As Western aid agencies increasingly promote democracy in other countries it is important to ask what strategy informs this process, what approach is adopted and on what models or theories of democracy and democratisation are these based? This article, in Democratization, is based primarily on US experience, but has relevance to other Western countries. It finds that democratisation rests on a conventional model of Western liberal democracy and is generally devoted to technical institution building. Both positive and negative consequences of this strategy are identified, though it is noted that efforts are underway to address the faults.
Western democracy promotion is based upon a duality of purpose: Democracy is promoted as an objective in its own right, and also as a tool through which economic and social development will be advanced. However, the vision that informs these efforts is of ‘democracy’ as a condition defined by a set of institutions, and ‘democratisation’ as the creating and improving of these institutions.
- US assistance is based on three categories: The electoral arena, aiming at free and fair elections; the governing arena, helping to fashion constitutions and promote a stronger legislature and judiciary; and civil society
- US assistance rarely strengthens the executive, as it is seen as beneficial to decentralise or deconcentrate power
- Those engaged in democracy assistance generally aim for a political model similar to that of their home country
- The process is entirely institutional – it is assumed that as long as the institutions of democracy (legislature, free press, plurality of parties, free elections etc.) are created, democracy will follow
- Very little thought is given to how democracy occurred in Western countries – through armed struggles, ideology, economic conflicts and class wars. These are far removed from the peaceful, planned transitions envisaged in aid programmes.
The above strategy does have some positive aspects. Notably, it has a common sense appeal within the home nation which helps generate support for the programme; it is broad-based and inclusive; and it is a blue-print that can be applied in a variety of contexts. However, there are also some significant problems with this approach:
- This institutional methodology overlooks underlying power relations and so treats symptoms rather than causes. Politics involves competing interests and ideologies, power struggles, conflict and competition. If the model ignores this it will never bring about systemic change
- An assistance strategy rooted in the idea of helping propel gradual, progressive change through technical assistance will fail if the transition to democracy begins to falter or back-slide
- Whilst it is a maxim among assistance officials that political and economic development are interdependent, US democracy assistance is generally disconnected from economic concerns, especially economic assistance
- There is growing recognition within the US aid community that their approach to democracy assistance was put together rapidly and with little reflection, and that there is considerable room for improvement.
