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
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS