Reconciling morals with how a society is organized -- in other words, reconciling ethics with politics -- is one of humanity's oldest ambitions. Hammurabi, Ramses II, Solon, Confucius and Pericles were among the first great figures to embark on this effort. The emergence of the nation-state in the 18th century, and the extreme level of barbarism reached in the 20th century, may have created the impression that an ethical politics was an unrealizable dream, or that it was a dream growing ever more distant as it receded into the future.
Yet, despite the rivalry of nations and the bloodiness of modern warfare, democracy is spreading. Indeed, in but half a century, Latin Americans rid themselves of all of that continent's military and civilian dictatorships, and Africa has eliminated more than half of the despots that have blighted its era of independence.
Compared with all the other political regimes known to mankind, democracy represents ethical progress twice over: first, because it is based on respect for human rights; and secondly, because the universal suffrage that modern democracy embraces prohibits neglecting or oppressing minorities.
Of course, progress toward more democracy and morality in international public affairs remains extremely slow. Yet the year 2004 may leave to history some of the greatest progress in this area that humanity has seen.
Signs of hope and progress abound. A Spanish government was overthrown because it lied to its public about the origin of the terrorist bombs that ripped apart Madrid's train station last spring. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George W. Bush are having huge problems with their electorates, also because they lied about the reasons they gave to justify their war in Iraq.
Democracy is alive and well in the developing world, too. The electoral process in Indonesia is reaching a level of equity and accountability hitherto unknown in that country. Morocco and Algeria are working to strengthen women's rights. Turkey has committed itself to a vast legislative effort to improve human rights, freedom of thought, treatment of prisoners, and civilian control over the military.
Even China, though highly insensitive to democratic principles, is discovering, with the dangerous spread of AIDS, an obligation to listen to popular clamor, and the need for public support to justify government actions. The US, owing to its horrific treatment and torture of prisoners in Baghdad, has had no option but to search for international legitimacy after denying and defying it for so long, in order to extricate itself from the chaos and drama of what is now Iraq.
Israel has seen both the legitimacy of its "security wall," as well as the wall's proposed path through Palestinian territory, called into question -- differently, but in a parallel manner -- by both its own Supreme Court and by the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Israel will not be able to ignore completely the rulings of either court.
In replacing the Organization of African Unity with the African Union, Africa, for its part, is making a huge effort to control conflict on the continent, as well as to spread observance of human rights and pursue the struggle against poverty.
Moreover, capitalism itself is feeling pressure in every direction. It sees ever increasing anger against bloated payments to bosses, risky speculation, and outright fraud.
The creation of the International Criminal Court strengthens all of these efforts to bring abuses of power by the powerful to book.
So, despite the Iraq war and the seeming impotence of world institutions, the beginning of the 21st century could well bring faster global improvement in political ethics than at any time in the past. But for this trend to truly take hold, good politics needs something more than morals alone. States must begin to explain their toughest actions, those deeds that the search for security and the inevitable mistrust among states make necessary.
"Reasons of State" will not disappear entirely. But for democracy to continue its march of ethical progress, reasons of state must be submitted to greater public accountability and justification.
Michel Rocard, a former prime minister of France and leader of the Socialist Party, is a member of the European Parliament.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS