate - but only in the way that one cheers hopefully during a tough game at halftime.

Everything we know about democracy promotion and post-conflict reconstruction tells us that Afghanistan is far from out of the woods. Even after significant international intervention, many failed states remain unstable, or relapse into conflict and chaos. Remember Haiti? The United States invaded in 1994 and oversaw reconstruction and elections in 1995 and 2000, as international forces slowly withdrew. By 2004, U.S. and United Nations Forces were dispatched to the troubled island again. Haiti is not an outlier. World Bank studies show that countries coming out of civil war are forty percent likely to return to war within five years. It took one horrific hurricane to turn New Orleans to chaos. Imagine the effects of 25 years of war.

One of the main reasons failing countries continue to fail is economic. Economic recovery after war provides one of the best measures of the likelihood of long-term stability. International assistance can play a key role in jump-starting the economy and paying for basic government services, but it can take a generation to return to pre-war standards of living. The problem is that donor countries tend to be most generous in the first few years of the crisis - when local capacity to do something with those funds is limited. And just when the government starts to get on its feet - usually around the four-year mark - the assistance dries up.

The Afghan economy has seen remarkable growth rates over the last four years, but that is only half good. There is a truly free market now in Afghanistan - free from the rule of law. Much of the growth has come from the booming opium trade and other smuggling operations. While a strong economy is necessary to rebuild state and society, a criminal economy will necessarily destroy them both.

Politically, Afghanistan is getting its first taste of real elections - but it is far from being a stable democracy. There were more than 5,000 candidates in the legislative elections this Sunday, violence was relatively low, and turnout decent - all signs that political participation is blossoming. But nobody knows who will run the new parliament, or how it will function. It has no building and no staff. The only other parliament in Afghanistan's history, from 1965 to 1973, is widely blamed for increasing the polarization that led to civil war there. Since armed warlords still dominate many parts of the country, they will undoubtedly be strongly represented in the new legislature. As we have seen in places like Liberia and Serbia, post-conflict elections can produce quite undemocratic leaders.

What does this mean for Afghanistan? First, it means that the next four years will be as important there as the last four. Afghanistan's leaders, elected and otherwise, must put the cause of their nation before their factional, ethnic and venal interests. For our part, the United States and its allies must continue to support Afghanistan, financially and militarily, until it gets out of the danger zone. That means the same level of support for at least another four years.

Second, it means we have to shift our mentality there from short term to long term. If the United States has one overarching goal, it must be to build a legitimate Afghan state that is strong enough to survive and competent enough to deliver results. The Afghan police and legal system remain in shambles. Afghanistan's school system was rated the worst in the world last year by the United Nations Development Program. More international support needs to go to education, training a capable Afghan government, and supporting the rule of law.

Finally, it means something a little more intangible: continued political attention. If Afghanistan falls off the policy agenda in Washington, London and Berlin, the dangers that lurk there will prosper. Lagging reconstruction is already creating support for the ongoing Taliban insurgency. An unchecked opium trade keeps warlord armies well fed.

On this anniversary, we must remember the true cause of those grim attacks four years ago: Bin Laden and Al Qaeda had free reign of a failed state in chaos. We may not be able to find bin Laden, but we know where Afghanistan is located.

All News button
1
Subscribe to Democracy promotion