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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS