Despite encouraging signs, it is impossible to ignore a "democracy deficit" in the Muslim world, especially the Arab part of it. Only one of every four countries with Muslim majorities has a democratically elected government. Worse yet, the gap between Muslim countries and the rest of the world is widening. \nDemocracy and freedom expanded over recent decades into Latin America, Africa, Europe and Asia, but the Muslim world continues to struggle. By the reckoning of Freedom House, a think tank devoted to monitoring democracy worldwide, the number of "free" countries around the world increased by nearly three dozen over the past 20 years. Not one has a Muslim majority. \nThis phenomenon has been noted within the Muslim world. In the summer of 2002, a team of Arab sacademics produced the Arab Human Development Report, written on behalf of the UN Development Program and the Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development. It portrays an Arab world lagging behind other regions in key measures, including individual freedom and women's empowerment, as well as economic and social development. \nDisturbing trends, such as a demographic youth "bulge" combined with high youth unemployment rates -- reaching almost 40 percent in some places -- highlight potentially explosive social conditions. The Arab world faces serious problems that can only be met by more flexible, democratic political systems. \nThe second Arab Human Development Report, issued last year, underscores the close relationship between the Arab world's educational shortcomings and its lack of democracy. \nDemocracy requires a citizenry informed enough to question its government. A well-educated citizenry is also essential if young men and women are to acquire the skills needed to perform the sort of jobs today's global and competitive world demands. \nAlas, instead of progress, what we see is a cycle of inadequate educational opportunity leading to a lack of economic opportunity. Neither freedom nor prosperity can develop in such conditions. \nMuslims cannot blame the US for their lack of democracy. Still, the US does play a large role on the world stage; and in many parts of the Muslim world, particularly in the Arab world, successive US administrations -- Republican and Democratic alike -- have not made democratization a priority. \nAt various times, the US avoided scrutinizing the internal workings of friendly countries in the interest of ensuring a steady flow of oil; containing Soviet, Iraqi and Iranian expansionism; addressing issues related to the Arab-Israeli conflict; resisting communism in East Asia or securing military bases. \nBy failing to foster gradual democratization -- and yielding to a "democratic exception" in parts of the Muslim world -- the US missed an opportunity to help these countries adapt to the stresses of a globalizing world. \nContinuing this policy is not in the US' interest. According to the Bush administration's 2002 National Security Strategy, US policy will be more actively engaged in supporting democratic trends globally, with no exception for the Muslim world. \nThis commitment was made with the full knowledge that democracies are imperfect and terribly complicated. Leaders in some Muslim states contrast democratic systems with their more orderly arrangements and point with satisfaction to the seeming stability that alternatives to democracy provide. But stability based on authority alone is illusory and ultimately impossible to sustain. Iran, Romania and Liberia illustrate that rigid authoritarian systems cannot withstand the shocks of social, political or economic change, especially at the pace that characterizes today's world. \nAny doubt that promoting democracy now receives greater emphasis in US foreign policy was removed by Bush's speech of last November, in which he made clear that the Muslim world's democratic deficit is not tied to religion, but to "failures of political and economic doctrines." \nBush also made clear that Americans had learned from the past: "Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe -- because, in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty. As long as the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation, resentment and violence ready for export." \nSo the US now actively supports the extension of democracy throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds, not simply for humanitarian reasons, or for theoretical reasons, but from self-interest. History shows that societies where opportunity is safeguarded tend to be societies that are good international citizens. \nBut, like medical doctors' Hippocratic oath, the US and others must pledge to do no harm in promoting democracy. Unrestrained zeal to make the world better could make it worse. Promoting democracy must be undertaken with humility, care, and wisdom. \nMany models of democracy exist; and some models cannot be exported. \nMoreover, mere elections should never be confused with democracy. Rather, what distinguishes democracy from other systems is a distribution of power both within government and within society. Until such a balance exists, elections can threaten freedom by concentrating too much authority in one person or body without providing adequate checks and balances, including independent media. Not surprisingly, this takes time, resources, and effort. \nFinally, political reform must go hand in hand with economic and educational reform for all the citizens in a society, including the 50 percent who happen to be women. No country can succeed if it denies itself the talents of half of its people. \nTrue, democracy can only be built and maintained from within, by a country's people and leaders. Outsiders, though, can and should help. \nThere is a role for governments, international organizations, corporations, universities, and journalists -- from the US, but also from Europe and countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa where democracy has taken root. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine a more important task for established democracies than helping other countries join their ranks. \nRichard Haass, formerly the director of policy planning in the US State Department, is president of The Council on Foreign Relations. \nCopyright: Project Syndicate/The Council on Foreign Relations
Criticisms of corruption, a poorly managed bureaucracy and uninformed, unprincipled or unaccomplished policy in China are often met with harsh punishments. Many protesters in the “blank paper movement,” for example, have been disappeared by the authorities. Meanwhile, the WHO has asked China to provide data on its COVID-19 situation, with the Chinese government choosing to disseminate propaganda instead. The first amendment of the US Constitution, written in 1791, prohibits the US government from abridging the freedom of speech, press, assembly, petition, or religion. More than 200 years later, China, the world’s second-largest economy, still lacks the freedoms of speech and the press,
As the People’s Republic of China (PRC) constantly strives to rewrite the Taiwan narrative, it is important to regularly update and correct the stereotypes that the PRC tries to foist on Taiwan and the world. A primary stereotype is that Taiwan has always been a part of China and its corollary that Taiwan has been a part of China since time immemorial. Both are false. Taiwan has always been a part of the vast Austronesian empire, which stretched from Madagascar in the west to Easter Island in the east and from Taiwan in the north to New Zealand in the south. That
A memorandum from US Air Mobility Command Commander General Mike Minihan, leaked on social media on Friday, warns of a US military conflict with China over Taiwan as soon as 2025. His is not the first such warning. Minister of National Defense Chiu Kuo-cheng (邱國正) told lawmakers in June 2021 that China might attempt an invasion in 2025, and US Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Mike Gilday in October last year said that an invasion might occur as early as next year. Minihan’s comments, which Agence France-Presse said were confirmed by the Pentagon, present an opening for Taipei to press Washington
The Chinese government seems to have fallen back in love with economic growth. As the chaotic exit from its “zero COVID” policy has unfolded — leading to tens of thousands of deaths (at least) — the nation’s leaders have been eager to profess their undying devotion to robust economic recovery. However, lip service alone can get China nowhere. Last month’s Central Economic Work Conference — the annual meeting where the top leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sets the economic policy agenda for the next year — established growth as the government’s top economic priority for this year. In the weeks
RSS