The Role of External Actors

“The Role of external actors”
 
The world has witnessed various phases during which democratic values and freedoms have gained momentum and broadened their reach. The latest of these progressive periods started in the early 1970s and covers a period of exponential increase in the number of democracies worldwide. In order to summarise this trend, Freedom House’s classifications provide a useful tool: in 1972 there were 43 countries in the world classified as free, 38 as partly free, and 69 as not free. Thirty years later, more than twice as many – 89 – were classified as free, 56 as partly free, and 47 as not free.
 
Nowadays, democracy as an international norm is stronger than ever, and democracy itself is widely regarded as the system of government that has the most potential to promote participation and protect human rights. Democracy has near-universal appeal among people of every ethnic group, every religion, and every region of the world. It has become a widely-discussed topic, no longer confined to small groups of philosophers and dreamers, but considered both in the everyday relations between governments at the bilateral, multilateral and international level as well as in discussions among civil society representatives, grassroots movements and ordinary citizens.
 
The current wave of democratisation has been characterised by two fundamental elements which distinguish it from previous phases:
1)      the presence and diffusion of grassroots democratic movements composed of ordinary people in every culture and region of the globe, and
2)      the increasing acceptance of democracy promotion as a foreign policy goal throughout most of the international community.
 
The synergies between these two elements are evident. International treaties and laws crafted to protect human rights have expanded dramatically in reach and scope, providing a tool for democratic activists to lobby for respect of human rights and democratic mechanisms. Domestic democratic groups have invoked international treaties and norms to pressure their own governments to change, and external actors - be they states, NGOs, or international institutions - have intervened more often to enforce these universal values. Moreover, external actors have at their disposal a wide variety of instruments and mechanisms aimed at strengthening local actors who support the values of human rights, rule of law and democracy.
 
There are thus two levels at which democratization progresses: on one side the growth and evolution of home-grown democracy activists who are struggling to build societies that respect democratic values, and on the other hand the role of a vast number of mechanisms and institutions that act externally and work toward the establishment of liberal and democratic political institutions.
 
However, several problems and risks need to be addressed in order for these two elements to work together harmoniously. One of the major risks to be avoided is that democracy be considered a foreign value and democracy promotion as a foreign-driven priority. Moreover, it is also important to avoid that in relations with governments the external actors eclipse the local non-state actors, leaving them sidelined, ignored or even discredited. If this take place, effective interaction at the local level it is inhibited, depriving society of the potential for genuine democratic reform.
 
If local democracy advocates and reformers have a fundamental role to play, and if all actors involved should recognise them as a legitimate and necessary counterpart for dialogue on issues of democratic reform, then it is time to change some unproductive systems: the model of “parallel” sessions of governments on the one hand and civil society organizations on the other. This often leads to confrontation rather than interaction, with civil society producing lists of “demands” or “petitions” that have no real impact on government deliberations.
 
We must propose new models that strengthen the contribution of non-state actors and form more effective alliances of local and external democracy advocates.
 
The Arab intellectuals who contributed to the UNDP Arab Human Development Report challenged Arab societies to overcome three cardinal obstacles to human development and democratisation posed by widening gaps in freedom, women’s empowerment and knowledge across the region. The Sana’a Inter-Governmental Conference on Democracy, Human Rights and the Role of the International Criminal Court in January 2004 - having gathered more than 40 Ministers from countries of the Middle East and North Africa on one hand, and civil society (parliamentarians, NGOs, journalists, human rights activists) on the other, together for the first time, to discuss democratisation of the region - recognised that “proper democratic governance and respect for human rights require a freely functioning, well organised, vibrant and responsible civil society”. Since then, Arab civil society leaders, intellectuals and governments have gathered together in numerous regional and international meetings, conferences and fora to discuss and promote democracy’s development.
 
In recent years, foreign states, foundations, NGOs and international institutions have focused their interest on the Middle East and North Africa with the aim of reinforcing the role and stature of democracy advocates in the Region, facilitating the establishment of a lasting practice or habit of consultation between state structures and non-state actors and enlarging the space of freedoms and rights for Arab citizens. Some of these efforts have been perceived as inconsistent and selectively applied. Violent and non-violent methods have created controversy. We can agree to the negative secondary consequences of using violent methods and therefore limit our discussion to the various methods and procedures of a non-violent nature (political, economical, social, cultural, etc).
 
It is now important to make an assessment of these efforts carried out by various actors with different methods and procedures to identify what has worked and what has not worked, with a view to elaborate some basic principles that could guide efforts in the coming months and years. To this end, three basic questions can be answered by actors with extended and on the ground experiences in these issues:
 

1. What is the current situation in each country and generally in the region;
2. What should the situation in the country and the region be in the next 3-5 years;
3. What steps need to undertaken to get from point (A) to point (B).

 
In order to facilitate the discussions and the elaboration of proposals aimed at answering these questions, a series of issues need to be addressed in a comprehensive way:
 
-          what are the methods and procedures adopted by external actors to sustain the processes of democracy promotion;
-          which mechanisms guide the activities of non-state actors both at the national and international level;
-          what is needed to strengthen a method and practice of mutual recognition between non-state actors and public institutions and what role can external actors play to reinforce these mechanisms;
-          How to strengthen the role of local non-state actors vis-à-vis their own government;
-          What policies and activities need to be undertaken to avoid the risk of having democracy perceived as a foreign value, leaving the local non-state actors sidelined and ignored by their own governments, in other words, depriving societies of genuine democratic reform;
-          What kind of resources can be mobilised at the national and international level.
 
A comparative analysis of these issues, particularly when undertaken on a global level, will allow the identification of how the various ingredients and components of democracy promotion mechanisms need to be mixed in order to achieve their goals as well as how best practices and models can provide useful examples.
 
Active participation of non-state actors in the political process and their contribution to the identification of political priorities by state structures are among the essential requirements for liberal institutions and democracy to thrive. The recognition of civil society as a legitimate and necessary counterpart to public institutions for dialogue on issues of democratic reform is one of the key elements that need to be addressed and reinforced when processes of democratisation are at stake.