Freedom in the World 1980 Complete Book
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Freedom in the World Political Rights and Civil Liberties 1980 RAYMOND D. GASTIL With a Study of World News Flow by Leonard R. Sussman FREEDOM HOUSE NEW YORK Copyright © 1980 by Freedom House, Inc. All rights reserved. Freedom House, 20 West 40th Street, New York, N.Y. 10018 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Gastil, Raymond D. Freedom in the world. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Civil rights. I. Sussman, Leonard R., joint author. II. Title. JC571.G338 323.4 80-66430 ISBN 0-932088-02-3 Printed in the United States of America Contents PREFACE ix PART I. THE SURVEY IN 1979 The Comparative Survey of Freedom: Nature and Purposes 3 Survey Ratings and Tables for 1979 15 PART II. SPECIAL CONCERNS IN CIVIL LIBERTIES: INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION AND UNION ORGANIZATION Freedom of the Press: Problems in Restructuring the Flow of International News, Leonard R. Sussman 53 An Index for Trade Union Freedom 99 PART III. COUNTRY STUDIES: IRAN AND ZIMBABWE RHODESIA The Struggle for Democracy in Iran 127 Elections in Zimbabwe Rhodesia 157 PART IV. HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY AND MORAL VALUES The Need for a New International Basis for Human Rights Actions 193 Moral Value and Freedom 200 V VI CONTENTS PART V. COUNTRY SUMMARIES Introduction 209 Summaries 213 INDEX 321 Maps and Tables The Map of Freedom 26-27 Zimbabwe Rhodesia: Electoral Districts 173 Tables 1. Independent Nations: Comparative Measures of Freedom 16 2. Related Territories: Comparative Measures of Freedom 20 3. Ranking of Nations by Political Rights 22 4. Ranking of Nations by Civil Liberties 23 5. National Elections and Referenda 32 6. Estimated Levels of Political Terror 38 7. Political-Economic Systems 40 8. Roll Call: UN Resolution Demanding Soviet Withdrawal from Afghanistan, January 14, 1980 46 9. News Media Control by Countries 70 vii Preface he third edition of this yearbook, as its predecessors, ranges the T world to assess the level of freedom in every country and territory. This edition goes on to examine other broad issues of liberty, as well as the overarching moral issues and human rights policy (Part IV). As the two earlier volumes, this includes country studies (Part III): the struggle for democracy in Iran, and the elections in Zimbabwe Rhodesia. The latter assessments are the result of two extensive visits to the country (then Rhodesia) in April 1979 and February 1980. Against this backdrop one may view the developing political system in Salisbury. These election-monitoring missions provide more than an estimate of the quality of the elections. They describe the problems of initiating an electoral procedure in a country without a voting tradi tion or any effective representational history. The reactions of the electorate, whatever the ultimate success or failure of the Mugabe regime, encouraged those who believe a politically untutored population can readily learn to campaign, vote, and accept the decision of the polling place. Though these elections were conducted in a climate of fear and intimidation, the observers clearly noted the determination of the voters to regard elections as a serious business. This, itself, disputes the view that inexperienced voters are not ready to exercise their political rights. This volume also focuses on the broad controversies that affect all countries (Part II). The problem of restructuring the flow of inter national news has been debated at global forums for a decade. Though it seemed in 1978 that a compromise declaration had been achieved at UNESCO, the controversies flared afresh this year in the MacBride Commission of UNESCO and underlay an April conference to transfer communications technology to developing countries. Late in 1980 these same controversies may reappear at the biennial general conference of UNESCO. Our analysis proposes some remedial steps for Western media managers, and the developed countries. Part II also includes an important "index for trade union freedom" ix X PREFACE —the use of new criteria by which to judge the actions of governments in the field of trade unionism. This edition provides once again in the Survey (Part I) and the Country Summaries (Part V) the information and assessments that provide a test of changing political and civil rights. These judgments are watched closely by governments themselves, as well as the mass news media, scholars, businessmen, and the general public. Just as this edition assesses more than the year's levels of political and civil liberties, so the two previous yearbooks examined continuing, basic issues in the field. The 1978 volume included essays on the definitions and distinctions of freedom and democracy; diverse views of democracy; how democratic ideas became established; the relation of alternative political-economic systems to freedom; and self-determina tion, subnationalities, and freedom. The 1979 edition featured a series of four essays by Sovietologists on supporting liberalization in the Soviet Union; as well as sections on freedom and equality; and national cultures and universal democracy. * * * We acknowledge, once again, the contribution made by the Advisory Panel for the Comparative Survey. The panel consists of: Robert J. Alexander, Professor of Economics, Rutgers University; Richard W. Cottam, Professor of Political Science, University of Pitts burgh; Herbert J. Ellison, Professor of History, University of Washing ton; Seymour Martin Lipset, Senior Fellow, the Hoover Institution; Lucian Pye, Professor of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Leslie Rubin, lawyer, professor, and African specialist; Giovanni Sartori, the Albert Schweitzer Professor in the Humanities, Columbia University; Robert Scalapino and Paul Seabury, Professors of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley. We are grateful for the financial support provided by the J. Howard Pew Freedom Trust, the John Dewey Foundation, the Earhart Founda tion, and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. This support enabled Freedom House to maintain the Comparative Survey throughout the year, and produce this yearbook and other components of the Survey program. Since Freedom House neither solicits nor accepts funds from any government—nor has it done so in the forty years of its existence- private gifts and foundation grants are essential and deeply appreciated. We also acknowledge the extensive editorial assistance of Jeannette Gastil and Patricia McCormack in producing this as the two previous yearbooks.—L.R.S. PART I The Survey in 1979 The Comparative Survey of Freedom: Nature and Purposes he Comparative Survey of Freedom has been published at least Tannually since January 1973.1 In spite of the obviously superficial knowledge of individual countries that they reflect, Survey ratings pro vide an objective reference point for those concerned with the state of freedom in the world. An objective reference point for comparing levels of civil and political rights is desirable for several reasons. First, a recurrent American policy has been to go to the aid of other countries because their governments represented democratic systems similar to our own, or were struggling against forces hostile to democracy. But the policy can hardly be implemented if we cannot distinguish convincingly the more free from the less free states, particularly in the third world.2 Secondly, opinion leaders in the developed democracies need a basis for a more balanced appraisal of the imperfections in freedom that they discover in their own societies. It is always important to protect democracies; like all systems they will continually fall away from their ideals. It is equally necessary to maintain perspective on these imperfections, to remember the difference between societies that have the means to dis cover, publicize, and often correct abuses of human rights and those that do not. Careless, fashionable pessimism about the level of freedom in imperfect free societies destroys the morale of their peoples; it en courages and nourishes the propaganda of those who truly hold their peoples in chains. In the 1960's it was common for political analysts to avoid the issue of freedom by judging political systems primarily in economic and organizational terms. Such an analysis might see President Nixon as a poor manager of internal party affairs, or judge that Haile Selassie was overthrown because he failed to solve his nation's economic problems. Freedom in this analysis became an alternative means to administrative ends or the product of a certain stage of material and political progress. Such a view of freedom is a natural consequence of the materialistic, technocratic, "value-free" ethos of our time. The political analyst also 3 4 THE SURVEY IN 1979 avoids the issue of freedom because its qualitative nature makes it hard to measure. It is easier to know if wheat production is higher this year than last, or if there are fewer beggars in the streets. However, those whose memories extend back as far as the thirties can never accept the claim that freedom inevitably accompanies economic or organiza tional progress, or that people who achieve material progress but are denied freedom necessarily prefer bread to liberty. Many questions go begging: How can we know what people think or want unless certain basic freedoms exist? Why is there so little evolution toward freedom in the Soviet Union, despite its advances in organization and technology? If freedom comes from material progress, why do so many Americans worry about the impact of further technological and organizational change upon freedom? There is more to political organization than efficiency. By its simple existence the Freedom House Survey suggests that freedom is a goal that must be pursued separately from modernization. It inclines leaders of the new nations to notice that material results are not all that count. It suggests to citizens of developed democracies that the freedoms for which so many have struggled in the past will not inevitably triumph in the future. At the same time, a survey of freedom encourages people everywhere to reassess what they mean by freedom, its variations and its degrees, and to distinguish freedom more clearly from other desirable features in political systems.