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
Beijing’s imposition of the Hong Kong National Security Law and a number of other democratic and human rights issues continue to strain relations between the UK and China. The tense situation has significantly decreased the likelihood of British Royal Navy ships being able to continue their practice of docking in Hong Kong’s harbor for resupply — a not altogether unpredictable development. In a Nov. 19 online speech to parliament, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced that the HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier would next year lead a British and allied task group to the Mediterranean, Indian Ocean and East Asia. Johnson
President-elect Biden and his team soon will confront a raging pandemic, a severe economic crisis, demands for progress in addressing racial injustices, intensifying climate-induced crises, and strained relations with allies and partners in many parts of the world. They will be oriented to view China as America’s greatest geostrategic challenge, but not the most immediate threat to the health and prosperity of the American people. Amidst this daunting inheritance, US-Taiwan relations will stand out as a bright spot, an example of progress that should be sustained. There are strong reasons for optimism about the continued development of US-Taiwan relations in the
Universities and colleges are bearing the brunt of Taiwan’s falling birthrate. Many schools have already closed down, while lower-ranking institutions find themselves in a precarious position. The Ministry of Education has said that more than 40 private senior-high schools, universities and colleges are already in a critical situation. When schools are forced to close, the impact is felt not just by students, who can easily transfer to other schools, but even more so by teachers and other staff, for whom it is hard to change track in the middle of their careers. A Cabinet meeting on Nov. 19 approved a draft
I was probably the first professor in Taiwan to teach a university-level food safety class and a postgraduate food toxicology course. During the administration of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), I participated in discussions to allow imports of US beef containing traces of ractopamine, and was part of the decision to permit imports of US pork containing the leanness-enhancing additive. I am not an expert on ractopamine, as I have never done any research on the drug, but I have taught classes about the health dangers of foods containing traces of harmful substances. When US beef imports were about to be allowed,
RSS