Armine Ishkanian

Democracy promotion and civil society

Book section

Original citation: Ishkanian, Armine (2007) Democracy promotion and civil society. In: Albrow, Martin and Glasius, Marlies and Anheier, Helmut K. and Kaldor, Mary, (eds.) Global Civil Society 2007/8 : Communicative Power and Democracy. Global Civil Society - Year Books . SAGE publications Ltd, London, UK, pp. 58-85. ISBN 9781412948005

© 2007 SAGE Publications

This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/37038/ Available in LSE Research Online: June 2011

LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website.

This document is the author’s submitted version of the book section. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 2

CHAPTER 4

DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY Of the various strands of democracy promotion, in this chapter I focus on civil society strengthening Armine Ishkanian programmes and ask the following questions. First, can democracy be promoted through civil society strengthening, and second, given that democracy appears to have near universal appeal and acceptance (at least at the level of rhetoric), why has there been a Introduction seen as a tool for preventing or reducing conflict backlash against democracy promotion that targets civil In his testimony to the US Senate Foreign Relations (Kaldor et al. 2007: 110). In addition to all these aims, society? My reasons for focusing on civil society Committee hearing on the role of non-governmental after September 11, democracy also came to be seen strengthening programmes instead of programmes organisations in the development of democracy as vital in countering terrorism. that are aimed at election monitoring or state institution Ambassador Mark Palmer argued that ‘achieving a 100% Since the early 1990s, programmes strengthening building are twofold. First, civil society strengthening democratic world is possible over the next quarter century civil society, in particular American, have excluded was viewed as an end itself as well as a means of – but only with radical strengthening of our primary political associations and parties (i.e. political society) furthering the other components (such as human rights frontline fighters of freedom ’ (emphasis added). Palmer in an attempt to appear non-partisan and to avoid and free and fair elections) within the democracy characterises these ‘frontline fighters of freedom’ (i.e. non- accusations of ‘playing politics’ (Ottaway and promotion agenda. Second, the current backlash governmental organisations – NGOs) not only as having Carothers 2000: 12). Instead, although donors have against democracy promotion is almost entirely assisted ‘a massive expansion in freedom’ but as being the recently sought to expand the definition of civil society directed at civil society strengthening programmes and ‘heirs of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Lech to include more actors than just NGOs, in practice civil involves legal and extralegal measures aimed at Walesa’ (Palmer 2006). While few scholars of civil society society was often equated with the development and constraining, co-opting, coercing or closing foreign- would describe NGOs in such laudatory language, such growth of NGOs and as a result, the infusion of donor funded NGOs (Gershman and Allen 2006: 38; Howell et thinking has fuelled democracy promotion efforts since the funding and focus on civil society strengthening al. 2007). Foreign funding of NGOs is increasingly being late 1980s. At that time, the idea that civil society is critical throughout the 1990s led to an unprecedented and described as a form of interventionism and neo- to development, democratisation and successful exponential growth in the numbers of NGOs imperialism, and as the creation of a fifth column. transition became quite prominent among donors and worldwide. Many have referred to this as the I begin by examining why democracy promotion and Nigeria, election time policy makers, because of their growing enthusiasm for ‘NGOisation’ of civil society. civil society strengthening became a central part of the idea of civil society, a certain disillusionment with the Nearly two decades have passed since the collapse of donor aid programmes in the 1990s, before over-concentration on aid to state institutions, and the the Berlin Wall there is widespread acknowledgement discussing the achievements and challenges of for democracy (Kaldor 2003: 19). In the late twentieth belief that through civil society ‘democratic forms’ could be that democracy promotion efforts in various regions, democracy promotion. In doing so, I consider several century, de Tocqueville’s work became quite popular transformed into ‘democratic substance’ (Carothers 2000). including the former Soviet Union, sub-Saharan Africa explanations and arguments suggested by policy among some American scholars, including Robert Civil society strengthening subsequently became a and the Middle East, have failed to produce democratic makers and scholars as to why democracy promotion Putnam, Francis Fukuyama and Larry Diamond, and it central part of democracy promotion programmes regimes, and that the anticipated vibrant, independent has not been as successful as anticipated and hoped was subsequently also influential in policy circles. The implemented in both transition and developing civil societies do not exist. Even in countries where civil for in the post-Cold War euphoria. I consider a range neo-Toquevillian position is that democracy is countries. Since 1989 very large sums of money have democracy promotion efforts are considered a success of arguments and although I recognise that strengthened, not weakened, when it faces a vigorous been spent by international development agencies, (for example, Eastern Europe) there is growing cynicism authoritarian legacies and culture shape perceptions, civil society (Putnam 1994) and that successful private foundations and other actors on strengthening, towards civil society (Hann 2004: 47). Furthermore, understandings and practices, I argue that the transitions to democracy are possible only if civil Y Y T T E E I I building, nurturing and supporting the institutions of there is a rising backlash against democracy promotion manner in which civil society and democracy were society or ‘something like it’ either predates the C C O O civil society, training civil society activists and funding as the euphoria and optimism that accompanied the defined and operationalised as well as the current transition or is established in the course of a S S L L I I their projects as a means of promoting democracy. In collapse of communism and the end of the Cold War conflation of democracy with regime change in certain transition from authoritarian rule (Perez-Diaz 1993: V V I I C C the former socialist countries, the aims of ‘democracy have been replaced by disillusionment. In spite of the contexts, such as Iraq and Venezuela, have 40). The belief that civil society is a bulwark against D D N N promotion’ and ‘programmes strengthening civil emerging pessimism and backlash, donors and policy significantly affected democracy promotion efforts. the ‘monstrous state’ (Weffort 1989: 349) and a A A N N society’ have been to assist the transition from makers describe democracy as a universal value and counterweight to state power (Rueschemeyer et al. O O I I T socialism as well as to support good governance and right (Ferrerro-Waldner 2006; McFaul 2004: 148; UN Why democracy promotion and civil society 1992: 6) supported the emphasis on civil society T O O M M free and fair elections, human rights and the rule of Democracy Fund [UNDEF] url). Such is the popularity of strengthening? promotion in US foreign aid programmes, and what O O R R law. In developing countries, in addition to these aims, democracy today that even ‘despots’ (Rieffer and Mercer some describe as the ‘democracy aid industry’ P P Y Y C it was hoped that promoting democracy and civil 2005: 385) and ‘tyrants’ (McFaul 2004: 151) who are Academic debates (Encarnacion 2003: 709). While these neo- C A A R society strengthening would also enhance aid suspicious of Western-led democracy promotion, Although he did not use the term civil society, Alexis Tocquevillian theories linking civil society to R C C O effectiveness and support efforts to reduce poverty. In pretend to be democrats or claim they are charting an de Tocqueville was the first to attribute the democracy became a key element of the post-Cold O M M E E D D conflict or post-conflict areas, promoting democracy is evolutionary (or revolutionary) transition to democracy. importance of associationalism and self-organisation War zeitgeist and subsequently quite fashionable

2 3 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page4

4 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY The 19 97 : W p we re ten (B act Be an par 199 7; un of ci d a as aw i p of p 1990s s on an ci ri nh us ar t em oli ol n o m s vi vi e g On Dav e s the d i e c r a ay im i v e c it l l sion i t rm a ociat public tai ti vis ma n i ac me k e i ic ar i vi re oc ica i s c s vi c n en rs fr th ar oc i i ipatio oci l id 4 n al B s ti g gu l pa m n as racy p om s 17 ). s tate in al l ll ve n s e e tl i , . ng opul ion oc iety con R et y y ety ociety ti on es sphere: rm y and g c Re publ ic in bein g 199 7: co nt Th y in i t r e eff th c bad, a neu Sh of n ac cep ted alis for and c eo pa rt iv il tex rou is st arity an e he volun n i a de rary e of als subver re fr . n fa r m a al on an tra t a 408 ) al con pa gh orm th be ic ul ustratio mo c soc bu ngt ( grea ter space o 19 ci t th d of , e l , rt mo a o d ta t an w c t tends e 97 : y No iz ens ar , re ie ty henin sh . he re B at vi rit c of rac rath ry ea kened ted Sh e am (B po r o n ivil re er m ew, ive rink to rd icises an aly w ha s 42 6– 27 ). , nei ay l y n ass discuss, on g ity im fo ider er so wh ic ar v a 200 0) g t ma in ar t repu an hat ing in iew ther cus nd ’ e g a in spar po e po in ciet is ocia si s (Rief depend aca dem t sc ho t 198 6; c rta nt t ar h of he wh rend t b whic of blican he on iv il tai ns he c n y y learn an d ked o ted g ti ‘ ov c inheren c f in f at c ue s ‘d ons ri se t e i a ivil l iv il 19 99 ). key he ersea t ars so n h og he the th of Wh it is ou s en t and t , the ha t ic h s ci e na a lea soc ie ma nee of ci the vi t t’ ociety th at a to a n s. co lla wh o t lat th e rt vi t nd ex change tion y e h ty e s th e tly d o th e th mi ddl H l ue cre de g holding p n e a 20 e ty e r riva id l to society da nger ps e argu e t ed 198 0s th o d Na zi state the goo he 04) . atin v to e na t w (Be (B e r a budg et iew s i xi a s il e- tis th a t stenc to l e d a of ure g ac t ib e wide rman rm an Sh eri mo c pa ati t tha shif la s heir th at tha a and and s to n no t th e the ral i rt nd on he or v re of o s, n e e s y r r t t f L G po i di i t c al E i v c au H ‘i as w (r o s s m i o e c e c Pe s p s s di r p o c r t d d s s i ( n n n f n oH he he ele ela on on olo on u sl o hapin aw e oc ven s n o pi pp ose r r i v n p la r e at urop e e) pr rams ab erm i o i s ss sc fl st so at t Wh In Whi i og th dr ci a p lit t m h arc d l ve a ni ce ue o in pu b e u c ie we t c fo r r po it po t v onor et r e ide ti usse ni nd s a s Marxi inue ic no c th ou nt ts o r epti e an n on n utio th i t il on od uc be d e h nce e r e d c rs sa cn e y le Am al r y , e aw al mi t e l e e g g s ci. b m en t t nts y rc a i li c l d t 2 s b in an cam s and sh y th as ’ tio 1 the wa s an d f ons o a s ns 00 2: d ec y y o i er - cu o d d s new pol a d e eri 9 g f v d y’ , t n po te to st h For ia r e ti o d f c h ip an d (H abe n i e 80s n to ci o d an n e , ho a ltura no e fr by l d a c a can neo he ge mu e nom y b icy fo r t vi c of subs t day def n u rg e ot he to i e de nd of om La ti po t h 57 ). n i i c v b d an d l t r m nt i s l a re il G J s P hi ars an d e qu i s i el e e t the on i v p tu al ürge Ha ber ca p te en gag a -Toc ci h i el f rams e , ate d e n p d mo the l ni rm as st n i sto that ief and rov al y. so e h t Toq c n mo n th e l a rs’ e eque h rc o N abo ut n te di t t of - g r m o a i p ion con ti co nte e He c eve org co s vis co e c l ri Am cr in th i id me T- o sis es ublic que vi de n ie t a p x e uevi c e o t an ‘li es in state h t E op ci, he i m e ic l a on c at ntin u s 0 9 9 1 ul d d ma s e i c em e ts Ha be re h w 199 2: ntl , fewo th rthe t an is as as y fl uen que cy er i and nsi c eol th e 2 u q c t a r ore i it o e r ni o th ip on co civ ibu d lle 0 e stat (Bo c we y st tern f y t er n lli ca sphe is c 0 i s o be ator ogy e vi of nt ’ i s s a m reng le at i id e tri e ’s pu bli s d i 2 hould il s rl ev t an n ns e rm a ti t re e s w nd as l ti a he bbio pa ce 133 ). rel : c io n ou rs i s a s mu d’ on o l o e one gger ci v s d on , l l i ent i to s I (K aldo n s, ( rati al v an d vil E p talian y Cohe oci po 5 d l i re o oci f is i a a th e s (H ‘a t o e ar n a i urope s s’ 1 t il o n c pr H ni c he n t of t in hat . t d po mo i s ) w es u deba te t on on al e c o i ab e Al e h be g . 19 ety abe ed c on wor so he lp e n it co of o soc r rs t n mor n o i he om m s e i l t c at iv t y s a ion . je th oug ea rn ac n he i r D wh i ing ship h 88: re de l h t r cie , m sib l r unde in rm In a ge m f Marx c to an rmas e c ly c k eca was 200 3: s ie an ad em de o 1999: a g e b at i i t pu l e co a e iv n ve e c a p w rc e ty’ ch on de ili tie t o c n r nd as un i p p g n i k bo y wh cono of moc 88). i an d il as o ( b i e nv ins l u e n lled h H ntell ab out ro s ub li the s on ic bate, n etween rmin e m m t ist c r th io m ow he d s H ert c n ic h c w ef e t g iv i ic in 193 ). s in s 199 6). pir y b i w i he p ph as apable oc at i n n 214) r , racy a ore ent mi c G c ol fluen amm es, l o f t ect s i d E e ell be rm ge ne vle i t c a y Anto virt ues, rre o h t ri t hat c e as i ram s tea d sp h t i e to o b Marx v iti aste ety pu bl pu b f ir s o p r d whic oc i d n it f e fa c ic on wa r m uals s u c i cle ca t d a s w sa w ci ci a han and a and h h t eh t reo l al ly ere the t tia ble ni et sc ral c i nd nd As o he el ad t as li c lly rn vil vil t to to of o o s s, ic ’ n h d o o e s s y y f f l l . , i mo prom a Alth D e b si W on r Car c i come US mone ref m in 2 whe t tr a co c g n j ro p d p p t n E c m n a g o e d s d c pr a nt h h es p iv iv l o oc 0 s l s cc t i iv a r o if e eo u u a g on or w h eir is a e o I o u s d 0 r t f er mo d m e il il l r l m t in w n n er l e t e c a jec ni t gr u a i is othe op 2 n e i - N a ther d te ough de m ic e e s i t c e a is ct ed h o so n so ny el na g y li r – f b m o t t en s p to otion i a l i t l u m ic t v p G r a y s n r an ip a r b cr t 3, d ea e y tis r c co l d e ed ies , w io p t b c im c o m de n t n O a er em r r has o oth a a t ion e rs r iet iet a c ho y ap pro a i o a i n ce n n c y c a s’ a n s s ng t oa s I m h t s r a c p f y oc rac y in io t i iv o s t t d be m n a t c th 200 y l y y n w o o io re T o t al e t w t (G s f a e t il u c a n c o , s h p t t a h c bee o o p f t o r r i ince s t n o s. e n the h p c y a t h l o m e ng r h t r rte so n b n ar a t N l f it c ces f a t c r s s i ac o m ea r 0). e out p r i u b t a o h es r n u - in c og iv o r ons en n ec s a w h o US G r t to r s c n t t r a c i I i a 1 o f co l a t h t m y o s v ld g he n il e g t iet O f . i ch es s h t S 9 d t re to r a r r il n a p pl t g m spent of he l u t c o r h S e e r e in a 9 s ic ince in pr om u i d y t i ct b o l u t n iv e, d u d y f so ed e s e, the Ash n a s u so 0 , d h h o o n o d l u b al t s es ered g i o d ’ u o c o se g n ch il ga t no s: b sh as er en t i 198 n U G il l tha em h su p m i k io d n , ci e c c ic seq of t to g, d (Tobi t S d e a so o o d v ’ iet ‘ b i then g t o h g a to i n We in a w 2 n em o m e ie r b n next r es i h u 0s b bee t ty k er t d U rs ( l n ot io n 0 le t n g o p c y o fo h g h y US u i w l no in l as ag o e t s eb ‘ 0 sin g s ish d de m iet SA r , r t a r h e g i en t n e m f y c a o n d re o s 4 c thr , t s t i f o u st d ef at ed n b ivil t en h s c a r p g a h ). h civi b b y r p w w al c c n a n ID c em t ea ed i t e d e r e n t h r r re f S e g h sectio A il l entr e ou e. a dem o a a y i it g e a eng c t ( 2 l ot en in n v enat s a t a e h s S h soci t , r l m oc ra l m ies ng l h h demo 0 fa m e t ic the d t t o l a v t d e t gh c e socie a t r er 0 i h s; Th om t e o c n h ed d h p en c m m iv m epie o h 7 a ge i th ou e p id o r n n m o s o d a o t e o l a al il e ety w f ) e c ged a x e r a r es s e e. n t p c . v n l ro t g ea ea en n i o o ena a r c u l p ic n t h g cy e h society r so 1 es s or t cracy h fo f and f ty jectisa y 20 l T a ce a f e h hened s e ocu o m 9 y r ev er d n a i been ollowing s I a as civil i I c cy hi e c ll r u s rm l n n nde ed , 8 co uld ( as t y t pr 06: we re a l y most i in O y a p que stion 0s e h f co g t s i sis grow revo lu ol t of n s l nd p 2 pro n i n a 1 none t mu e s y er om ot i a t l 0 o 99 no i t o m ro p nsider society l ista que stioned d A as b on pos de e diss ip at t o st involved tion 0 r e t 1 an beca A fo e r d e m a n a w vis io ns w motion. t 2) 0 ltila ) menia sist eng a u t i m i mer be c a E so bila s g th la c i n h c n s, i elect a c nce ce i . a n e tio na a ti an t g pa u oc y quot of o m cia g w i t n s s on W in an m t s me built . on t era la n o t u t d ica hich racy rt w era a e ci a han ge d h e h th the t the ore t in li my ed , ion ce n o n he he a i as nr v fo r of of s in in l e, ‘a i ’ n d d l, a a e e e il s s s y t l 1 de an d s vari pr po 11 s f na t m S ( c u t or c c R s f a m e d s de 1 f Gi W E ( m s po s t Eu h t t e A Fi nk or o o o rad he G a r tr om onsp li om ewh up port t hal l lemen t. n as r i s e en lt h el ur r c hile r lles dina ak echan om Fund ing ght i mo cra mo s de on Af ras i en gthe 2006: $1,457.6 1990–2003, i e l u s n io For a n i a t n i a it i it i l ou s wh en at ou it as th la rge m e ope a e Brai sin t r l. g g el rs eng e na ions on i a ot i ly pi o ica … s or a crac y i ons n dem tion e on a cuous s gh c instance, n lb 2 p ta t e A t u g et l i 33). l on , 00 6: ($ 5. is e i vil Jose e at t n a za t e m nd cy lea di i of an EU p f i ($ 1 l s guid se c n or arlie th e d m ni ng m y o million n m al . of ocra d s a e pt i t a h t c in d cle ar a be en ci l a t 7 s o or em th e m nd t om . a c i c i o ly 20 o dem governance th p 29 h d n n 7 EU ph ci ur ity local Ri 33 –4 vi l on or s t e fo r 20 06 r eline ng ro e ocr y r e d hi mi lli si st e abse while e at a 06: t c eff ’ chard oc ra cy in mi ty li i mi lli Bi rl i d so cie mo tio ap pro s iv sa and t democr e l i t n u k pe rs a m Eu ac Y m di r han ( ’ sy o m e vi il ar ect iv ) Eu ro pe a an ocra U an ce e den er t o pa rtic ul : ( . s t 3) t c on ) s Biden NG Os rea ar l i y nt s u civil e s S rop ec te y on l 33 on c US $1,218.5 on ) on y s e k oc ie tem e n à str A an d ty to ryin ist m Youn elect (Gil n ac ) r c g st the wi t e D I 1 and . v i - e i h t society us prom o cy s demo he s on g er n s flou nc re as s i 99 0 fu n d an d wa s at acy a F s h y c a t in tr a g , by lespi an co y e h 2 n rom t ‘o paqu e th d a e a gs ar t rule ci 2 e r u ion of 00 pr i wh ic nati ic t EU t m e d de r s s re ri million ng th 0 0 n at he v ge neral no foc pr e t a l i b an As N a ng ) l sh co in no 6, certed i c is bi late r se n st t aid om i l d wa s e ll b la of ti on 0 he om W . GO s ra 1 r c o ‘ ed onal lowe does i d u soc m n t a ’ y e l i u w : a h an 99 a ci vil h t mo re en law on s (USA was cy ten mph e o i h t nd e ean oti on ($ st ‘ke otion Eu r de 6 , s 0 9 9 1 respectively fo l ’ o r n d 0– w on c i t a n i d , in ie ty a 200 le ) t t (Y ou n pres ro 1. be st programmes be c o . d t o in ou ld al l fi ne Youn $2,438.2 lowi g’ h 20 0 y so that NG s no 29 as Eur op ID n an d N tha iti e g le D cam e democr donor s, t pr t ‘vag ue’ 6 g a ob he ( e ci ety an d GO h au ng s a do nors vel i t i US A ente a r p d ea n fou 3 19 s S s Os mi ff ovi de ng ne tive e t ci vil gs ope an f f e , je c or m e ‘b e a se adde th e h t s eff s 99: s u mo s ci vi c nat ll ion) , n w ct i c o or ts 20 Se pte million ou n t r o de mo e o 2 I s d ha s (Finkel dem d Un ion D c i t a f f ecti th ‘ a f 00 s d at w US ve e s ssi st t a x e a l has atisa 06: c i ai i epar o d). (S c vi e o 19 9 i received s t n o io k c a l e s e R broa ). 2). tr Foreign di st seriou d ci ety i so t go rou ve ( s cr over l a ocra US U n act i oward bega Fi nk of As ie s c hi ft mb er go i crac y s 8) . m hm id from v a h bee et.al. SA a 9: it i ci ety T ha ture of a tion an d in ct n AI D h dl y, co- u io SU US U ca n o ng a ed ce I v) ey r cy fo s el in is D S n n n n ll d d e a s s t l . 5 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page6

6 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY Police wa a occ u pub 200 i p d i s Eu ( ( s p b i th l d wi e for kn p n n n t e EN EI p u n ro emoc re eca olit em nil at cu ad ten terp a ha Pre A t ecif pp lar own ro D r h n io ven mo Dem up 6: ater lic P), r HR), ica in oc s p use t o na sif ren s g a oth survey im se 4) r ica a ea rt u ement tion b tion eting ra rac y Ir tion’ l ied w l rve re as , al s een th es oc nt l t n fo undat er aq, but l its cy ider governme l a main y hu use e and rac Init y nn fol the y, a tar EU a p a la ( nd p ma as cr ma promo Ko r ct E public it of ual lowing rom ogramm in cks iat y r th e get of IDH itic ivit anger ‘cap inst J as tends 200 pste th ny n ions tha ive s eff for Eu bud s ies. us ised e ot ad R r pro test E itu E ‘a 6: civ rey it al ce ight nt ro t tio ion in fo pi u min U E S get it an is s r tio 6). pean to il ci r of eptem uro rep E as n 2 op es. K fo ca s, d so ous 006: IDH d is D in ns t op istr fav th r of arl hat po ean ac wel in n emo ac pean c ciet dem fa il Of p e iv st in ten s €100–1 ou Uzbekistan to and act R lic ing at k art b il 85). ber ein l of ag rs, in l y. EU in ilateral ive r as ies c eaders t is soc s’ oc h ner rac c ent t g Cr ed po he e Ne p d lu 11 just f inc seen rat (E if y oin em le to iet e str f de y lic ir t 30 r a cap i hr co ur xibil cou ( in g ghbo u o ely l isat y Sc ted and ificati ha ud t ies oc uctu m s ee o mi m a or enla and hm pean ital ou n as ve in nt racy i ity, ion m ndep gan i l d con n 2 it s l g Hu st ries ion t re on 00 i -bas a i , 1 th rhoo r t more d requ rands men geme par fol 99 isa mult ilateral an ma cer 1–6 real e and , de moc racy for F ende pro that t l 4 ou a he E ow d ed ti li d n n nd i an u t ame on re w m n ed c B f rop n im by i EI N Ri a t lex ng dat on n Polic o s d t, o s, ra o m r w f tly DHR GOs gh tion lo pa w wi an e n fli ibl iz or t bu t th t os io EU n it he a h he ts th a of ts ct ct n h n d g k e e e y t t t , , , a v o p h r De E s S Di t v di pr 1 o t a (D e s F s Ag c w US o he e ar io iew omp o uf fic o 9 ver mp has c f un daci r l l w a u h sc al og More inci s en ma m o ci ci h 9 s e v t a c o pa rt ro ich ‘d em ed e p 7 p ie n i ncy Nat Swedi et et uss e co o ). u ea k dem p vi ie ared o ple g y y n s o e m n foc t me n n Dem nt ove b i s a d e as io n o i a rk on oc ra (S is E g e h t e an d E cto d n of nal or ur ocra us sh IDA), x c , in a po i to r, abo pe t i l te om pl F Para t ‘ p s op ea r b ocrac c th e ke s e i c i l o p ranc cy - s fo r or ve t ri or Interna t e hea s e i l i E a o m t he he c i c e thro he ve. ntr y a ce ndo wm i rt y gi n act r Eu r e t In te pi ex el ate n y r US. s a U vil , e, La s e l a c i f y e (F re llar r t s (DF ugh pi i K) , al ). ive b j l a y t G op e u i RI DE y rn ati a a m il ate s e ti i l c er m st s Ind on ly d ce an d o R m of th er ID Y( n u o Of ent ly a e not n a i t nal an el ce n i r hei s co eans eed elat dem o ral civ on al r ) urla upport t ac i an y, d d e t f he ly e mp e di ap for o al so r D pol dis a il s g wa s ver on es pr u m do no iv e n o proa c s oc ; r a d s by ve l De rgan i d ely Th e eve cus ic De ogram i url oc o m e ten c i m si t r u c i t a l i t l lo y f 0 0 2 acy vel h and whi ou nd v , ie m rs, n b) y s pm ar i e t u In te les as N h’ t ed sat ocra m e’ co op me to y c a l : 6 d et or t ch prom at c a r i r e ( ent s mes i enga ’ an nc l pr Yo ungs un e t n rn aci , he rla ions an d ma ke i as th a as on a 7 1 – 6 1 to t o fo cy d i w tr i he y ud ing l m C nt ri c , ot a e a t in ge h t es o-o pe d the us ( ght s d oti ‘ on al o m ro p l nd s, NED) US m (D F io n im me r c o m e th e uc o mat th e it on, s 200 6: wi n an po . ) y w S s h inate ur ve on di ff r o cont t re ans ID ) amo es te t he Sp ain, a h te rati W l (SI d e s eve nd we s (url ic i t wa r c ci h we an d y yc a yed the UK ext DA 25, fo iv ul o e ng on li e sa v or re to o el ls n n ), il i s r r t f l a l e R s ci vi N Hi gh Devel Dem for Al tho focus 3 2 Even Th F desc estab l ti Newman ma me law appear provi fu ndin g s a c u d e Al tho UNDEF s UNDEF d s pro tate’ oc i p oci me e RIDE o R i de Na It ec rc o m n The The management in association independent, Consultative largest Board n e l mb d m ic h Securi i et y ety and - so mo cr th i e s ri if ical l UN de o ti o o i t UN th at ug h ug h Co m G otion s ed op m t cratic is hm bed not a UNDEF Conference ho n o i t ershi ci et o s r 2 n autho , in co eport i h s n debates o a f 00 4 v wi of fu ndin g pr iori t on s p fi o ugh member Magdy e rganisat a s i t appr at and th is oliti el d a o ray ns en t y t mi to ty 17 y l r vari he ne l i e as le n i : p s s th ro s to a In deci nt of ul tati v fo members, p ssi m 5) ep arate and is a n o i t gis rity. [ Relationship d cal d n only (Youngs into international, UN de moc of stitut Rich, de mons ti of Pr ou s and y ste r NGOs emoc a e ‘pushy’ and of oach prom o on on er ug h area s n lative of the voluntary th e de stat e og ra mme Martine i w fo r parti , th e t io Co-o e z i t i c Acc chart democ Non-Go vernmental a or a decisions. e d h t h t ns UN ions UN l on th that em oc s re rac th e ra fo ra, ci fo r t UN contributors. ta stru ct re e o including rO a g e , o es te pro 2006: vi l trat e c Secre tary c per at funding rding th th r t er, by facilitat es legi ’ s n ent ir y y ed and with e h t ag enc UN w R DE F z tha at de racy not-for-profit pr om cesse i ra s pr e i e s ord a So li nc sinc oc i i n p some ti mi e fu gees s ure an d m c Trust adm re o are not u io the 18). n a Hum y, s 3 lu di to fo c a gram m r oc ra c et represen tatives c c n i a promot o po man, ie n oti N U e s to ‘de fo cus General to i t UN s, n cn o wa s y e the the a s s e us i i th e Even s, Ju l cr Fund s s n o 2005 n s ng o i civ an le em po N es oth e n sible respo mo pr n] , (CONGO) itic Organiza tions Eur it i participa tion cs n r e on y. GOs y gal ha ve in c . i th e e e cr O ac Right of membership l e 2 a C ( under on (N ew crac o t x co al i t socie O i r ff ice te on. with 005 the ea ted c ecut ac tiv he l n o tive t t ud ing ,) O G N O we f part ac to i he nde raining, nditi pe’s v and Co nfe ci of th e e f n i il UN C Organ Accor y s UN an ng aged vi wa s m rm e is the s a Un ’ from ive ta l u s n o soc ie it ie fo r ty. democ a nts is l rs ’ a m r o an an on pr of Advisory o DE in does Of s i overall mem t far of has te oc iet renc s oces in t nt , he he eff o t t th e the fice he a th e the he fo di 2 F’ s isati d or NGOs rule i ty n n r mor ad orts ng r d .n o i t ci ra oh w wi th also fi r c civil e an d s i t h t y ber UN UN UN UN UN not t for si iv il vi o he ve cy of t o of of st in n o e e c x f n m va N 5 4 I Non -sta ( f a p p W a r i d U D f D q F a S r p h p ma i e o ma (Mart val d Mart r b s fr ho de co t n n d n u o un u e e t w nd p nd n r e t x a em u r o av r m e o r e t s l o c o om em K- p e o ate’s e d is c g r o o i r mm unit v i mo r p u stile a s - n c ues funds The It among n r s l ei a ndate intaining e mo d i ti e m ro si si an n o ) th m ba i e e t a tm a should a dd o p , ci i es inez-So t e o oc ve s u da n rs ine b o -N u t o crat s c r t pr e e a e c e t a t report v , he g. se ti n ee w t l a t r it y in s r r n i t i a r h envi on tio e m r i a so from a l i o s, ia n a G i n o z-So 4 h e g n d s n o c i ventuall o s programme d cy c a n n n e p ti s £4 a te t O quest, ti h e I i e UN t o n n N p u s y a be d w o d n c i For h c o n c er nd . t o a a n n s as my ) W r rto s hat ci c a did G an . o s individual ar n onm ct lim n o 1 ar c t I a t an noted su liman a h t T n n es t O w o e F t g e r o n a ctors r o p . i s t iv e d h an h s st a ou ty not ou e t s, mi f e e s r o ne o So balanc d ch e hould i an tm r er t u re e dem re b p ns p are l t n e m i h t om d f y ent l tu l no o n i nd i o s p nd t r l y t o i la indicate s me that e e he li a that n therwis as t i a l e , r tan n a ar r n areas. te go i t S re e ra e o s iv t te te t a s i r o h t u ha at o t 2006: s su p o st donors i t n n i a a gues c l e a th a ( t t d u l c n l n e i F a crac these g ra o repre s e g i f ce n he h can e re be a er s t ve nd n o o r g o r t rg has t agains o e v ag a e t e l l m d n e e h a t al r l po rted th rd e el o s , d be n how c o m e se n a a U r be t pr I F e i s e p e n d a c e w U e t s y dem s n f r n N p c as NGOs a i r a t that 2) S v i t ( d o F er u m o n i n s a been i rv S o te is ween reate N ov f ar d o ass g n en o f a a - u ou E democr en tati ve a f o d ns in f e . the k r in well f e b e n a i n E rn n l t D l ide ce t o n C n a g The f d re i m t o c n da a r i e d mu D in fro i i io i r o de f ocra t o d se c . $8 , t n o nd at are t stanc ’ s n p da un i e he e h f w f n e o re e as pro d co a n s t v ns M d i s n t t t v i r t n m ‘the ha io moc m d n . mo i ol r c r n billion th g lt e n t on d ce a espe e d e also ea on corporations. i nt e s io ci , na res p t n e NE i r v e t a i acy F ble v r u e la wi s n a ng ab ro s cy e e u g r a n o e al iv cr e r or is nw i l o m a u w r e d r n l y te a k o racy fo , n ll l s es D engaged f ch s t d o i mati a is ac d ct iss , ) b h Af was i c a l m e o pr i at ra r n f c e hi m prom e n e j fo il t a r r t th e ad . d e n m o g t or o de ss ing f y hi o m e d n not e is o m e d e a h n e m t n l le a D f n r ove n o c om ncern w de r p a u o h a m t s ass broken b ro p s d si ir s c t fu n em pe n f a e h b the vi e , e pro ro t NG o s mo m o g fi N u ge be d he death’ nati na ti od n s p otion i r , re in t o m oti n n n p l c o istance g an mo i t a t a e h d ol o e e s S o . a d i r cause n h vidi a r c t t Os en raising y as e e n e m mber cr c s O r h i n iti e o a r non- T c n down ,s n o o on onal on al a v h t d r wi t t t dn a t p s e nc ci ie t he r a ac a n i h t th ua n on U i ca h n ci t o he e so as c b o cy ta t th t a al al in s K n n g g e e e e e e – y y y y r t t l l , , 7 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 8

Foreign and Commonwealth Office (url). In addition to made and many democratic institutions and practices undeniable, increased activism should not necessarily these various types of foundations, there are also have been established in the countries of Central and be seen as the result of democracy promotion political parties or organisations affiliated to political East Europe. However, this did not happen overnight programmes for two reasons. First, much of the civil parties that engage in democracy promotion. In and enlargement is not an approach that can be society activism at the global level comes from Germany, for instance, there are a number of replicated elsewhere. Moreover, the ‘return to Europe’ organisations based in or operating in the global organisations, including the Friedrich Ebert, has been more complicated than would initially North; far fewer Southern organisations are engaged Friedrich Naumann, Heinrich Böll and Konrad appear. Examining democratisation processes in in lobbying and advocacy at the global level. It still Adenauer foundations that are associated with Central and Eastern Europe, Mary Kaldor and Ivan tends to be the ‘usual suspects’ (that is, well- various political parties and that have been active in Vejvoda recognise the establishment of formal established, Northern-based organisations) that are democracy promotion. Finally, among non-state democratic institutions and maintain that there is engaged in global activism and included in actors, there are the private service contractors or hope for the development of substantive democracies consultations with intergovernmental organisations. consulting companies (such as Planning and in these countries. They contend that the process of For instance, only 251 of the 1,550 NGOs associated Development Collabrative International and democratisation, in substantive terms, is ‘underway’ with the UN Department of Public Information come Women and men queue in separate lines to vote to Afghanistan Development Alternatives, Inc. url), which procure (Kaldor and Vejvoda 1997: 80). While acknowledging from the global South; the remainder are NGOs from contracts and carry out democracy promotion, civil the successes of Eastern European countries in the global North (Wild 2006). conceptual level is the existence of citizens holding society strengthening and governance on behalf of establishing democratic institutions and practices, it Second, although the numbers of NGOs have their rulers accountable and the existence of and based on the specifications of their clients. is important to also recognise that the development of dramatically increased in developing and transition procedures by which to do so. This narrow approach USAID, in particular, provides a significant amount of democracy and the growth of Eastern European civil countries, the reality is that the vast majority of these focuses on the formal institutions of democracy and contracts to such consulting companies and private societies (namely, an increased number of NGOs are almost entirely dependent on foreign does not consider social and economic inequalities service contractors. In 2004 alone it provided US $8 organisations) has not necessarily been translated support. This dependence not only raises concerns and how they affect participation, access and decision billion to contractors engaged in carrying out into greater citizen engagement or participation about their long-term sustainability and impact but making. While procedural democratic institutions and international development projects throughout the (Celichowski 2004: 77), or led to greater benefits for also raises questions about their legitimacy, probity mechanisms are necessary and in fact represent an a world5 (USAID 2006). various social groups (Hann 2004: 46). and accountability. In other words, are these NGOs priori safeguard against the abuses of power and for While the levels of financial and operational The exponential growth in numbers of NGOs considered legitimate actors locally? These the development of substantive democracy (Kaldor autonomy vary, it is important to recognise that similar worldwide is also often cited as evidence of the considerations are often ignored and the growth in the and Vejvoda 1997: 63), there are many managed 7 to the bilateral and multilateral approaches discussed success of democracy promotion efforts. Indeed, number of NGOs is frequently cited by donors as a democracies where the procedural elements are above, there tends to be a strong commitment among there has been a ‘global associational revolution’ sign of success. This is due to the fact that it is easier present but where substantive democracy is absent. all the aforementioned non-state actors to the belief (Salamon and Anheier 1997) and the number of civil to count the number of organisations and to cite Consequently while recognising the successes, we that civil society is important for democracy building. society organisations has dramatically grown increased numbers as evidence of the impact and must be cautious in prematurely proclaiming the So, given the involvement of such diverse actors, what worldwide since 1990. Civil society organisations, and success of donor programmes. For instance, the triumph of democracy promotion efforts, consider the has been the impact of democracy promotion through in particular NGOs, are actively engaged with ‘Lessons in Implementation: The NGO Story’ report challenges and ask why a backlash against civil civil society strengthening? Democracy promotion has governments and intergovernmental bodies on issues published by USAID in 1999 examines the lessons society strengthening is emerging. had mixed results. of global and national importance through awareness learned in ‘building civil society in Central and Eastern raising, advocacy and lobbying. These organisations Europe and the New Independent States’. The report Challenges and obstacles to democracy Achievements of democracy promotion work on a wide spectrum of issues, including poverty acknowledges that the immense amount of aid led to promotion programmes reduction, debt relief, human rights, women’s rights, an ‘explosive growth of local NGOs’ (USAID 1999: 3), Y Y T T 6 E E I I Many of the democracy promotion success stories are the environment and others. Although there are citing growth as one of the eight success indicators. Cultural barriers C C O O about the countries in Central and East Europe, questions about civil society impact on policy making, The need for demonstrating success is driven by the In analysing why the transitions to democracy have S S L L I I although South Africa and the Philippines are also the ability of civil society actors to introduce issues pressures on all actors engaged in democracy not yielded the expected results, a common claim is V V I I C C mentioned (Gaventa 2006; Hawthorne 2004: 5). The onto national and global political agendas, to promotion, whether donors or recipients, to D D N N EU enlargement and accession process has come to influence public debates, and to name and shame demonstrate effectiveness and to give account to their A A 6 N N be seen not only as the EU’s first major experience of actors who do not deliver on their promises, should own funders. However, since it is difficult to measure Other indicators include the increased managerial O O I I competence of local NGOs, the establishment of regional T democracy promotion, but also as one of the most not be underestimated. Consultations with NGOs, as the impact of democracy-building efforts on people’s T O linkages, strengthened sectoral infrastructures, improved O M M successful cases of democracy promotion in general. well as the growing complaints about the power of behaviour and attitudes, often what is considered and O O prospects for NGO financial sustainability, improved legal and R R Integration into the EU is often described as an NGOs from politicians and business leaders, attest to presented as signs of success are the formal or P P regulatory frameworks governing NGO sector operations, Y Y learning by local NGOs of professional grant making systems C effective tool of democracy promotion because it the fact that civil society organisations are actively procedural democratic mechanisms and institutions. C A A and procedures and, finally, the benefit to women and minority R provided incentives for the leadership of engaged in public debates and policy advocacy at the The minimalist or procedural definition of R C groups as well as reflecting social concerns and public policy C O democratising countries to pursue internal changes national and global levels. democracy is identified as originating with Joseph O M M issues important to women and minorities through the E E D D (McFaul 2004: 157). Certainly, great strides have been While the growth and presence of NGOs is Schumpeter (1947), who argued that democracy at the establishment of NGOs (USAID 1999: 5–6; see box 4.1).

8 9 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 10

Box 4.1: En-gendering democracy: the 2002-04 anti-domestic violence campaign and When I visited Armenia in 2005 I found that donor interest had shifted to other topics and that all but one of democracy building in Armenia the shelter programmes had closed due to lack of funding. One of the six NGOs involved even denied any involvement in the 2002–04 campaign (Ishkanian, forthcoming). There was broad consensus among the other Following the collapse of communism, support for women’s organisations in the post-socialist states in NGOs involved that, even though the anti-domestic violence campaign had not fully overcome the resistance Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union became a significant component of democracy promotion and and criticisms encountered from the outset, at least it had accomplished the difficult task of introducing the civil society strengthening programmes. Donors, including USAID, the Ford Foundation, the German Marshall topic to the public and generating discussion about the issue. Less successful were the technical solutions, Fund, the Eurasia Foundation and the Open Society Institute, shared the belief that there was a direct link such as shelters and hotlines, employed by NGOs to try to combat the problem. between democratisation and women’s advocacy groups (Ghodsee 2004; Hemment 2004; Henderson 2003; Hotlines were not successful in Armenia for a number of reason, including the costs of phone calls (there McMahon 2002; Richter 2002). Furthermore, the pressure to liberalise the economy and to privatise state were no toll-free numbers during the campaign); the absence or poor provision of telephone services in welfare delivery often meant that women, traditionally involved in caring for children, the disabled and the some rural areas; the lack of privacy in most households; and the fact that sharing problems with a stranger elderly, assumed a greater share of this burden in the face of shrinking public services. By the end of the over the phone is a alien concept. Meanwhile, shelters, which may be successful in developed countries with 1990s, women’s NGOs represented a significant proportion of NGO activism in the former Soviet countries welfare systems that provide public assistance, unemployment benefits, health insurance, subsidised housing (Berg 2004; Hemment 2004; Henderson 2003; Ishkanian 2004; Olson 2003; Richter 2002; Tohidi 2004), and at and free schooling, did not work in Armenia, where these provisions are either not present or not functioning. the same time domestic violence became a popular funding initiative among donors. In September 2002 the All that a shelter can do in Armenia is to provide counselling and housing for up to four weeks, leaving the USAID Mission in Armenia made available US $476,367, which was divided among six Armenian NGOs. This question of what happens to a woman when she leaves a shelter unanswered. Without viable employment, funding was part of the USAID Democracy Program (USAID 2002: 32–34) and the six grants represented the affordable housing and subsistence benefits, often the only options for women are to return to their husband first direct USAID grants to Armenian NGOs (USAID 2002). or their parental household. The lack of alternatives and public assistance meant that shelter programmes Although the issue was being discussed in global forums and funding was becoming more readily available were viewed by many women as untenable. in the mid-1990s (Sen 2003), domestic violence was still a taboo subject in many post-Soviet countries, The technical solutions such as hotlines and shelters that were implemented ignored the socioeconomic including Armenia. Unlike in the USA or Europe, where the issue of domestic violence was first raised and problems, including poverty, unemployment and multi-generational households living in cramped conditions, addressed by local women’s organisations and groups of battered women (Keck and Sikkink 1998: 174), in which exacerbate and at times provoke incidences of domestic violence, as well as the fact that Armenia has a Armenia there was no broad-based grassroots movement pushing for recognition of the problem. Most of the weak social welfare system. They were thus implemented in the place of more ambitious programmes that women’s or human rights NGOs that worked on the issue did not begin doing so until the announcement of would address the structural and economic inequalities and provide more long-term and sustainable large grant programmes (Ishkanian 2004). solutions. Unless the broader issue of access to services and a more robust welfare system are addressed, Domestic violence had not been recognised locally as a social issue that could be addressed by law short-term, temporary, technical solutions such as shelters will not solve the suffering of the victims of enforcement, hotlines and shelters until it was identified as such by Western donors and experts; and therefore domestic violence. the problem, as well as the proposed solutions (i.e. hotlines, shelters), were perceived as being artificially imported and imposed. This perception led to widespread civil society criticism of and resistance to the efforts of the six NGOs involved in the 2002–04 USAID-funded campaign. Although much of the criticism was directed Armine Ishkanian, Lecturer in Social Policy, LSE at specific policy solutions, such as shelters, the metanarrative of the critique was directed at the influence of donors and the post-Soviet transition policies (i.e. liberalisation and privatisation) more generally. As the campaign unfolded, the greatest challenge for these NGOs became countering the persistent civil society resistance to and critique of the campaign, which alleged that the issue was being imposed by donors Y Y T and that the six NGOs’ involvement was motivated by greed and grant-seeking. This led the six NGOs to T E E I I C devote a significant amount of time demonstrating the existence of domestic violence existed in Armenia, C O O S S L arguing that they were not working on the issue because of the grant money, and explaining that they L I I V V I considered local cultural practices and beliefs while designing their programmes. In addition, they sought to I C C D D N legitimise their work by framing domestic violence as a human rights issue and maintaining that addressing N A A N the problem was a critical component for democracy building. The crux of their argument was to define N O O I I T domestic violence as a human rights violation and to contend that since the protection of human rights are a T O O M necessary, if not obligatory, component of democracy building, the anti-domestic violence campaign was M O O R R P contributing to democratisation processes in Armenia. During interviews, in public addresses, and in their P Y Y C C A publications the leaders of the six NGOs often made the connection between their work and the larger goal of A R R C democracy promotion. C O O M M E E D D

10 11 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page12

12 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY ‘B cr e m p fl fo c Bos e b on i d m e d b b m e s d a i f me 199 9: b as ‘i M co u W w o i tr c th as (19 p s 7 - n o n th s s nte nte n a n oc i oci oci oci iv em la m is lu re oc k’ rg o e r ans e a e e at i l i S alka vo e ti S il formal/procedural elections) and managed situation early phrase ‘Managed p n us 94), an st ep Eli n d i d uc h e r u nt rn rp ci n a e e e e W ar s a oc n tal i i ke p c o ra a r We cate r e e i j ty ty ti ty a l so h s i ri r an oo o p e h w ate o r e at i a de s e ag 14) Kyrgyzstan). n e in (C h e e rati sat r a m m e cu n s r c 2000s oc n xp lan for i w t s “c u co Kedou s i cie d n a tation d s n r se t s i t a t s l ts y n e on a s i so l, i e th that 2 a c i t i er y l d n of . d l w ( iety’s ation f o weep in in (N th an dl ul n t 002) in Ge were g in For by ur ty e ci et of h lt u s e el on democr acy’ in e t t o applic t d e o i t a ll o other odia ave and was he pe at w lln l e sta v democracies v i c the io n m a y l i s n o i s Ea s re iewe e n into is ‘mis it rie e n d er ay s alis y io n fo r cn i s t a p rcei v in s or pr x h t e s t v e fu nd ”, s is that . n nce, i as authorities ist introduc ed ci ted i d ra It be en n o r l g t prac to former ; w op 2002; cul a ter abl 200 4: e h e now or e institutions tan ce, th at refers th m a i n o m i r Isl fo use 1994). t d in ry ‘d he e g f o m p o l ge neral in D ensity ed Wester at ed ’ n r t b i t e amic ee p Serif s i a f ‘ (upravl yayemaya hav ural ar v a t t and an d being w y c w o h t e m o s ic e c o Isl a e h r in l in capa c e d am E Musl t n o o Sovie t ac s n gued es isted som hi ch to s i hy Mc exist l e d uro 240 –1). f i l e ly amic oca l i cer e y in H c o m (Colton by t e a k it sel r and g n t ‘r th at or p o ter t n e l increasingly Mar ce r ea son Faul si c he e 1 been situation C is a t a h t r n elig of and pe , y x the e ims B e r a 5 9 tain but stat es le d n a h s e i t e i c o s t t ‘f qu ms t a he osn ia, k’ , ho in tai n ’f hat ra itnes ti o d g c d NG soc it din 0 a c t i w gr Russian f o practices d n a ious ul (B are em eo ter est ream and ie s . s (C hand ‘t 200 us , d y c ‘f eud hav co ns s H (Mar ea ter s i B used e d rans ito t Os . v e uraw , x e g iet (such ur i h the We s e na t in io controlled e h t osn ia o nte x fo s’ demokr atiya) raphic h M McFaul o 2). c i m o r crac y e K ( l e e fund n e p m a c ned ave c ie which f an r ar used mn h c i f m o al istic’ din ul ture io nal Bo o m authorities or m p o nothing T s. co u c s i d co te t o th e gu e E as at t d (for le ts t h i r u o d hey s o p a n i s y o n rnest l e a lo g ib us rn sn ia de at ament ali n ncept a d n Othe t a p wh r , s e l 1 to Kazakhstan r e d n r e t en a the 2003). cl aims lso cept o p in explai 9 o h w example, p 2 s nd n e m in a ac to and - t r describe p rox ists ’ 95, eo ple 0 ethe cludi s s d ti o b i pe o or ol i ns 04: n i e t prog H i n oc i c o s oe c rs, t r ha t c le bi li is ’ i t a V f o G i in on e fz l r e e n rc quo lai m ci in t a s a of er racy rs i 1 e s in s e a yr c e d s n r la b i r t s 228 ). mu s e e o th ni ) 2 9 9 ng ce pt s i the ty a n o llne t me i l a w de ry sm res t on l n a hei th at s i fte ci c ‘t h an d an d uch th i y h t v eh t not no i the the te the ivi i ed vi o t to to st i i n h n d d d d e e ’, s s s c y r r r t l l l . ’ r t i c be ‘o be m t e c s in id c al no r e ‘t i an by hu ‘W (H n t he a go i s e c s Mc w (B G de l In Au sc d s n n g e e o he eci ej a ultur ul tur ce ile et ultural s ch nt m e o c radi o ers r th e d e l d nd enc it Wh Fr rzez erzfe s n ho ve vern e r ha vi ld d t t man itt ect t aut As F s iv o addi ivi th o it e ig at t c a pt i ent nc e ie s pi ob o n l cu he aul l o valu c lo pm e eg y id ual o an d hman , t’, l n o o r’ gre of ti o be d v i i . e m ars ogni or it ing n c e cal a s e i hori al le gie je c e ins l ou r c i m u iali nts me n i d ra in g t as ld t and while F d l ti wi na l’ ura ar a y r io 2 y un derm as at es. beli appli mo ; u mate ight ti A l c s I 002: k fundame s i se e the th s 2001: n se . ar ia ta gu m of b st r ve ha y i f i an d ho ul e nt an d ’ n fa cto t s l r ei n t w i s an h are rian ic d s s o s fo n wa y efs i to Mich a 2002: ‘t of fi att t c s ugge p v t un o er t r e v e hat ed, of fai s he e h an d r e a r 264; u g val e of en ts n me om e ki ar un ders d ss o e n . m un pr it a ld n d tr a v ci al 152) r lin af fec in e a m leade I udes n- bas ma certain i i rgui l o l e W t e ue t eati n enti ts ess o o it s eg a to i sts he ar t d i r rs ta vi a o ntali el g nly r ec in es : m p t a Nod 196; i s d t i e, is t su ppo e s i l he brant nco s u o c intain ob le gue he . rg t o i fi g de to ng of en t A c in ng te on ali t ha t t’. Suc that th e rst rs a c ul tan di ne r lle nd n and ue n e co ed out I sm d eb y m t 199 0s ie s t mpat ia sat r d, , Fo ro ly tur ia l th he ma t e t who , th that c n, me G by f in t he is oc r t h i c es s o s h ed rte 2002: ci ‘ t de c s e s. n r As i ers is i t at ion t ogni he g o e bi d imp ng s t 199 0s v e h n u o he d a vil no t cu lt t ig no he s ci s iews em e m i at is m W his a co ible ng as rs w i d n c, af te argue ary i n Ye an hman et i c fai t th f un t o ‘ q e or ks oc s of s a ultu nce o Pr se es ( the oc r t ure u ar s t, c oci mo no am t Th omp a n 203). at i c re t ri ng lur rtan es di t om r e h , ite racy h r valu e t s p to t i wi u e d e i ot e t l r Her sc ason of the as e l o he r as sid pt on ety lt . ac , r a es b a e th e cu he s th t al t e Th e pa ex u wh i beh he h i on ’ ou rs t an p y c bo 1 is t y c so r li t ent a i at how I i lt e zfeld rea r o to i r ro n is ami He an 9 a s’ er tai l ti bl l b s and m son o fi ura y t i f al d hi c t s 0 7 ha ve l ls g is it s cult u own, av de h b an c authorita ca na nci i a a m a d ener e sp e es nf lue i t i po s s tme rzfeld a t of t ul le e i nd b All e ne s io o dono mo l l cl ai l de a argu m e n on e 200 1: h m g ma tu re ux t arti an d wi ure barr N i kre a (mi ur do li tr h th at mpo ak s a to a i be en back nt rgum mo t aintai s c ic ef W ED, We y e t ur y c n al adit e t io n nc mi , h tag e rit t ’s c racy s s)us rs e s ic s o to ier boge le affect s A s adds, cr is I 2006; e c mo ste ste b ng ic as rtant f do 154 l a vi e tat l C racy i d own rian th at e a an and an d ons as t h t all y a c the ent t t nt na i ns, w ew arl ne dn he he ed s es rn by rn o- or r m to to o is i h d ). o o a e e s c y f 'Pure ag ainst cal l rs e m i g e rule bas ed mi s s p ope have th e s (Hawtho an d a d pre o and Wa r the pro tendenc t o n pro ar tates ub sta n r r e i l o g g e Hy Wh m s ue ble c a e rat s pa , fiel d s e i c i ed ures, en t. ideo n impl eme o br id Victory' d t in g. t f i h is a le c le i a st ve ms it ionali hy pers o rule), r c ft de ti ve ) r a y s erta re i rne ry ha logi es t b s In e of c regi Cle arly io to ra ri d to a h cognis mo crac a y im im s reads is n di t c e l e s t de e e in t s argue 20 04 : in c h in fl t v w legac i ed. sc ussi p lem ent he regi me ntat po rtan t n e a o mocra cy hic prac and rp o ha t t rtant lu di ue o the leg acie , A s, ing e b s n o i me ion h h ve r soc ie y cru d e l a y nc f ave a 10 ). a t that fruit u ng ng pro have n e w ices b cc ordi infl uenc s s’ t n of ed no he of e to c are re th e (G t mo t c t juice ti es a M he s t c an d io t n i ‘wide prom dec e poli o im ( d n e e to such and xa m infl eanwhile, n u c n ei rshm an r ng l ommon ho e po io n . ac k t advert attribu ades o m e d t c do a co t r p r ed he ue ies r i I a s l rtanc otio m in e n to n di ng i pread nt i i w o l l as are s e r nc of no t and emori d e t e Ge f o weak l and n , above orma n of an d c ed rs c e i c a c t te ue s a o h an d e i of rs t i under v exi s rruptio n n er in n h aut ‘b y- ic o , hape d al how g hm an e pra c pol es f un derstand re p st Russianscommemorating y to t r lly p l a Al le histo hori art he w e la tivel ar tici pa pr of co ns p a d i v i c of iti in flue i o n t od uc icul a Co t s i r de cal th ic n po re h w e the he d tari the ry, an d l a d e t es. and 200 6: s, e ti tute d mocr m s a y vac t e i c o s pres curr nc e p an apath a g I t muni -Sov r, desi fre ti o h , ast. would In of Al le c y i uu m C how lan- n rule n b a e a 37) . so eh t ent the ent th e o r dn gn iet ti o or In ld (i n, s yt id y’ a c - r t f i le co an d t ho re 199 0s di ab o gr de ol ex S S an d th pr ma w E p ex as 1 t ha 9 ro o o a i ga ff e iga erapies a wa s owin g ogr F c c th the mm unis s 9 mo w v v s rket li ty t lus i lusi r o ociat g iet iet 0 ut t cy rent e r s rchs t th e de i 1917 amme e he nt cracy a r th is v n po ll on, on, m th e i an citi past mo le en si n er ion e r market f s pa rti pa e m se lec d eform October E d ar y t se t zens po l ute d pe m crac y (se a t u h , gangster s ha d hi fy i which to n be at r m . s of t ople a o w it ica c ng es id e e ng i ore nd p t e tween s as led de ive s va e B an d , to with Revolution box un der ol refo i nte rpr e co uld mo l c s no sta l so i and e co mple a w i og ie n c rea be to re t s rem it her u a a on co nt rms linked crac y press i qu i re c s 4 poverty de n the pu r te e s api .2) s sho e di e bec c ete estio a gi d m fl q mb ra nce e am inat ed ‘n ot . ha d ff ere l but talism ou ri ge x u t n a s oc t int ck d buil ame p al Demo on s o h an d in d r f ning e rac an d i , roduc or io tr ue also ye ty s t nt a en gend er be t he gro d h r herapie f r , an d it a ing.8 f y disi a c fo e th e r and cra (M an m po is ircu m to p in st ss c a s c with o re (t i t by t nd iv il inds d llusi f ion wort h e ve la c ha t cy h t l i t d ‘s ru me tr ue y ne the h the th e r de marke e s so tab i k e t the stanc es ed y b o qualit p m i re y of p o i l of ned, c s, o r f c C co nsi o ci ie ty’ f benefi a ris li many nta l 20 o as t the m h om e h t free n t he v l fo rge l th y’ m e la a i d e 02 t sociate l o y, not s e is e ti ps mu nist s re or . of de ri of ) n do ms) s s e s on oc iety . c post- ts e b ot ion e o hock form oci n e tt ing d l only th at Th e arl y c s o t the th e ng e e i by o of a al i n n d d e f l 13 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 14

Box 4.2: Nashi (Ours) In the past two years Nashi has organised numerous high profile demonstrations. In 2006 members of Nashi spearheaded a campaign against the British Ambassador in Moscow, Anthony Brenton, because he had attended an What is Nashi? opposition conference organised by the ‘Other Russia’ coalition. Brenton’s appearance at this conference sparked a series of protests led by Nashi including demonstrations in front of the Ambassador’s official residence and Nashi (Ours) is a pro-government, patriotic Russian youth movement that was created in March 2005. Since then, it has disruptions at public events where Brenton was due to speak. Nashi claimed it wanted Mr Brenton to apologise for rapidly grown throughout Russia and presently has over 200,000 members, of which 10,000 are regular activists or Nashi having shown support for what the movement defined as extremist and nationalist groups. ‘commissars’ (Konovalova 2007). The majority of Nashi members are in their late teens or twenties and for some On 17 December 2006, over 70,000 Nashi members dressed as Father Christmas, Snow Maiden or elves took to membership is a path to career advancement. The movement’s activities include organising voluntary work for members the streets of Moscow to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Soviet victory against the Nazis in the Battle of in orphanages and helping restore churches and war memorials, organising educational and training programmes, and Moscow. The day before, a rally was held with heavy police reinforcements to commemorate more than 200 organising demonstrations and rallies. Critics, including Russian opposition activists as well as Western observers, argue journalists killed in Russia in the past 15 years. Only 200 people attended this commemoration. that the movement is the Kremlin’s attempt to co-opt the youth, control dissent and to prevent a ‘colour revolution’ from In April and May 2007, Nashi members began to hold daily protests in front of the Estonian embassy in Moscow occurring in Russia. Given that youth groups played an instrumental role in organising mass demonstrations in Serbia in following the removal of the Bronze Soldier of Tallinn statue. The removal of this statue is described on the group’s 2000 ( Otpor – Resistance), Georgia in 2003 ( Kmara – Enough) and Ukraine in 2004 ( Pora –High Time), the establishment of website as evidence of state sanctioned fascism in Estonia. and support for Nashi is seen as a pre-emptive measure, especially in view of the 2008 presidential elections. Although In addition to these high profile demonstrations, Nashi provides educational and ideological training to its Nashi has been described as a neo- Komsomol (Communist Youth Movement) movement that, similar to its Soviet members. Those who successfully complete the training and pass the exams become Nashi commissars. The predecessor, trains and grooms its members for leadership positions, it does so by using the forms (demonstrations, sit- commissars are the most active members who receive even further education and training, and are groomed for ins), techniques (master classes, trainings), and language (of rights, participation) of civil society organising. leadership positions. In the various provinces Nashi activists also organise master classes, lectures, and educational Sovereign democracy and the Nashi manifesto competitions for high school students. According to its manifesto, Nashi’s aims are to support Russia’s development as a global leader in the twenty first Nashi and Democracy Promotion century through economic, social and cultural means rather than through military and political domination. The key Nashi is growing against the backdrop of criticism in Russia about how the country fared in the wake of the collapse theme throughout the manifesto is sovereignty, which is interpreted as the freedom and independence to set the ‘rules of the Soviet Union and what it perceived as its humiliation and loss of status globally. According to Steven Pifer, a of the game’ in one’s own country and the rejection of Western (i.e. American) hegemony. The manifesto also rails senior adviser with the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington: against and calls for the liquidation of ‘oligarchical capitalism’, crediting President Vladimir Putin as the first to have challenged the oligarchs’ power, for strengthening the state, and for turning Russia into a global power. Nashi pledges Moscow’s combative stance is widely seen as a reaction to the humiliation many Russians felt in the 1990s, when the its support for Putin’s policies and vows to work toward these goals in a variety of ways, including through the creation country was emerging from the Soviet collapse…Russia was also subject to frequent Western lectures about how best of a ‘functioning civil society’ ( deiistvuyeshevo grazhdanskovo obshestva ). Criticising the existing ‘liberal’ civil society as to rebuild its society and government. There is this lingering perception that in the 1990s the West somehow took being the ‘worst advertisement for democracy’, the manifesto claims that Nashi will promote civil debates, work with advantage of Russia. (Whitmore 2007) multiple stakeholders (such as government, business, etc) to promote Russia’s economic and social development, fight Indeed there is a growing backlash against democracy promotion and civil society strengthening in the way it was against fascism and intolerance towards ethnic minorities, campaign against violence in the army, and restore people’s introduced by Western donors and NGOs in the 1990s (Carothers 2006; Howell et. al. 2007). While derided for his faith in Russia’s future (URLa). autocratic policies in the West, Putin currently enjoys widespread public support in Russia. His popularity is based on Nashi’s manifesto is greatly influenced by the work of Kremlin ideologue, Vladislav Surkov, and his idea of the perception that he has restored Russia’s pride and place in the world and that he is challenging the hegemony of sovereign democracy ( suverennaya demokratsiya ), which rejects the notion of a single type of democracy (i.e. Western powers including the US and Britain. In a scathing critique of democracy promotion, Putin made the following American) and argues that each country should have the freedom and sovereignty to develop its own form. Indeed the remarks at the G8 Summit in St Petersburg: only ‘sources’ cited on the movement’s website are Surkov’s works (URLb). The concept of sovereign democracy is a critique of Western democracy promotion efforts which were implemented following the collapse of the Soviet Union. If you look at newspapers of 100 years ago, you see how, at the time, colonialist states justified their policies in Africa or in Y Y T T The idea of sovereign democracy as espoused is currently spreading beyond Russia. In July 2006 the Nashi Asia. They talked of their civilising role, of the white man's mission. If you change the word 'civilising' to 'democratisation', E E I I C C Rossiya-Uzbekistan movement was established in Uzbekistan (Saidazimova 2006). Meanwhile, Dariga Nazarbaeva, you find the same logic, you can read the same things in the press today. (BBC 2006) O O S S the daughter of President Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan, praised sovereign democracy as sign of freedom. L L I I According to Russian political analyst, Pyotr Romanov, one of the implicit items on the summit's agenda was the V V I I She said: C C issue of the independence and sovereignty in relations between democratic countries. He writes, ‘In a unipolar world D D N N For a long time, we trod a path to democracy guided by maps prepared in the West. But times are changing. We see dominated by the United States and its desire to be "generous" to humankind by forcing the North American A A N N more and more countries and peoples in the world refusing to live according to identical patterns set up for them by worldview on it, this issue was bound to surface at bilateral talks within the G8 and during joint discussions’ O O I I T someone else. Even the failure of the European constitution, was in defence of the national and the home-grown.. In (Romanov 2006). Such criticisms of Western democracy promotion are becoming more widespread in Russia and T O O M M defence of sovereignty (Kimmage 2006). other former Soviet countries (including Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, etc.) and Nashi, which draws on Soviet and post- O O R R Soviet era models of organising, is both a recipient as well as purveyor of these neo-Cold War ideologies. P P Y Y C Demonstrations, mass mobilisations and education C A A R While opposition groups, including members of the ‘Other Russia’ ( Drugaya Rossiya ) coalition, have faced R C C O harassment from police and had their rallies and meetings disrupted by security forces, in contrast Nashi’s actions, Armine Ishkanian, Lecturer in Social Policy, LSE O M M E E D D such as mass mobilisations and educational activities, have not been obstructed and have received support.

14 15 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 16

Genetically engineered civil society donor-created and- supported NGOs. In Latin Katherine Verdery (1996) contends that since the America, as Jenny Pearce (2004) discusses, this led to demise of communism, Western capitalist societies divisions between organisations that considered have come to believe that they have a monopoly on themselves builders, and those that considered truth and can therefore dispense wisdom about how themselved critics, of democracy building. The critics to build the ‘proper’ forms of democracy and (social organisations) not only view the builders capitalism. This, the critics charge, led to the (professionalised NGOs) as having been co-opted by promotion of a single (i.e.Western) model of civil the state, but also consider them as advocates of the society that ignores other traditions and neo-liberal economic agenda (Pearce 2004: 63). understandings (Parekh 2004: 22). According to Sabine Freizer also differentiates between the donor- Thomas Carothers, ‘Democracy promoters pass supported ‘neo-liberal’ and the ‘communal’ civil through these countries [in Africa, Asia and the Middle societies that have developed in Tajikistan and East] on hurried civil society assessment missions Uzbekistan, and discusses the lack of mixing of goals and declare that “very little civil society exists” and approaches between these parallel forms (Freizer because they have found only a handful of 2004). She points out the lack of grassroots support or Westernised NGOs devoted to non-partisan public- recognition for such neo-liberal organisations. Such Teaching democracy: representatives of NGOs in the Democratic Republic of Congo learn about democracy and elections interest advocacy work on the national side’ developments have led to discussions about the (Carothers 1999: 248). Since donor-defined civil unintended consequences of civil society society (that is, professional NGOs) did not exist in strengthening programmes in many parts of the where many of the same policies and training were of local councils in Iraq. In order to assess how these many places or was believed to have been tainted, world and concerns that NGOs are donor driven, also implemented, a Georgian NGO leader writes, lessons had been absorbed, a district council meeting donors engaged in a process of building society from upwardly accountable and disconnected from their was observed. According to the report: scratch (Mandel 2002: 282). own communities and constituencies (Abramson Some [Western] specialists come without the slightest This led to the promotion of a particular model of 1999; Adamson 2002; Bruno 1997; Glasius et al. 2004; knowledge of the countries they are advising. At the district council meeting, the Iraqi experiment civil society and democracy, and encouraged the Hann 2004; Helms 2003; Hemment 2004; Henderson The latter generously share the American experience in democracy seemed to be running off the tracks creation of what I refer to as ‘genetically engineered 2003; Howell and Pearce 2002; Ishkanian 2003, 2004; in organizing election campaigns and fundraising for when a couple of council members began shouting civil societies.’ With the injection of external funding Mendelson 2002; McMahon 2002; Pearce 2004; candidates for state legislatures, or perhaps the Indian their opinions around the table, appearing to be angry (the growth hormones), these genetically engineered Obadare 2004; Sampson 2002; Wedel 2001). experience of community-building in traditionally enough to come to blows. (USAID 2004: 12) civil societies experienced spectacularly rapid growth In addition to the funding of projects and caste-bound villages. I do not deny that all the that would have not occurred organically. Similar to organisations, a major component of the technical information may be of some theoretical interest The USAID observer was told not to worry by an Iraqi genetically modified crops, they also began to aspect of democracy promotion programmes involved to some local specialists, but I will say that in Georgia council member, who explained that the shouting was colonise and squeeze out all indigenous competitors, the capacity building and training of trainers. Capacity the practical use of all those lectures, seminars, only theatrics and that it would not disrupt the process. becoming the dominant type in their environment. In building has been used to teach individuals a series of and training sessions was pretty much nonexistent … While seemingly accepting that this was ‘the Iraqi way’, the process, in many places existing civil society lost skills, including how to create and manage NGOs, Expert knowledge of India, combined with complete the authors express their satisfaction that ‘the its diversity and was reduced to professionalised how to apply for grants, how to prepare reports and so ignorance of Georgia … was both insulting and shouting soon gave way to constructive debate; the NGOs that were engaged in advocacy or service on. Having participated in a number of capacity humorous, neither facilitating the learning process council agreed on some issues and deferred others delivery and that supported, in theory if not in practice, building exercises designed for NGO activists in nor contributing to the reputation of the international before it adjourned peacefully’ (USAID 2004: 12). Y Y T T E E I I liberal Western values. Through this approach, which Armenia, I found that training, in addition to teaching experts. (Haindrava 2003: 77) Although donor policies are indeed an important C C O O has also been termed ‘institutional modelling’ a particular skill (for example, how to fundraise) also factor, we must not disregard the agency and the role S S L L I I (Carothers 2000), organisations and actors were implicitly communicated the donors’ expectations by The popularity of capacity building continues of the NGO leaders and members in developing or V V I I C C rewarded on the basis of their success in imitating teaching local actors which topics were open to unabated. The following excerpt from the USAID transition countries who, for various reasons, ranging D D N N that particular model and its associated discourses. discussion and which kinds of knowledge and (2004) ‘A Year in Iraq: Building Democracy’ report from a sincere belief in the values of civil society and A A N N Subsequently, groups that did not replicate these discourses were considered valuable. While never demonstrates the importance ascribed to capacity democracy to the more banal, pragmatic need to O O I I T practices and discourses, such as nationalist criticising them publicly, many NGO members I building. As part of the US democracy promotion make a living, embraced the models, discourses, T O O M M organisations and activist groups, were ignored or interviewed in Armenia complained that the training effort in Iraq, a former official from Colorado was ideologies and projects promoted by donors. In the O O R R marginalised by donors and soon came to view often provided superficial, one-size fits all answers to asked to write a guide explaining how to run a context of economic upheaval, impoverishment and P P Y Y C themselves as real civil society, in contrast to the problems, and information that was not applicable to meeting, how to encourage people to speak and crises, this led to some opportunistic use of aid C A A R the local context. They also resented the large sums contribute, and how to resolve disagreements and funding. The misuse of aid money is hardly a shocking R C C O 8 spent on the trainers’ per diem, their five-star hotel reach decisions through compromise. The guide was revelation: however, the actual misappropriation or O M M I am grateful to Mary Kaldor for drawing my attention E E D D to this point. stays and business air travel. In neighbouring Georgia, translated into Arabic and distributed to all members perceived misuse of funds intended for democracy

16 17 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 18

Box 4.3: Civil society and democratisation in the ‘colour revolutions’ Soros Foundation supported Kmara’s election support programme with $350,000, and other NGOs also received significant financial and organisational support from the National Democratic Institute (Stojanovic 2004). The ‘colour revolutions’ were a series of protest movements that emerged in several post-socialist countries following fraudulent elections by authoritarian governments. They took the form of massive street demonstrations 3. The rise of radical youth organisations influenced the tactics of the movement. Due to the young age that led to the overthrow of the ruling regimes by new coalitions committed to political reform and democratisation composition of NGOs, the internet became a major location, not only for mobilisation and the diffusion of The revolutions are so-named because of their non-violent resistance and the symbolic use of colours or information, but for humour and ridicule of the authorities (Kuzio 2006). For example, the intellectual abilities flowers by supporters. NGOs, in particular youth and student activist groups, played a key role in organising of Ukrainian presidential candidate Victor Yanukovych were ridiculed in youth NGO circles and on websites the street demonstrations and creative non-violent resistance. The colour revolutions refer to the Rose after it emerged the ‘Professorship’ listed on his CV was fictitious (Chornuhuza 2005). In addition to this Revolution in Georgia (2003), the Orange Revolution in Ukraine (2004), and the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan humour, the Ukrainian movement’s activities were infused with a carnivalesque atmosphere; for instance, the (2005). Some scholars also consider the Serbian Bulldozer Revolution of 2000, which led to the overthrow of hymn of the Orange revolution was downloaded 1.5 million times from the internet in 2004 (Kuzio 2006). Non- Slobodan Miloševi c´, as an influential forerunner of the colour revolutions. This revolution was led by Otpor violent resistance was common to all the colour revolutions – a tactic inspired by the work of Gene Sharp (Resistance), which became an important knowledge source for, and trainer of, the subsequent movements. (1993), the guru of non-violent resistance in the West, and then disseminated by NGO training centres In Georgia, following fraudulent elections in November 2003, and galvanized by the Kmara (Enough) youth (Beissinger 2006). movement and the Liberty Institute, protestors thronged the streets of Tbilisi carrying roses – a symbol of non-violence. Georgia’s Rose Revolution forced President Eduard Shevardnadze to resign; and he was 4. The successful operations of the main NGOs could not have developed without the experience of others, and replaced by Mikhail Saakashvili after new elections in March 2004. the transnational linkages that allowed those lessons to be shared. For instance, the Soros Foundation In Ukraine, as rumours of fraudulent second round elections circulated, opposition leader Viktor supported a trip by Georgian civil society activists to Belgrade where they met with Otpor activists and learnt Yushchenko called for mass public protests. Wearing orange or carrying orange flags, the colour of about non-violent resistance techniques. This inspired the creation of Kmara, which grew into a broad-based Yushchenko’s campaign coalition, demonstrators poured onto the streets and squares. The youth movement movement of 3000 students (Beissinger 2006). Before the Orange Revolution, 14 Pora leaders were trained in Pora (High Time!) coordinated the mass protests, acts of civil disobedience, sit-ins and general strikes during Serbia at the Centre for Non-Violent Resistance, an organisation created by Otpor activists to teach youth the Orange Revolution. The movement resulted in a re-run of the election and Yushchenko’s victory. leaders how to organise a movement, how to motivate voters, and how to develop mass actions. Pora also Kyrgyzstan’s Tulip Revolution of 2005 was led by a new movement, Kelkel (Renaissance), which was provided summer camps in civil disobedience training for its members (Yablokova 2004). modelled on Otpor and Pora. In the wake of fraudulent elections, activists seized control of several towns in southern Kyrgyzstan and called on President Askar Akaev to resign. The demonstrations spread to the north Diffusion of the country, and when a 10,000 strong demonstration, led by Kelkel, was attacked by Akaev supporters, a The success of each revolution provided impetus for neighbouring countries in the post-Soviet region. riot broke out and the presidential palace was stormed. The violence of the Tulip Revolution, in which at least Democratic youth groups such as ‘Walking Without Putin’, the Red Pora or the Orange Moscow, were formed three people were killed, contrasted with the peaceful change of the other colour revolutions. in Russia, while in Belarus, the youth movement Zubr (Bison) became more active in this period. Similar movements emerged later in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, the activists trained often by Pora. Youth movements Common features modelled on Otpor were also created in Albania, Egypt, and Zimbabwe. The so-called ‘Cedar Revolution’ in The experiences of the first democratic revolutions offered a model, which was spread by NGOs and adapted Lebanon also gained some inspiration from the Orange and the Rose Revolutions. according to local circumstances by social movements. Four key characteristics of the colour revolutions have Despite the spread of the colour revolutions, the role of NGOs in the emergence of these revolutions has been identified: been highly criticised by academics on one side, and governments in the region on the other. The primary critique has been that NGOs are foreign agents of Western democracy promotion; for example, some argue 1. civil society organisations’ use of fraudulent elections to mobilise against regimes that the Orange Revolution was ‘made in the USA’ (Wilson 2006: 3). The colour revolutions have also 2. foreign support for the development of local democratic movements engendered a backlash against civil society in several authoritarian regimes (Carothers 2006; Howell et. al. 3. the organisation of radical youth movements using unconventional protest tactics and non- violent resistance 2007), with the result that some NGOs have been closed down by the authorities. For instance, the Soros Y Y T T E E I I 4. the importance of transnational linkages (Beissinger 2005). Foundation no longer operates in Belarus, Russia, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan because of the growing C C O O hostility of those governments towards what is perceived as assistance to ‘revolutionary S S L L I I 1. All of the colour revolutions were electoral revolutions, and used the occasion of a stolen election to organisations’(Beissinger 2005). Finally, some analysts doubt that in the long term these revolutions will V V I I C C organise mass protests led by a coalition of civil organisations. For example, the Orange Revolution’s central influence the process of democratisation significantly. D D N N civic organisation was Pora, whose yellow wing - named after the colour of their symbols - formed part of the Before the national elections in Kazakhstan, President Nursultan Nazarbaev criticised Western interference A A N N Freedom of Choice Coalition, which was active in election monitoring. This coalition organised massive through NGOs: O O I I T protests in cities across Ukraine; the largest, in Kiev's Independence Square, attracted an estimated 500,000 T O They [parliament] have seen the dangers that arose in neighbouring countries when foreign N.G.O.s insolently O M M participants, which was unprecedented. O O pumped in money and destabilized society. The state was defenceless against this. (Karajkov 2005:1) R R P P Y Y C 2. The financial support of foreign donors and mainly American NGOs was critical to the emergence of local A Russian law passed in 2006 portrays ‘NGOs as imported, unnatural, un-Russian implants’ (Kuzio 2006: 12). C A A R democratic movements (Wilson 2006). Through the democracy promotion programmes in Ukraine prior to the In 2006, Kazakhstan modified its law on NGOs to control their activities and require consent for foreign R C C O Orange revolution, the United States spent an estimated $65 million, which was channelled mainly through financing (Wilson 2006). Similar legislation and regime propaganda is also evident in Belarus. The increasing O M M E E D D foreign NGOs to Ukrainian NGOs and social movements (Beissinger 2005). In Georgia, the local branch of the isolation of authoritarian regimes and the greater oppression of civil society organisations offers little chance

18 19 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page20

20 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY Am le we w S di s re Zs for no fav i ‘R tra mp up h h d s g os H F ó me e ou re ns s i i a ch in fi a ch to p ow ev e va ac t me ati y ort s fo r al r fu nc uk rd R dr Far u s w of , ly, n of e fac ccess ma na lat as for am o vo d ( the k 2004) f s r ed t dz tion as , ur h , lu t Wes e om rais t atic oth io n e ign e; e do e fu io n’, co lour p e xe an ed an s. te er l os t th me t r su c he dem c egim r d r e s A d u n wit itic grad pp b y stical s t m ar w co as ed iv co w J ort r ho o ere s or gue e, ev on e st er unt crat uate ar e ut c and e ol ly es of will hang no gu r o ries . th m ut efor fo isat n o The sa ys: st t e at or io n reign rg inc p hav e ins t ud neit ub l e e ion ms. an anising unl s r m (J e co e d ig o ic nt ‘ her ased ajor An d es ones in sup lit n ncerned ated Af NG r i s t d el a n t ter le he em ocracy it t por t Os NG he ha s the here y accountability ef 2006). ti ons from reg the of Os fect t was goa . protes th th Beissinger with io is rev ol an d e ra e ls ab n. ( In crucia a Wilson Ro se fo th n road. bu ildi ng genuin tr Develop m the t reign or e u anspar i r tion, n th th an l, Revol Rose Kie v’ s of 2006). e bu financ (2006), e change outc t r t dom he ency ge e ut t Re ent ma in hat ce nu i io n ome ad More e volu est ntr al a He of mini we the ne s t o s L ic i t ve rd ti o nclud he nt ov e SE to de se o f mas squar st r n (2005) t on be mo c he th e g rati rev r, pe ov e ing m s t s co o olut raini on, la s ee n e rati m ple ost r lo nmen an w new ov e t ur ions did as c . ng t d did of wo ch a men re oth e con the n and t, quiva no vol em ot y ng e?’ ers rem ea rs t sti t orig uti l er ead m agai e tut lent xpe agre ons ged ov al ain tran inal (2 006: ion to nst ct te to wer e from of radi nanc al sf orm prote the t an US hat t am e he 7) . cal au res r dom e. $3.8 ev o st the endm old ed Th thori Ac ign cam e luti it s es financ cor mi lo atio taria tic el ent onary ng paign lli ding f n on, in to s ter m ial n of i n , to s o a r ap pr of f pro b e ‘ th ey (K aldo r fi t an d be ing co s 2 re gi d ac ce ha s 2004: op e Zambia, s F Co nf la ti and de m West q i pro d othe and Ho pro fact o o NGO mo dem r pr re dev el ti hear ts the mpac rg e t 0 n if ue r me in e y rate si g h T I om 0 th e f t m we a al i t r gram c m i t 4 rat th stance j c s m i t n s recogni e o ess rs US o o vations oa c pta nc ne go e of t : me civi o re fo re e o very t u ly, oping ote p ot actor s ver, i ir i crac y cracy e high gy e g n pportuni 75; h c la b t a e - ju n lt o o io nali r 1 are and r en as n io f i e n on i es l s reco 5 he s et n a n j c th me s. s g a ne ee ds are a ustif t sp e el le ch an ge fro 9 n ng g ti ate c s te Is rarely h i the e s r f ; an al . oc y made be en how m a i ecent u a to hkani g n i of (Car ot se an c prom rs mind s s o m h a ng N an d rd. pro S b r a as a d c recei at io de m et iet f k b as nd ic s , ’ fact o a ki ng I 200 t G l d Of s US th e stic), de mo ’ a i u bu t a i e u m atio co o ( de th y s O wit mo I ( NG being O i . to rg a i pu bl Wh er po t n I tro m id e n l co ur an i o n i h s p b e ye untries i d 7: b nte rpr pr hers dem do ol og ved. A ti on rem st at oc rac y s dem wi thi ee the s h th a st-s in n o t O ou t f ub lema ke r) n t ars o as , u a k omot io b or d f div e 111 ) 2004; but c s char i e n no g n e cly e o a fo t se i v i c ea s racy n ci pr us ie he a i n o dri ains influx c f are r prog o o even r vi n t c e vi (i nc th the 2 2002: a a a h t et c s, e c rs crac has i racy q wis u also 006). l qu nd ivi m on io n a th e cas he ge ial ven s l n the Mi e ed as ue st io n i 2 Mandel I b so e d di per t n pr e bu ildi l ram t o tha d 0 y cris fu n ili is s ud i ddl e un d h 0 2 i c o s sc ours Ir i . of 0 y e c co nte t f no t c far by ty meant of by du als s r o n o d se , om ie ty 4 m a a o war cei i pro on t n i 307). t 0 pro ng Far c , he : q d d f n i v i me s t s e s 3 o hy n in d ountr i un for t onor an of ec n do e ve u l rstand E in : c 1 civ apart , m only ot i y how of w e g m t y t s pocrisy r xt 2002: 5 ast, l the h o he in y onom d osi es do s no c a 9 2 p otio ar 9 ad apt, from on . i ave r ext oti de o o l ti way on an d i of Thes ) ( ’ c t ai such c n rs ) c ng Iraq vali e hat so io un ate an d s , c 1 has soc on mo it i the th e ai o o er a n d s d t e n e r t on 990s as n af fec ted wi th r m s be hav f e 286; i c ‘ th ic d as appe ars to pr ivatel (C n . is di fu ndi m ha ve y e havi ng crac ie fla a i ma ni e s n o i t i n i The a ‘p e , dem ab l i v a ‘g o pr c has ty a ide Albani i as e cti po uch nc o nce t lly at ly, e h t g a , s lichows y ro t a po tent oj e ou Obadar negat ed o f cre of s v ld rtr ay n as orm y cor i ng s i c o s fiteers i si le -c u an actor s’ ex ou r o un ters ties nti pu late d r d ig n t ‘g ct i r t cracy ai sed y mo ru s n ating r al he s lo n v w a rupt the y w pos i iven that s ves. an an d an d nc e i ve al t gn i the le yt e cal v ive it h on all ia l re fo to to a of of h’ i in ki l n n h d d e e e - t l ’ de The r c hand’ re fr pr Re ma i th que d ‘to th S S s ge as hi US gr mi i th de ex Ch ‘f Al G Ara de pr s us to m n t u m e ree UM A o hraib om m anda r ol ese ey ese th voluti om owing om S movem de mo cap th r so br o ga i Increa t s i c i t i pp ort ed mo tt i s mo V p v periali litary voluti avez’s raor ny uc h b ie t cr i en ezue ha ving stion ough (G ng wi in o percei i do co ns eate n th ni ng ug ht a, oti oti it ali in cracy cracy c wor form t TE i be s r re in din th n he at state s. t ra di egimes wn o crat d m cr i he on on Pa ri d on rule t and singl y vo t fr n quest s sm nary he sm . in he ent s t th e au id e (J at c ld om i ab ti cis o t kistan fi luti c ont r la ved t e (Be C i a he of is a and o he be e all me on n of pr i ’ rs t n a t pro r time way col n s pp r old r ou t in o ho 200 5; o (R as d , hav e G Sov t omo on r (K a NE D i ti on utco rend i is ioning he ms Fo e ob jec Pr a s d e t nte rna l ol G uant anamo o pres ritarian the n ob in P Up ) he moti w li t nd uppor t oa che ve c si civ by eorgia) un derm War, s, ur s ino chet t es r olour ere o i ld or e e and hat f , et n c p e c s l ver are me s ti orme t co r li mi p o in sta nc il ke epi ma al reat ger rev ol hes e wh o id e or de e tion so an d i on. ence in s ti ve s o ntensi s unt legat e so anti- n of m tates ar wher n human po pul s’ ss no e Eg nt ti i Ve ne po 20 ng ed o , m s i c i t poli a an d e c 2006; rev ol n e r r US AI and t is ng ut ri f ’s in ing t to cri iety h n de mo bo x g ypt, o li t an Hu go o 03: o de Sovie es bad io ar li mi Co e t ions e, ptimis on Chile fi f any e f wi t ‘fri at c ica l a ar tics zu ela, d fo ns ed G mo cr guments US mo ies the r Bay utio t that v mmuni l US D, tribute i aid he as e i fr i id rei righ io nd in endl ted 4.4 ). h nteg ra mov 5 au t see cra nam m c t has of , 2 af fai rs t lat tend as e h Ch ave de o is w ive gn o t , n ). s t th e w m US us a su ppo nd lier a n ac y exper hey he nti are ti s to tates. ts ere i i em ents io y ng e e mo c nte de s wh ich are 2 a w n box s po pu (that e’ e als To the ll Wi l 00 m ns ha at s st Iraq ti o the becam tyra nt ‘ to behind s s of s do day i rvent as r be io . (Halperi e 5 tr ug cr i z tha gno hadowy o ole th s c d u n and racy li am ience in rt ) dd ling igno 4.3). co n ter ms l tort i Four an d n a de mocra ginni ‘ ar at ntensifi i art be d or de di c is nt movem en uthoriti ha s t d Brazi fo mp re f gle l e d s’ th rect or pu rpos aim , e ma ionis de o de c e part t re ur r icu p r d he d lined Ame Follo t e Ro g re a r c o m s romo ti by ro ng a mo cr he th in years mocracy e becaus rec y loba l n a s wi in s late s ive’ do g l pl acin g fo rme mising cynical ome doub e be bi nson m r e i c e u c n unde 2006). of th about Saudi es to olour e rican Rose ri ti d cy wh at iding NG O wing n e i ive Abu ac and and and o ts ot the the th e the on on su be cs yc by of of i l y n d e e r r 21 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 22

democracy promotion efforts and feeding into the important not to deny the agency of civil society actors Box 4.4: Súmate (Join Up): promoting and defending democracy in Venezuela emerging backlash against civil society and around the world for challenging hegemonic democracy promotion. discourses and powerful actors, as well as contesting Súmate (Join Up) is a private non-profit association, founded by opposition activists, Alejandro Plaz and María Corina oppressive regimes. Machado, and a group of Venezuelan citizens in 2002, with the objective of promoting individual liberty and the free Conclusion As the development of civil society and, indeed, exercise of citizen’s constitutional rights. Today, the organisation has more than 30,000 volunteers. ‘Democracy is not instant coffee’ stated Benita democracy is no longer solely restricted to national Plaz and Machado were employed in the private sector until they founded Súmate, Plaz was a senior partner for Ferrerro-Waldner, the European Commissioner for boundaries, outside actors, be they foreign donors, McKinsey & Company in Latin America, and Machado worked for a car parts manufacturer (National Review Online 2006). External Relations and ENP in a recent speech (2006). diasporic networks or global civil society activists, According to Golinger (2005), Súmate’s mission is to ‘promote a recall referendum against President Chávez,, a Her comment represents the pragmatic attitude that cannot be excluded from the equation. Global actors participatory instrument introduced in Venezuela’s Constitution of 1999, with the support of the Chávez government. has replaced the euphoria and optimism of the early are implicated in and shape national/local processes However, Súmate describes its mission as being to ‘…promote, defend, facilitate and support the complete exercise 1990s. After nearly two decades of democracy in a multitude of ways, including providing financial of political rights the Venezuelan Constitution grants to every one of its citizens’ (Súmate URL). Its stated goals and promotion, donors remain committed to civil society assistance, training, and supporting exchanges and values are: strengthening, but they are re-evaluating their earlier education abroad. Actually existing global civil society • The guarantee of civil and political freedom and rights approaches and formulating new strategies. In this is complex and contradictory (Kaldor et al. 2007: 119); • Impartial and independent citizen participation in democratic processes period of reckoning, we are faced with questions of it can contribute to peace, stability and justice just as • Professional volunteerism with a high level of citizen participation how and whether democracy should be promoted it can foment conflict, instability and exclusion. While • Organisational transparency and efficacy through externally funded programmes. Is continued some global civil society actors (such as NGOs) are Súmate has engaged in a number of activities in its effort to promote and defend democracy in Venezuela, civil society strengthening the way forward? What engaged in democracy promotion through civil society including the collection and processing of signatures for the recall referendum; the collection and processing of the about support to state actors? Or political parties? strengthening programmes, this is not the most signatures for a constitutional amendment; and the design, planning and coordination of the Firmazo (the Big The results of democracy promotion thus far have important contribution of global civil society. The Signing) of February 2003. In addition, Súmate runs several projects that include the consolidation of the national been varied. Indeed, democracy has been greatest contribution of global civil society is its web of volunteers, the diagnosis and analysis of the permanent national electoral registry, the planning and (re)established in many countries. Moreover, if we potential to enhance communication by creating execution of the parallel manual counting of the votes to strengthen transparency and trust in electoral processes, consider the spread of formal or procedural ‘islands of engagement’ (Kaldor 2003: 160), where and educational projects implemented through its numerous volunteers (Súmate 2004). democracies, then democracy promotion programmes diverse actors will find opportunities for discussion, Because of Súmate’s open objections to the many steps President Hugo Chávez has taken to consolidate his power, the organisation has been described as an ‘enemy of the people’ by the Venezuelan government (O’Grady can be and are deemed a success. 9 However, if we participation and debate. If global civil society can do 2005). Both founders, Plaz and Machado, are being accused of a conspiracy ‘to alter the Republican order’ under the consider the development and spread of substantive this and also encourage greater self-reflection by Venezuelan Penal Code, and are currently awaiting trial. Other active members, such as Luis Enrique Palacios and democracies, then it is clear that donor-supported Northern actors about the state of their own Ricardo Estévez, face the same charges, but as accomplices. The Prosecutor Ortega Díaz has requested the democracy promotion and civil society strengthening democracy (and not only discussions about the status maximum penalty for the crime of conspiracy, which is 16 years. programmes have not met with great success of democracy in the South), then it will go a long way Critics argue that Súmate is not an impartial organisation, even though Súmate describes itself as a civil because, although the mechanisms and institutions in revitalising and reinvigorating democracy and of association that is not concerned with who governs but rather with safeguarding democracy in Venezuela. The have been created, we are not witnessing greater civic course, civil society. criticism surrounding Súmate stems largely from the perception that it is funded and influenced by foreign actors. participation, engagement and inclusion. It is not The conspiracy charge mentioned above, for instance, is linked to the grant received by the US National Endowment uncommon to hear about ‘virtual’ and ‘managed’ Acknowledgements for Democracy (NED). In September 2003, Súmate signed a contract with the NED for a US$53,400 grant for the democracies. In many instances donor civil society The author would like to thank Martin Albrow, Marlies implementation of a programme of non-partisan elections education. However, only $31,000 was used by the strengthening programmes, while leading to the Glasius, Mary Kaldor and Hakan Seckinelgin for their organisation to develop its educational project and the rest of the grant was returned to the NED. (O’Grady 2005). In addition to the NED grant, Súmate has also received funds from the German Konrad Adenauer Foundation, exponential growth of NGOs, have also thwarted useful comments and suggestions on previous drafts Y

T USAID and the Canadian Embassy (interview with Súmate 2007).1 The USAID grant was part of the agency’s E

I natural political processes and imposed a particular of this chapter.

C programme, launched in August 2002, to provide assistance to maintain democratic stability and strengthen

O model of democracy and civil society. This tendency S Venezuela’s fragile democratic institutions (USAID/OTI 2006). L I has led to an ‘abortion of local processes of change’ Súmate’s director, Alejandro Plaz, says that only 5% of the organisation’s total funding comes directly from foreign V

I 9 C (Hann 2004: 46) and tamed social movements (Kaldor For instance, a recent USAID-commissioned study, ‘Effects entities. In an interview held in May 2007, he said:

D of U.S. Foreign Assistance on Democracy Building: Results

N 2003). Some even suggest that donor civil society

A of a Cross-National Quantitative Study,’ used Freedom House Súmate’s funding comes primarily from Venezuelan citizens concerned with the current situation our country is living.

N strengthening programmes risk ‘inhibiting and and Polity IV measures to examine the impact of US

O Deposits are made through several national bank accounts the organistion owns, for as little as $1, if desired, by any I

T ultimately destroying the most important purposes of democracy promotion programmes worldwide. As one of the

O one who wishes. authors of the study said, ‘We found that when the United M civil society … the freedom to imagine that the world O States spends money to promote democracy in foreign R could be different’ (Howell and Pearce 2002: 237). Aside from the arguments about foreign funding, critics point to the relationship between Súmate’s leaders and the Bush P countries, it works’ (Finkel et. al. 2006). The authors of the

Y administration. For example, a meeting between Machado and President Bush in the White House in 2005, caused an outcry

C These concerns, however, are only part of the story. report attribute the growth of democracy to US assistance A and write, ‘USAID Democracy and Governance obligations and criticism from the government in Caracas. Venezuela’s foreign minister, Alí Rodríguez Araque, called the meeting ‘a R The reality is far more complex because, in spite of the C have a significant positive impact on democracy, while all provocation’, and the interior minister, Jesse Chacón, called Machado ‘a puppet of the CIA’, continuing the heated rhetoric O taming, co-optation, and backlash, there is still much M other US and non-US assistance variables are statistically that has characterised the relationship between the Bush administration and Venezuela’s president (Ceaser 2005). E

D emancipatory potential left in civil society and it is insignificant’ (Finkel et al. 2006: 83, emphasis added).

22 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page24

24 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY int wit int reg u pro Ma reg u an pro a El same ha ci pr o Acco r dra me a Pe a or g wh A vi c ect pro testor Hu gu Ven The go st r he l Sú d ve en er ich hhol le nue l an vi c mote w rce R es n ri ve l l n ar de o o ma t de p at at not di the iz ezu us si ght ra ation ng p a th Ven rn men ses la pr or or at ng d er d se 200 et t det l for ei e , e de mo ote de be io s fu y y t el Pla cen lin CN pa a o ez Ve e to demonstrates expe (in board body, ns al an a 2). n nd a mocr a e spon e ct La be iled r ’s uela ne gn za, n tage Am E) t leg a t con d s b to ervi e I in th cr ac tion Na tr f etw e z p ri b is gov ue te is an p e an nest inf c ro v as n i sor en trib lle . t n os ti ar ry lat rf er b o int cy S la ie d of onal s w ormat e er nm i NGO ad ce is tgr as en choen fi e p : (2 d s n i ere uti y (John son on. l wi m ar i p en c donor di t o ar 00 e on ou go i I er owe adua ll nte rn against p ns ons ocracy ent d th ti st A e us rom 6 is Ve ve en t t on e. ion and ss d t s ), b Súmat e h thei for onat tr ate s rs, rnme n ui p nezue l an and Th e to Ch air e aid te to i ar t at i oti nt is lt mb on g d f cont r is President r , whic ci re st ove c on 2 er v on ng m i Súm l ri of s leg ons f vi omp y 00 la w’s d ly ude a e ght ed th e l onat al, f i a t of en t a the rnm un d r, de 5 and app itima soc 2 h oll h . s ). d would 00 at e s nt Tr anspa ren cy st l as Pr ol i Thi moc futh er li yi io pe e exce ssi ve of re io ed ng r ie a 7) ent’s ng d Hugo fair es in d ns, oved willin ti te ns rt ine nt s point s fer ty so cie ty . b ng f rac by ide in MS ou nda ti ‘ wi y ag wor k, group s. req en ag e and e t comp l an ot her ’s o Chavez th that le in t nt he a y enc gly c w du cti ui and pre limi nd as, NG ex is er nat ional out, n C an d donors. re in go v m, re pl y ons. há su the on c gu lat i ge ner al Os rit i for e cat al foreign ting Ins In te rn ve ch ernm ent. ‘I dg was of o eria . l V an d t f z an nary int ernat ional h ten es loc enezu el ed te ad Súmat wor in t f ‘ re in on c mu T d set ivil the k al er nal ed om to he at ional , in fl It , c D k in s wo u int w it draf ont st of c evel c u i code up Venezuel ou l s ue nces; ivic wa oul is s e p by In de ‘p te f t Pr NED, bas al Cor t im be & mo acc par whe ti tut ions erv They re u r h h an ld en tious u ho : om beli ev r l t t af fa irs, r sing e e wi Th Gol e B d fe sp l nd s p opme ue e omot fre e d N m i V n NGO ention ti u org un d s do e e ld o r V P e Nati onal r be a at en th st and i ED ci i rat also d e n e v in ea e e se to rl d r t ’ al i of e a b ct m a n rp ed h e ates: n p c e do m r C an ( a e anisa t s r s a hi nd lon er min a t d Am s oop si ec g so e e, e ate es n i t t z i an d art as a transpar enc nt, in an n th th on l at er i zu t t sepa with t u an d t d issue s u wi n aw N n ax th us h giv al g he th n g on e C e si bel p e e that g e d d ne e er A ’ a e eration’ a ere d th ed to g ( d l n L l on h , e ve w 2 an a t l l rig e re s l sov hi b U p ov wi re t SE e a ions e i aws. p áv s 0 Ele domestic L n s on ieve R , ration C anks, E i cle ar s r a n le money S s r t ty fe by 0 br each ing o th o s u d om th t fr f ernm pe ak ht th h u e e the e e er A h . 5 er eig nty c , 5 ct h g a m r for p d nt ro aud’ ctoral z c Internat io oug em ) I i ad i 9 en n l ov inte rnatio at D , u e i s o pro a se io to ot the and ct s % R e pe ow Dem nd wi f b m electoral ta i e would d ernm li nks n r du civi l (Gol th egis t nh e ion l non-gov ernmenta of o reg iste r ent y b h s i b ‘ i an t v p (2 d t t u can N (Ba u r to h as e at y es ional isions Venezuel an 2 m in e ai (PS er wi m t powe 00 Council C O’ 0 aff airs? , oc s th t go vern of i e, Un ic g c soci e would ng 04 he an d to há ent u electoral ere d t ro be the ent to h auses 5 ni it s hi e Inst v rat B), lt have ri g a ut na ) el ot ) ne io er org na ve ng ca s n . Ve g g th e c ly rs, r , il sover eign ty? d simil a A pr n i e, ra oal on V h na tiona lism as l ecall s z in c t i Súm l i ty us 2006). n g 2004). t n enezuel he a s ts an h 20 04). i f o ment ut oces ses hu n w nt Inst or m ez an roups ing cl ( an o full US wh b ex . org a legal p that Co e o of i w A e, s s T onit or se ud art cons u ma n d u a o u i e ate and he st ate e r in el nsej o ic t r i f t ld f p gove rnm ent b t rve ef gu e dis r d e r he a p ut is h to t om r an de oth ni sa tion woul eferendu m donors ve d he nd erendu m ematur ely ro o h enti ties lo woul an tit st an was e S l creti on rs l rights othe i t n f pen those l m l os he human go unde r úm u an e does and utional t re U entitie s Na b 2 t o nding ac co governmen d h (H owel l 00 y of Wh ere e wi SAID ve d s d r op de spec ou at r cion P es ta t t u es b 4 ci . n r cont rol rn have neve r the s en ld democratic y e e tr eaties i n in gh Ac ni not c with v ul w to ra t Chávez see 2 me t il p ti agains n al from n no rights as if 0% an blish right Uz ts cording judi ciary e on does against s th financ , g is su e ical does e r posse ss oc n t Sc t an d ki ng so d we b b o e s a , wi t t e y ie all f ho US (d ly new n s t unds the k re a th ty , h it ne t e of one ed e or ou t t e o n t l to , o (cons ulted http://news.bbc.c o.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/world/eurBB Cope/5172794.stm Amnesty Beiss inger, Baro ne, Abramson, REFERENCES Amchuk, Bayart, Berg, Adamson, Berman, Bermeo, Biden, Bobbio, Brzezinski, en&of=ENG -VE N http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENG AMR530012004?op December www2.pravda.com.ua/archive/?41222-1-new milliono v Cambridge Chabal Democracy amerikanskikh (cons ulted 08 20.htm http://www.usnews. com/usnews/ opinion/baroneweb/mb_04Report. The Beiss inger, (cons ulted http://www.diss entmagazine.o rg/articl e/ ?article= 155Revo lutio n Society Pow er Outside?’ Columbia http://polisci.wisc.edu/~beissinger/beissinger .modrev.article.pdf Modular Organization in Wilson Weimar between Activism. Transition: Kathleen Organizations Boulder, Democr acy: ment060608.pdf http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/testimony/2006/BidenStateRelations, Democracy Jr . Society’, Cultur e’ European Uzbekis tan (200 6) Hearing Andrea Diffusion Joseph Jean-François Norberto M and Nancy International Sheri Leonid International (ed), as Fiona Republic’, (200 4) 14 in in Political David Women’s Zbigniew CO: Baltimore, ‘Putin Mark Kuehnast griven’. Perspectives. in University 8 Nation-Building, Means Limits 19 28 2004). Larry a (200 4) John in June on University Mark Promotion’, , Les sons R Sarah June. Political (1997) Construtive 58(3): Rowman and Eastern of June March and B in (2004) (2006) Non-Governmental ‘Exit M R (1988) deneg. rebuffs Bulldozer/ Ro se/Orange/Tulip (2002) (consulted Uzbekistan’, Keane 20 07). Diamond of (200 6) Phenomena: (1999) (cons ulted R ‘Two to Nor d, Kyrgyzstan: (2002) Info rmal World E 240–50. ‘Civil 20 07) NGOs: (eds), (200 5) polls (198 6) Report MD: from an Press. Domination Center Mendelson 20 07). ‘Aleksandr ‘Statement Europe ‘Gramsci Press. Na & Worlds ‘International London: ‘col onialist’ End (ed) ‘Promoting US Philip ‘A Society Strategy?’ Johns Politics ‘The Littl efield. in Nineteen th Post-Soviet revoliutsiiu ‘Structure A Critical and ‘Civil Economic 20 (2004) Senate Venezuela’. Networks Civil in for Critical 19 and in Primacy (eds) Building Uzbekis tan’, March Apart: Mar c and Scholars May Hopkins Verso. , Carol Tretiakov: Society in and and of Society Eurasia. 49(3): Look Organizations Africa. Senator West’, Committee Dissent Democracy: Look the (2000) 20 07) F Century the Survival, John Democracy and Women The 2007). perechislili Nechemias and Plattner of 401–29. Civil Concept US in at and Press Collapse at Press. Cambridge: Example His tory Lack New 12 Africa’, U K Civil NGOs Nongovernmental News Building Human Joseph Magazine. the Society Glenn nas (consulted Europe. July. Encountering and Revo lutio ns ’. York: and on Society of (eds), Stat e: Is of ne and Assistance and and 20 & Civic Integration in of and Foreign Exporting in (eds), Civil Woodrow R. bylo World from Patrick the Civil New Biden, Before 22 The the Chandler, Carothers, Bruno, — Carter — Celichows ki, Burawoy, Cohen, Colton, Dev elopment DFID order’, (Consulted http://www.csmo nito r. c om/20 05/0 705/ p0 6s01 -woam.htmlc harges’, Learning University. (cons ulted http://www.c artercenter .org/news/ documents /doc20 23.html Foreign — March fa= view&id=1 8416 &pr og=zgp&proj=z drl,z me http://www.c arnegieendowment.o rg/publications/index.cfm?June Testimony, (cons ulted http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itdhr/0500/ijde/carothers.htm of Political Lewis Corina Ceaser, International Socialist Uncertain Local Bridger Democracy Recall Peter Growth London: Smiyuchys. Chornuhuza, Frank and Cambridge: Democracy’, President de 2000. (Eastern Vote (consulted http://www.dai.com/ work/practice_detail.php?pid=6 May http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/election.pdf (2000) (200 6) Civil (200 6) Cor doba, (urla) Managed Center 2007). on Marta Jean Timothy 20 06. Washington, Strategies Calvert Cass. and ‘Democracy ‘Responding Referendum: 20 07). Issues Machado Society Michael Affairs, Without David Chavez: and and M Thomas World. Routledge. edition). Curv e. ‘Making ‘The The After Transitions: (1999) Jerzy Hakan (200 5) 19 28 14 Alternatives VUS: US after 19 (1997) (200 5) Cultural Cambridge Frances J in Peace. O Democr acy: (eds), J. Christian June March June (200 4) Backlash of June and Senate Building March/April. Lanham: Mark (ed) Years and Washington, and Engagement’, and Polarized Communism. (200 4) Kyiv. Democracy, is ‘Trust, (1999) ‘Anti-Chávez (consulted Democracy Seckinelgin ‘Playing DC: ‘Observing Luhnow, Promotion: due 20 07). 2007). Civil to (2005) 20 07) Regional Verdery, McFaul, ‘Democratization Comprehensive Contexts. 20 07). Pine Warren of the Committee Ethnographies Brookings Scienc e ‘Civil in Inc. Aiding Strategies’, University against Voluntary Politic al Society Rowan the court Democracy (eds), Nation Tak! the D (url) Society 18 DC: Katherine Michael Russian Responses 5(1) (ed), Work the Baltimore, (eds), (2004) London: Co-operation Democracy leader in Ukrayintsi A Monitor . June in Wednesday Democracy Sur viving & Rifts ’, key Marlies Carnegie May. Venezuela Institution Decides Democra tiza tion. Association Democr acy on Press. Littlefield. for in Exploring in ‘Venezuelans Report’. focus 2007) of Foreign Elections under (2003) Promotio n in Peter Eastern Poverty Routledge. Wall (eds) Change in Bo snia: MD: Peremahayut Glasius, Post-Socialism: Abroad: Whether Eastern Endowment in on Promotio n’, fire: Street Popular Game,’ Press. Presidential Burnell (cons ulted (1999) a Relations, and (consulted Civil Johns and of Reduction’. treason Euro pe: new in María The 1999 Backlash’. Trust. The the David Society: Journal Rush Workable Europe. London: to in world Choic e Hopkins and Limits Post- Recall and Sue for 20 8 to 20 25 DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AND CIVIL SOCIETY GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 26

REFERENCES

— (urlb) ‘The Civil Society Challenge Fund’. http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1500 Scholars Press. Civil Society: Theory, History, Compariso n. Cambridge: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/funding/civilsocietyguidelines06.asp (consulted 18 June 2007) — (Forthcoming 2007) ‘En-gendering Civil Society and Cambridge University Press. (consulted 20 May 2007). Habermas, Jürgen (1992) The Structural Transformation of the Democracy-Building: the Anti-Domestic Violence Campaign Martinez-Soliman, Magdy (2006) ‘Challenges to Democracy Encarnacion, Omar (2003) ‘Beyond Civil Society: Promoting Public Sphere. Cambridge: Polity Press. in Armenia’, Social Politics , 14(4), December. Promotion’, text of speech delivered at Club of Madrid Rapid Democracy after September 11’, Orbis 47(4): 705–20. — (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Johnson, S (2005) ‘Venezuela’s New Chokehold on Civil Response Meeting, Pocantico, New York, 19 July. European Foundation for Democracy (2006) ‘The EU Approach Theory of Law and Democracy . Oxford: Polity Press. Society’, The Heritage Foundation. Mendelson, Sarah E (2002) ‘Conclusion: The Power and Limits to Democracy Promotion in External Relations: Food for Haindrava, Ivlian (2003) ‘H E L P !!’ in Centers for Pluralism – http://www.heritage.org/Research/LatinAmerica/em1005.cfm of Transnational Democracy Networks in Postcommunist Thought’. Networking for Democracy: 10 Years. Institute of Statehood (consulted 12 January 2007). Societies’ in Sarah E Mendelson and John K Glenn (eds), The http://www.democracyagenda.org/modules.php?mop=modlo and Democracy. http://www.idee.org/JournalFINAL.pdf Jones, S F (2006) ‘The Rose Revolution: A Revolution without Power and Limits of NGOs: A Critical Look at Building ad&name=Upload&file=index&op=getit&fid=15 (consulted 25 (consulted 15 June 2007). Revolutionaries?’ Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Democracy in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. New York: April 2007). Halperin, Morton H (2006) ‘Democracy Promotion as Policy: 19(1): 33–48. Columbia University Press. Ferrerro-Waldner, Benita (2006) ‘Remarks on democracy Online Debate’, Discussants Paul J Saunders and Morton H Kaldor, Mary (2003) Global Civil Society: An Answer to War. Nashi (urla) ‘Ideology – Manifesto’ promotion’ delivered at the conference, ‘Democracy Halperin. Cambridge: Polity Press. http://www.nashi.su/ideology [in Russian] (consulted 14 June Promotion: The European Way’, European Parliament’s http://www.cfr.org/publication/10784/ (consulted 20 March — Kostovicova, Denisa and Said, Yahia (2007) ‘War and Peace: 2007). Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, Brussels. 2007). The Role of Global Civil Society’, in Mary Kaldor, Martin Nashi (urlb) ‘Ideology – Sources’ http://www.alde.eu/fileadmin/images/photo_library/2006/200 Hann, Chris (2004) ‘In the Church of Civil Society’ in Marlies Albrow, Helmut Anheier and Marlies Glasius (eds), Global http://www.nashi.su/ideology/sources [in Russian] 61206_democracy_promotion/061207_benita_ferrero_speech Glasius, David Lewis and Hakan Seckinelgin (eds), Exploring Civil Society Yearbook 2006/7 . London: Sage. (consulted 14 June 2004). _on_democracy_promotion.doc.pdf (consulted 14 June 2007) Civil Society: Political and Cultural Contexts. London: Routledge. — and Vejvoda, Ivan (1997) ‘Democratisation in Central and National Endowment for Democracy (url) Finkel, Steven E, Aníbal Pérez-Liñán, Mitchell A Seligson and Hawthorne, Amy (2004) ‘Middle Eastern Democracy: Is Civil Eastern Europe’ in International Affairs , 73(1): 59–82. http://www.ned.org/about/faq.html#Is%20NED%20part%200 Dinorah Azpuru (eds) (2006) ‘Effects of US Foreign Society the Answer?’ Carnegie Papers Middle East Series. Karajkov R (2005) ‘ NGO Bashing ’, Worldpress.org. f%20the%20U.S.%20Government (consulted 20 May 2007). Assistance on Democracy Building: Results of a Cross- Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International http://www.worldpress.org/Europe/2178.cfm Newman, Edward and Roland Rich (2004) The UN Role in National Quantitative Study’. Peace. Keck, Margaret and Sikkink, Kathryn (1998) Activists Beyond Promoting Democracy: Between Ideals and Reality. Tokyo: http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/democracy_and_governance Helms, Elissa (2003) ‘Women as Agents of Ethnic Borders : Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, United Nations University Press. /publications/pdfs/impact_of_democracy_assistance.pdf Reconciliation? Women’s NGOs and International NY: Cornell University Press Nodia, Ghia (2002) ‘How Different are Postcommunist (consulted 28 March 2007). Intervention in Postwar Bosnia–Herzegovina’, Women’s Kedourie, Elie (1992) Democracy and Arab Political Culture. Transitions?’ in Larry Diamond and Marc F Plattner (eds), Freizer, Sabine (2004) ‘Central Asian Fragmented Civil Society: Studies International Forum, 26(1): 15–34. Washington, DC: Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Democracy after Communism. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Communal and Neoliberal Forms in Tajikistan and Hemment, Julie (2004) ‘The Riddle of the Third Sector: Civil Kimmage, Daniel (2006) ‘Kazakhstan: ‘Sovereign Democracy’ University Press. Uzbekistan’ in Marlies Glasius, David Lewis and Hakan Society, International Aid, and NGOs in Russia’, in Almaty and Moscow. Obadare, Ebenezer (2004) ‘Civil Society in West Africa: Between Seckinelgin (eds), Exploring Civil Society: Political and Cultural Anthropological Quarterly 77(2): 215–41. http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/07/6129be69-8044- Discourse and Reality’ in Marlies Glasius, David Lewis and Contexts London: Routledge. Henderson, Sarah L (2003) Building Democracy in Contemporary 4ead-a401-3ac4d549a134.html (consulted 14 June 2007). Hakan Seckinelgin (eds), Exploring Civil Society: Political and Garton Ash, Timothy (2004) ‘The $65m question: when, how – Russia: Western Support for Grassroots Organizations. Ithaca, Konovalova, Evgeniya (2007) ‘Reactionary Revolutionaries’ in Cultural Contexts. London: Routledge. and where – should we promote democracy? First we need NY: Cornell University Press. Transitions Online, 11 May 2007. Olson, Lara (2001) ‘Women and NGOs: Views from Conflict the facts’, The Guardian , 16 December. Herd, G P (2005) ‘Colorful Revolutions and the CIS: http://www.tol.cz/look/TOL/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPubli Areas in the Caucasus’, New Bridges to Peace Occasional Gaventa, John (2006) ‘Triumph, Deficit or Contestation@ “Manufactured” versus “Managed” Democracy?’ Problems cation=4&NrIssue=217&NrSection=3&NrArticle=18717 Papers. Washington, DC: Women in International Security. Deepening the ‘Deepening Democracy’ Debate’. of Post-Communism, 52(2): 3-18. (consulted 14 June 2007). O'Grady, M (2005) ‘A Young Defender of Democracy Faces http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/information/WP264Summa Herzfeld, Michael (2001) Anthropology: Theoretical Practice in Kopstein, Jeffrey (2006) ‘The Transatlantic Divide over Chávez’s Wrath’, Wall Street Journal. (Consulted 19 June 2007) ry.pdf July (consulted 28 March 207. Culture and Society. London: Blackwell. Democracy Promotion’, Washington Quarterly , 29(2): 85–98. http://www.hacer.org/current/Vene009.php (consulted 18 Gellner, Ernest (1994) Conditions of Liberty: Civil Society and Its Howell, Jude and Pearce, Jenny (2002) Civil Society and Kuzio, T (2006) ‘Civil society, youth and societal mobilization in June 2007) Rivals. London: Hamish Hamilton. Development. A Critical Interrogation . Boulder, CO: Lynne democratic revolutions’, Communist and Post-Communist Planning and Development Collaborative International (url) Gershman, Carl and Allen, Michael (2006) ‘The Assault on Rienner. Studies, 39(3): 365-386. http://www.padco.aecom.com/MarketsAndServices/38/56/in Democracy Assistance’, Journal of Democracy , 17(2): 36–51. Howell Jude, Ishkanian, Armine, Obadare, Ebenezer, Lukas, C (2006) ‘Women the World Should Know’, National dex.jsp (consulted 14 June 2007). Gillespie, Richard and Youngs, Richard (2002) ‘Themes in Seckinelgin, Hakan and Glasius Marlies (2007) ‘The Review Online. 8 March. Ottaway, Marina and Carothers, Thomas (2000) Funding Virtue: European Democracy Promotion’ Democratization , 9(1): 1–16. Backlash against Civil Society in the Wake of the Long War http://www.nationalreview.com/symposium/symposium2006 Civil Society Aid and Democracy Promotion. Washington, DC: Y Y T T Ghodsee, Kristen (2004) ‘Feminism-by-Design: Emerging on Terror’, Civil Society Working Paper 26 , Centre for Civil 03080944.asp Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. E E I I C C Capitalisms, Cultural Feminism and Women’s Society, London School of Economics. (consulted 20 June 2007). Palmer, Mark (2006) ‘Promotion of Democracy by O O S S Nongovernmental Organizations in Post-Socialist Eastern http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/pdf/CSWP/CCS_WP_H McFaul, Michael (2002) ‘A Mixed Record, an Uncertain Future’, in Nongovernmental Organizations: An Action Agenda’, L L I I Europe’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society , owell_26.pdf (consulted 14 June 2007). Larry Diamond and Marc F Plattner (eds), Democracy after Testimony. US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, June 8. V V I I C C 29(3): 727–53. Ishkanian, Armine (2003). ‘Is the Personal Political? How Communism. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/testimony/2006/PalmerTesti D D Gindin, Jonah (2005) ‘Bush and SUMATE’, Znet. Domestic Violence Became an Issue in Armenia’s NGO — (2004) ‘Democracy Promotion as a World Value’, Washington mony060608.pdf (consulted 20 March 2007). N N A A http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=8000 Sector in the Late 1990s’, Berkeley Program in Soviet and Quarterly , 28(1): 147–63. Parekh, Bhikhu (2004) ‘Putting Civil Society in Its Place’ in N N O O (consulted 25 April 2007). Post-Soviet Studies. McMahon, Patrice C (2002) ‘International Actors and Women’s Marlies Glasius, David Lewis and Hakan Seckinelgin (eds), I I T Glasius, Marlies, David Lewis and Hakan Seckinelgin (2004) http://repositories.cdlib.org/iseees/bps/2003_03-ishk NGOs in Poland and Hungary’ in Sarah E Mendelson and Exploring Civil Society: Political and Cultural Contexts. London: T O O M M ‘Exploring Civil Society Internationally’, in Marlies Glasius, (consulted 14 June 2007). John K Glenn (eds), The Power and Limits of NGOs: A Critical Routledge. O O R R David Lewis and Hakan Seckinelgin (eds), Exploring Civil — (2004) ‘Working at the Global–Local Intersection: The Look at Building Democracy in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. Pearce, Jenny (2004) ‘Collective Action or Public Participation?: P P Y Y Society: Political and Cultural Contexts. London: Routledge. Challenges Facing Women in Armenia’s NGO Sector,’ in New York: Columbia University Press. Civil Society and the Public Sphere in Post-Transition Latin C C A A Golinger, E (2006) The Chávez Code: Cracking US Intervention in Carol Nechemias and Kathleen Kuehnast (eds), Post-Soviet Mandel, Ruth (2002) ‘Seeding Civil Society’ in C Hann (ed), America’ in Marlies Glasius, David Lewis and Hakan R R C Venezuela. Olive Branch Press: Massachusetts. Women Encountering Transition: Nation-Building, Economic Postsocialism: Ideals, Ideologies and Practices in Eurasia. Seckinelgin (eds), Exploring Civil Society: Political and Cultural C O O M M — (2005) ‘The Sumate Case: How the NED violates sovereignty Survival, and Civic Activism. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins London: Routledge. Contexts. London: Routledge. E E D D and self-determination in Venezuela.’ Press and Woodrow Wilson International Center for Mardin, Serif (1995) ‘Civil Society and Islam’ in J A Hall (ed) Perez-Diaz, Victor (1993) The Return of Civil Society: the

26 27 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 28

REFERENCES

Emergence of Democratic Spain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard — Who we are ( Quienes somos ) Next? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. University Press. http://web.sumate.org/quienes_somos.asp Wedel, Janine R (2001) Collision and Collusion: The Strange Putnam, Robert (1994) Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions (consulted 22 April 2007). Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe 1989–1998. New York: in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency St. Martin’s Press. Richter, James (2002) ‘Evaluating Western Assistance to (SIDA) (1997) Justice and Peace: SIDA’s Programme for Weffort, Francisco C (1989). Why Democracy? in Alfred Stephen Russian Women’s Organisations’ in Sarah E Mendelson and Peace, Democracy and Human Rights. (ed) Democratizing Brazil: Problems of Transition and John K Glenn (eds), The Power and Limits of NGOs: A Critical http://www.sida.se/shared/jsp/download.jsp?f=Part+1+Justic Consolidation. New York: Oxford University Press. Look at Building Democracy in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. ePeace97.pdf&a=2085 (consulted 20 May 2007). Westminster Foundation for Democracy (url) New York: Columbia University Press. Thompson, Mark R (2001) ‘Whatever Happened to ‘Asian http://www.wfd.org/pages/home.aspx?i_PageID=1811 Rieff, David (1999) ‘Civil Society and the Future of the Nation- Values’?’ Journal of Democracy , 12(4): 154–65. (consulted 20 May 2007). State’, The Nation. 22 February: 11–16. Tobias, Randall L (2007) Democracy and the New Approach to Whewhell, Tim (2006) ‘The Kremlin’s New Commissars’, BBC Rieffer, Barbara Ann J and Mercer, Kristan (2005) ‘US US Foreign Assistance. Newsnight , 12 July. Democracy Promotion: The Clinton and Bush http://www.usaid.gov/press/speeches/2007/sp070117.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/5169610. Administrations’ Global Society , 19(4): 385–408. (consulted 20 March 2007). stm Robinson, William and Gindin, Jonah (2005) ‘The United States, Tohidi, Nayereh (2004) ‘Women, Building Civil Society, and (consulted 14 June 2007). Venezuela, and ‘Democracy Promotion’: William I Robinson Democratizationin Post-Soviet Azerbaijan’ in Carol White, Gordon (2004) ‘Civil Society, Democratization and interviewed. Open Democracy 4 August. Nechemias and Kathleen Kuehnast (eds), Post-Soviet Women Development: Clearing the Analytical Ground’ in Peter http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy- Encountering Transition: Nation-Building, Economic Survival, Burnell and Peter Calvert (eds), Civil Society in protest/venezuala_2730.jsp (consulted 28 March 2007). and Civic Activism. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press and Democratization. London: Frank Cass. Romanov, Pyotr (2006) ‘G 8 and Sovereign Democracy’, Ria Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Press. Whitmore, Brian (2007) ’Russia: Culture of Fear Back with a Novosti 17 July. Transparency International (2006) ‘Unrestricted civil society is Vengeance’, 1 June. http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20060717/51480097.html critical to fight against corruption’, press release. http://www.rferl.org/features/features_Article.aspx?m=06&y (consulted 14 June 2007). Berlin/Caracas. =2007&id=A391FBA0-7C40-413A-8E25-5AF107BA4F18 Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, Stephens, Eveyln and Stephens, John http://www.transparency.org/news_room/latest_news/press (consulted 14 June 2007). (eds) (1992) Capitalist Devleopment and Democracy. Chicago, _releases/2006/2006_07_26venezuela_ngo_freedom Wild, Leni (2006) ‘The Darker Side of Global Civil Society’, Open IL: University of Chicago Press. (consulted 19 June 2007). Democracy , 3 April. Sajoo, Amyn B (2002) ‘Introduction: Civic Quests and Bequests’ UN Democracy Fund (UDEF) (url) Brochure http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy- in Amyn B Sajoo (ed), Civil Society in the Muslim World. http://www.un.org/democracyfund/Docs/UNDEF_brochure.p think_tank/civil_society_3413.jsp (consulted 25 April 2007). London: IB Tauris and Institute of Ismaili Studies. df (consulted 25 April 2007). Wilson, A (2006)‘Ukraine’s Orange Revolution, NGOs and the Saidazimova, Gulnoza (2006) ‘Uzbekistan: New Pro-Russian USAID/OTI (2006) ‘Venezuela Field Report’, April-June. Role of the West’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs , Youth Movement Launched’, 14 July. http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/crosscutting_programs/tran 19(1): 21-32. http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/07/271b4fea-f527- sition_initiatives/country/venezuela/rpt0307.html (consulted Women and NGOs: Views from Conflict Areas in the Caucasus’, 4638-8467-a52f0c730838.html (consulted 14 June 2007). 13 January 2007). New Bridges to Peace Occasional Papers. Washington, DC: Salamon, Lester M, and Anheier, Helmut K (1997) Defining the USAID (1999) Lessons in Implementation: The NGO Story – Women in International Security. Nonprofit Sector: A Cross-national Analysis. Manchester: Building Civil Society in Central and Eastern Europe and the Yablokova, O (2004) ‘Youthful Pora Charges Up the People’, Manchester University Press. New Independent States. Washington, DC: USAID. Moscow Times . December. Sampson, Steven (2002) ‘Beyond Transition: Rethinking Elite USAID (2002) United States Assistance to Armenia, USAID Youngs, Richard (2006) Survey of European Democracy Configurations in the Balkans’ in C Hann (ed), Postsocialism: Mission to Armenia. Yerevan: Printinfo. Promotion Policies 2000–2006. Madrid: Fundacion Para Las Ideals, Ideologies and Practices in Eurasia. London: Routledge. USAID (2004) ‘A Year in Iraq: Building Democracy’, 28 June. Relaciones Internacionales y el Dialogo Exterior (FRIDE). Schmid, Dorothee and Braizat, Fares (2006) The Adaptation of http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/AYearInIraq_democracy.pdf EU and US Democracy Promotion Programmes to the Local (consulted 2 April 2007). Political Context in Jordan and Palestine and their Relevance to USAID (2006) ‘USAID Primer: What We Do and How We Do It’. Grand Geopolitical Designs. EuroMesco research project http://www.usaid.gov/about_usaid/PDACG100.pdf (consulted Y Y T T published by Institut français des relations internationals 20 May 2007). E E I I C C and Center for Strategic Studies. USAID (url) ‘Promoting Democracy and Good Governance’. O O S S Schumpeter, Joseph Alois (1947) Capitalism, Socialism and http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/democracy_and_governance L L I I Democracy . New York: Harper and Brothers. / (consulted 28 March 2007). V V I I C C Sen, Purna (2003) ‘Successes and Challenges: Understanding USAID (2002) Mission to Armenia, Press Release on USAID D D the Global Movement to End Violence Against Women’ in Grants Program to Help Victims of Domestic Violence, N N A A Mary Kaldor, Helmut Anheier and Marlies Glasius (eds), October 18, 2002 Domestic Violence. N N O O Global Civil Society Yearbook 2003 . Oxford: Oxford University http://www.usaid.gov/am/pr10_02_DV.html (consulted 20 I I T Press. May 2007). T O O M M Stojanovic, D (2004) ’Nonviolent Revolution for Export from US Senate (2006) ‘ Nongovernmental Organizations and O O R R Serbia’, Associated Press, October 31. Democracy Promotion: ‘Giving Voice to the People’ , A Report to P P Y Y Súmate (2004) ‘Preliminary report: The presidential recall the Members of the Committee on Foreign Relations United C C A A referendum’. States Senate. 22 December. R R C http://web.sumate.org/documentos/PrelimRRP1- http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_rpt/democracy.pdf C O O M M 2%20main%20text2.pdf (consulted 20 March 2007). E E D D (consulted 23 April, 2007). Verdery, Katherine (1996) What Was Socialism and What Comes

28 29 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page30

30 GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY AND ILLIBERAL REGIMES GLOB CHAPTE Deni s a AL Kost R CIVIL 5 ovi c SO ova CIETY and Ma AND ry Kaldo I L LI BERAL r RE GI ME S 31 GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY AND ILLIBERAL REGIMES GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 32

CHAPTER 6

DEEPENING DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA By substantive democracy, I mean a process, which has to be continually reproduced, for maximising the Miguel Darcy D'Oliviera opportunities for all individuals to shape their own lives and to participate in and influence debates about public decisions that affect them. (Kaldor 2008)

Democracy, to be sure, requires the respect for basic Twenty years after the transition from military might added situations of extreme tension in the political rights and civil liberties, such as a multiparty dictatorship to the rule of law, democracy is in crisis political system that did not reach the breaking point: political system, free and fair elections, freedom of in Latin America. This crisis is also raising questions Nicaragua in 2004 and 2005, when President Enrique expression and organisation. But this is what we might and forcing a reappraisal of the role played by civil Bolaños was threatened with impeachment; Honduras call a thin, or minimalist concept of democracy as society in strengthening democracy in the region. The in 2005 when authorities delayed announcing the opposed to a thick, or wider definition (Kekic 2007). manifestations and causes of this crisis, as well as winner of the presidential elections; Brazil in 2005 Democracy is more than the sum of its institutions and how to deepen democracy in order to safeguard it, are when the government of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was procedures. In a substantive sense, democracy is the focus of this chapter. undermined by a wave of political scandals; and Mexico embedded on society, nurtured and enhanced by a Supporters of Mexico's opposition candidate Lopez Obrador took in 2006 when the opposition candidate, López Obrador, vibrant civil society and a civic culture of participation, to the streets in 2006 Challenges and threats to democracy in aggressively contested in the streets the legitimacy of responsibility and debate. That is why democracy is Latin America Felipe Calderon’s election to the presidency. always a work in progress, an unfinished journey, a state-centred vision of national development, deeply From the early 1980s to the mid-1990s, Latin The recurrence and intensity of these political process rooted in the history of any given society. That ingrained in Latin American political culture and American countries led the so-called second wave of crises and risky situations indicate the fragility of is also why it cannot be imposed from the outside and institutions, came into sharp conflict with the democratisation, following southern Europe in the Latin American democracies. Latin America has is never achieved once and for all. demands of global competitive capitalism. Internal mid-1970s and preceding Eastern Europe, East Asia entered a new historical phase of crisis, inflection and So far, no Latin American country has relapsed into needs and external pressure led to a second drastic and parts of Africa in the late 1980s and 1990s. For political change. Democracy is again at the centre of dictatorship. However, the proliferation of corruption process of change: the reform of the state and the two decades the peaceful transition from the public agenda. It will be safeguarded – and this scandals and the rising levels of criminal violence opening up of closed national economies to global authoritarian to democratic rule after decades of will be my main contention in this chapter – only if it is combined with the persistence of poverty and trade, privatisation and fiscal adjustment. repressive military dictatorship and, in Central strengthened and deepened. inequality are at the root of a profound sense of Globalisation, however, is not only an economic or America, outright civil war, was deemed a success With the exceptions of Chile, Uruguay and, disconnection between people’s aspirations and the technological process. It is also a political, social and story. The only exception in the region to this surprisingly, Colombia, despite the permanent threat capacity of political institutions to respond to the cultural phenomenon. It is not only about financial democratic trend was Cuba. to political and civil liberties posed by the drug cartels demands of society. The root causes of this growing flows and goods being exchanged in the global market This is no longer the case. Over the last five years and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – political instability are to be found in the deep political, arena. Globalisation is also about information, values, democracy has been put to severe test. Since the turn People’s Army (FARC) guerrillas, there is throughout economic and social changes undertaken by Latin symbols and ideas. The modernisation of the of the century, more than a third of Latin American the region a deep and widening public disaffection vis- America over the last two decades. Every country in economy and the emergence of open, democratic countries – Paraguay (in 2000), Peru (2000), Argentina à-vis political institutions. All opinion polls the region, with the exception, again, of Cuba, societies thus represented a profound historical (2001), Venezuela (2002), Bolivia (2003 and 2005), corroborate the deficit of trust and the pervasive underwent not one, but two, radical transformations: change, both in the patterns of development and in Ecuador (2000 and 2006) – have experienced situations sense of fatigue affecting political parties, the transition from dictatorship to democracy, and the the social dynamics of Latin American countries. of acute political risk. In several cases, widespread parliaments and governments 1. Democracy, opening up of closed and stagnant economies. To be sure, in most countries, growth resumed after A A C C I I public protest led to the downfall of elected presidents. therefore, must be made to work or apathy, cynicism Democracy authorised the full expression of long the lost decade of the 1980s. Wealth, however, remained R R E E Alberto Fujimori in Peru, Fernando de la Rúa in and disenchantment will facilitate the resurgence of repressed demands for social change. For most unevenly shared. Inequality and high levels of poverty M M A A Argentina, Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada and Carlos authoritarianism under old or new disguises. countries, however, the restoration of political and persisted. Many young people live in despair, with no N N I I T T Mesa in Bolivia, and Jamil Mahuad and Lucio Gutiérrez In chapter 2 of this volume, Mary Kaldor argues for civil liberties went hand-in-hand with times of sense of future. This frustration, combined with the A A L L in Ecuador were removed from office by a combination a concept of substantive democracy as something economic and social hardship. The oil crises and huge incapacity of the political democracy to improve, quickly N N I I Y Y of social protest in the streets and political action by deeper or ‘thicker’ than formal democracy: debts of the 1980s drove national economies to the and significantly, people’s standards of living is certainly C C A A parliaments. In Paraguay the military played a key role verge of bankruptcy. The combination of rampant one of the root causes of the prevailing widespread R R C C O O in the impeachment of President Raul Cubas Grau. In inflation and economic stagnation threatened the very sense of hopelessness. The legitimacy crisis affecting M M E E Venezuela, a farcical coup d’état, promoted by military fabric of social life. political institutions has been dramatically compounded D D G G and civil sectors with US support, led to the temporary The crisis of the Latin American developmentalist by the proliferation of corruption scandals and the rising 1 N N I I A region-wide opinion poll conducted in 2006 by N N overthrow of President Hugo Chávez, who was soon model of the 1960s and 1970s, based on internal levels of criminal violence and incivility, especially in the E E Latinobarometro indicates that although 54 per cent of Latin P P reinstated, with the full support of democratic leaders markets and import substitution, coincided with the region’s large cities. Human security is at risk in Latin E E Americans believe there can be no democracy without political E E parties, only 19 per cent have any trust in political parties. D D and public opinion throughout the region. To this list sweeping changes brought about by globalisation. A America, anywhere and at any time.

32 33 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 34

anti-imperialist and anti-globalisation message but abstain from defining the utopian way towards the new society. President Chávez has resorted to the old Cuban rallying cry of Patria o muerte, venceremos (Fatherland or death, we shall overcome!) to promote his Bolivarian Revolution. In his inaugural speech in January 2007, President Rafael Correa of Ecuadomade a distinction between una época de cambios (an epoch of change) and un cambio de época (a change of epoch) to underline his radicalism. President Evo Morales’indigenismo appeals to the ethnic and cultural identities of Bolivia’s indigenous population as the foundation of his concept of a new society based on non-Western values. However, in their call for radical political, economic and social change, today’s populist leaders differ significantly from Getulio Vargas in Brazil and Juan Impunity and insecurity, combined with persistent Perón in Argentina, whose populist regimes shaped poverty and inequality, account for much of the Latin American history in the mid-twentieth century. profound sense of disconnection between people’s Enraptured by the revolutionary myth: a Venezulan supporter of Hugo Chavez dressed as Che Guevara These charismatic leaders appealed directly to the aspirations and the capacity of the political system to urban masses, ensuring their political allegiance respond to the demands of society. The democratic through an extension of the labour legislation. They already subjected to restrictions and interferences. In The forces of renewal: the rise of informed transition in Latin America created the rules and despised representative democracy, promoting the Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, mechanisms of direct and empowered citizens institutions of democracy, but in most countries redistribution of resources but not seeking to change democracy are being used to grant unlimited power to Latin America is at the threshold of a new historical respect for due process and rule of law is in danger, the prevailing social and economic order. Perón was the presidency, by-passing parliament and cycle in which the fault-lines will be defined by the at best. Mistrust of politicians, political parties, strongly anti-American, unlike Vargas, but neither undermining representative democracy. contrast between old models and new ideas, parliaments and the judiciary system is paving the ever entertained an anti-market stance. Their Populism is, however, more than just a risk to authoritarian regression and the deepening of way for the resurgence in several countries of forms reliance on an authoritarian state was more representative democracy. It is also and foremost a democracy. This is a situation fraught with risks but of authoritarian populism that were thought to be pragmatic than ideological. risk to substantive democracy. The imposition of also with challenges and opportunities. Widespread relegated to the past. Nothing is more expressive of The new populists have in common with their increasing controls by the state over society directly disaffection towards the political system coexists with this all-encompassing rejection of the political predecessors a strong reliance on mobilising the contradicts the gradual building and strengthening of the emergence of new forms of citizen participation establishment than the call – que se vayan todos (they masses against internal and external enemies, as open societies in Latin America. It also exercises a and civic culture that may well prove to be the best all must go) – that punctuated the street well as on policies of income redistribution through strong fascination over large sectors of Latin antidote to the resurgence of populism. Latin demonstrations in Argentina, leading to the overthrow social programmes. However, they do not hide their American civil society that are still enraptured by the American societies have changed drastically in the of three successive presidents in a few days. In some hostility towards the markets and political pluralism. revolutionary myth. It is important to remember that last few decades. These changes have deeply affected countries, such as Venezuela, the traditional political Populist leaders speak to people’s hearts and the dream of a radical transformation of the the relationship between civil society, the state and A A system literally fell apart. In others, the crisis of C C I I mobilise powerful symbols and emotions in response established order remains alive throughout the region democracy. NGOs and social movements were at the R R legitimacy gave rise to new actors and demands for E E to real or imaginary grievances. They build on the in social movements ranging from the neo-Zapatistas forefront of the struggle for democracy in the 1970s M M radical change. A A climate of frustration and disillusionment that makes of Subcomandante Marcos in Mexico to the Landless and 1980s. With the traditional channels of N N I I T T people think that the way to the future is a return to Peasant Movement in Brazil, not to mention the participation – political parties, unions – having been A A The resurgence of authoritarian populism L L the past – even though it is a romanticised past that, narco-guerrilleros of Colombia who still see blocked by the dictatorship, the only available N N I I The notion of populism has been used to characterise Y Y in fact, has never existed. themselves as revolutionaries. The triumphal alternative was the creation of small circles of C C the policies of countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia, A A This direct association of a charismatic leader with reception accorded to President Chávez at the fifth R R C C Ecuador, Nicaragua, and even Argentina. Many O O ‘the people’ and ‘the nation’ undermines the World Social Forum at Porto Alegre in 2005 is an 2 M M interpret the recent string of electoral victories by It is hard to equate the resurgence of populism with E E foundations of democracy. It brings with it an eloquent example of the incantatory power for non- D D charismatic leaders as a historical turn to the Left in the strengthening of the Left in Latin America. Presidents G G inevitable propensity to impose, always for the greater governmental organisations and social movements of Ricardo Lagos and Michelle Bachelet of Chile, or Tabaré N N I I Latin American politics. A core component of Latin Vázquez of Uruguay, by virtue of their personal history N N good of the people and the nation, controls by the the rhetoric of anti-Americanism and anti- E E American neo-populism is the reaffirmation of the 2 and political philosophy, stand much further to the Left than P P state over society. This is what is happening in globalisation . E E Hugo Chávez, and they clearly reject his anti-American and E E central role of the state. Its leaders vocalise a strident D D Venezuela, where civil society and the mass media are anti-globalisation rhetoric.

34 35 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 36

freedom at the community level. This kind of arena of debate and innovation, criss-crossed by the grassroots work represented a break with the Latin conflicts and controversies present in society. It cannot American tradition of looking to the state and at be appropriated by any single political project. Its most labour relations as the strategic reference point for visible face is made from organisations and political and social action. With their backs turned to movements. However, today, this organised the state, social activists have promoted an immense dimension, no longer accounts for the range and variety of local initiatives that combine the struggle for diversity of citizen action. This classical notion of civil civic rights and freedom with concrete projects to society has to be reframed and enlarged to take into improve people’s daily quality of life. This flexible, account emerging actors, processes and spaces. bottom-up approach was profoundly democratic, in so The decline in the role played by organised civil far as civil society organisations grasped emerging society as a driver of democratic change and the demands, gave a voice to new actors, empowered concomitant rise of informed and empowered communities, tested innovative solutions and individuals and networks is a significant trend that pressured governments. calls for further scrutiny. It has to do with the This is less true today, for a number of reasons that emergence of open and complex societies as well as it is very important to underline. It is citizen action that with the opportunities for participation and dialogue gives life to civil society, and citizen initiatives are as that have been opened up by the new information Citizens are increasingly expressing their identities: Quechua women march diverse as the public issues at stake and the energy of technologies. Today, ordinary people tend to be more for equal rights in Peru and transsexuals demonstrate in Mexico. those who mobilise around them. Civil society is not intelligent, rebellious and creative than in the past, in homogeneous. It is not a realm of the good, guided by so far as they are constantly called upon to make institutional politics and the dominance of everyday and taking stands, are at the root of a second pure and noble values, contrasting with the evils of the value judgments and life choices, where previously concerns in people’s lives. These profound changes that phenomenon of great significance for the strengthening state and the market. Civil society has no controlling there was only conformity to a pre-established shape contemporary societies are increasingly visible and of substantive democracy: the rising power of public or regulatory body to set action agendas or a destiny. This enhanced capacity for individuals to relevant in Latin American. What is missing is the analysis opinion to shape and influence public debate. consensus about what to do. Citizens do not ask for think, deliberate and decide is a consequence of the of the significance for democracy of this emergence of a permission to act nor do they conform to any pre- decline in the forms of authority based on religion or critical mass of informed and empowered citizens. A society less organised but more connected established hierarchy of priorities. They create their tradition. Each of us is daily confronted in our private Anthony Giddens uses the concept of ‘active trust’ to define and interactive own, constantly evolving, agenda. life with choices that are no longer dictated by a the ethos of participation and responsibility at the core of Manuel Castells was one of the first to underline the And yet, some activists see in the plurality of supreme authority nor regulated by law. the democratisation of everyday life: change represented by the transition from a public initiatives, actors and causes intrinsic to civil society a The experience of our bodies and sexuality, the sphere anchored in political institutions to a public risk of fragmentation and dispersion of energies. For decision to get married or not, to maintain the In almost all spheres of life we have moved from sphere structured around the communication system, an important segment of organised Latin American marriage or opt for separation, to have children or not passive to active trust as the main bond of social which he understood both as media and new civil society, the way to restore unity of vision and to have them, to interrupt an undesired pregnancy or cohesion. Active trust is trust that has to be won from information technologies (Castells 1996). Individuals purpose lies in a closer alignment with leaders such not to do so, to exercise the right to die with dignity – the other and others; where there is two-way increasingly elaborate their opinions and choices as Chávez, Morales or Correa, who are seen as all these questions are now open to choice. Even the negotiation rather than dependence; and where that based on they way they live and what they see. If their standard bearers of a Latin American socialism for preservation of a loving relationship requires constant trust has to be consistently renewed in a deliberate perception and experience bear no relation to the the twenty-first century. care of the other partner, who is also endowed with way. (Giddens 2007: 116) message of politicians, the inevitable outcome is A A 3 C C I I This subordination of the diversity of citizen action to desires, aspirations and the capacity to make choices growing disbelief and mistrust . R R E E the political imperatives of a uniform, state-centred of his or her own. In the past, tradition and religion Today, citizens tend to have multiple, overlapping The other aspect of this demand for accountability is M M A A strategy of radical social transformation challenges determined identities that were destinies. Today, identities and interests. Ethnic origin, age group, people’s capacity to see through and reject N N I I T T civil society’s constituent freedom and autonomy. identity is the end-result of our choices. Each religious creed, sexual orientation, and consumption demagogical gestures, empty words and promises as A A L L Citizen participation is multiple, fluid, diverse and, in a individual tries to be or to become what he or she patterns have become a more powerful source of identity false solutions to complex problems. George N N I I Y Y way, it is precisely in its lack of organisation – a really is. But, in contemporary society, to quote the than social status. We all become what we desire to be Papandreou, leader of the Panhellenic Socialist C C A A reflection of the growing complexity and fragmentation Portuguese poet Fernando Pessoa, ‘each one is by resisting whatever negates our freedom, and in the R R C C O O of contemporary societies – that its strength resides. many’. Identities are as multiple and fluid as our own incessant search to give our own life meaning. This 3 M M The global opposition to the web of lies underpinning the E E Civil society is not, nor can it be, a political party. Its repertoire of experiences and belongings. process opens up new linkages between personal life D D invasion of Iraq, and the exemplary reaction of the Spanish G G goal is not to achieve or exercise state power. Nobody Alain Touraine observes that ‘the public space is and public debate, individual freedom and collective people, who punished the government of Jose Maria Aznar for N N I I its attempt to manipulate information about the perpetrators N N speaks for civil society, nor has the power or capacity emptying at the top and filling up at the bottom’ (Touraine responsibility. The process of self-construction is E E of the Madrid terrorist attack in March 2004, are two recent P P to define who is part of it or who is excluded from it. It and Khosrokhavar 2000: 31). This formulation keenly inseparable from the dynamic of social transformation. E E and eloquent examples of the call for truth and transparency E E D D is, by its very nature, a contested political space, an grasps the double phenomenon of the withering away of Citizens capable of making up their minds, deliberating as a paramount political value.

36 37 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part 2_Issues 12/7/07 22:16 Page 38

when knowledge and information are provided about in national opinion against ratification: gun control what is at stake, when credible calls are made for was rejected by 64 per cent of the electorate. citizen participation and involvement, the popular Enlightened public opinion and political analysts were response tends to be extensive and vigorous. The stunned. On the one hand, the broad discussion surprising result of the October 2005 referendum in preceding the vote showed the untapped potential of Brazil on the prohibition of the sale of arms and the Internet in a developing country as a space for munitions can also be understood in the light of these horizontal communication and public debate. On the new forms of participation and deliberation. Concern other hand, the outcome expressed ordinary people’s with urban violence and criminality is by far the top capacity to confront arguments with their own priority in all public opinion polls. Brazil comes experience and make up their own minds about second only to Venezuela in the number of people complex and emotional issues. This example also killed by guns. Imposing legal restrictions on the demonstrates that citizens tend to be much more Brazilians responded to a creative safe sex campaign commercialisation of guns and ammunition had long creative and innovative than politicians in handling Latin Americans citizens are proving more adept than politicians in been a demand of groups concerned with human new technologies. Blogs, emails, cell phones and handling new communications technologies Movement (PASOK) in Greece, says people want a new rights and urban violence. Sensitive to pressure by the Internet sites are becoming enabling tools for a new relationship with power. As they experience a sense of media and public opinion, Congress approved type of communication: personal, participatory and gesture by the leader that, in a stroke, responds to the greater freedom and autonomy in their daily lives, they legislation severely restricting the gun trade with the interactive. Society is apparently less organised but it people’s needs. The democratic leaders will be those also want to be respected in their ability to understand provision that the law should be ratified by the people is more connected and participatory. open to dialogue and committed to harnessing the problems, to take a stand and to act (Barnett 2004). in a national referendum, scheduled for 2005. A The main hurdle to overcome in the path to energy and creativity of an informed society 4. Informed citizens no longer accept the role of passive couple of months before the vote, opinion polls substantive democracy is not, therefore, audience. They want to be actors, not spectators. They estimated popular support of ratification to be 75 per disinformation or apathy on the part of the population. Citizen participation, civic culture and want to speak and to be heard. They want the truth to cent of the electorate. The Yes campaign was backed It is politicians’ incapacity to understand, respect and substantive democracy be told to them in a straightforward way, and they want by an overwhelming majority of politicians, religious trust the capacity of the citizenry – or at least, the In complex systems, order is not imposed from the top to be sure their contribution will be taken into account. and civic leaders, opinion makers and the media. The extreme difficulty they experience in trying to do so. down by a centre of command and control. Neither Consider the case of Brazil, a country with a low outcome seemed a foregone conclusion. Latin American countries such as Brazil, Colombia, does social change occur according to uniform and level of formal education but with extended access to And yet the unexpected happened. The virtual Chile and Mexico are unjust and yet vibrant societies, pre-established strategies. Change is an ongoing information through television. There are several consensus in favor of gun control started to be marked by high levels of social mobility and new forms process that occurs simultaneously at multiple points. examples in recent history of situations in which challenged in blogs and websites. A variety of of citizen participation. The dynamism of such Personal freedom and technological innovation release citizens showed that they are fully capable of arguments opened up a process of heated discussion. societies calls for more efficient and less arrogant creative social energy. Pioneering actions, innovative understanding complex problems, evaluating Opponents denounced the approved legislation as a actions by the state, based on dialogue not monologue, experiences, exemplary projects and unexpected arguments, overcoming prejudice and coming up with false, simplistic solution to the complex, dramatic partnership not imposition, argument not empty interactions take many shapes, flow along multiple innovative answers. To the astonishment of many, problem of violence, arguing that it reduced rhetoric, and autonomy not bureaucratic centralism. pathways and radiate at great speed. These ordinary people overwhelmingly supported President government responsibility to ensure public safety. New actors, processes and tools for public debate decentralised initiatives produce an impact on the Cardoso’s Plano Real (Real Plan) of 1994, the complex Others spoke about risks to individual freedom and are making the interaction between citizens and system as a whole, generating a critical mass of new strategy to stabilise the currency and curb inflation, civic rights. Blogs and virtual communities were political institutions much more unpredictable and ideas, messages, proposals, knowledge and support that actively contributed to its success. The created overnight. Friends and colleagues shared complex. Democracies are evolving into a space for experiences. Connectors and communicators amplify A A C C I I national plan to combat the spread of HIV and AIDS emails about contrasting points of view.Ideas were collective dialogue and public deliberation. What and re-transmit these innovations in a continuous R R E E generated profound changes in mindsets and confronted in an extensive conversation that spread to matters today is not a fluid ‘will of all’, but the dynamic of experimentation, learning, feedback, M M A A patterns of behaviour, thanks to information the workplace and many households. People who participation of all concerned in the deliberation. The reorganisation and expansion. Power is moving from N N I I T T messages reaching out to all segments of the usually took stands along clear-cut lines started to legitimacy of the decision-making process will the centre to the periphery, from vertical command and A A L L population in the clearest possible language. Faced in defend conflicting opinions. With the opening up of increasingly depend on its openness and control structures to horizontal networks and N N I I Y Y 2001 with the immediate risk of acute power television prime time for both sides to argue their transparency. This transformation is a formidable collaborative platforms. Communication is, C C A A shortages, again people reacted in a surprising way by case and with mandatory voting, the debate expanded challenge to the democratic imagination. Increasing increasingly, participative, interactive and collaborative. R R C C O O voluntarily changing their energy consumption to the entire population. citizen participation and deliberation calls for a In this rapidly evolving context, the transformation M M E E patterns on a much broader scale than had been Voters listened to the arguments and evaluated radically new style of political leadership. Democracy of society is a collective process of changing D D G G requested by government policy makers. them based on their personal experience of violence is a long process of incremental change and it now mindsets, practices and structures, not the result of N N I I N N Similar examples can be found in other countries of and criminality. Citizens felt challenged to elaborate involves many actors: media, public opinion and an act of unilateral political will. The responsibility of E E P P the region. Their common message is that when and sustain their views and possibly to change their parliament. There is no longer space – even though the democratic leader is to grasp the challenges, E E E E D D leaders acknowledge the capacity of ordinary people, mind. In a matter of weeks, there was a massive shift the ardent expectation is always there – for a heroic break new ground and show the way forward. There is

38 39 GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page40

40 DEEPENING DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA 4 Ei a vi cu th un th g to wi i p ap an ci th v 200 re Me i d s i d th an con c cou an B d nte nv i al u tr n o ap ar t ee e s raz ti ea l w th e e e ey S Th t g g lt pe d d d d c o m io e that In president is dozens has const antly leader to h z d tat o r a row trib nt 1) p ra ur er f ng i v e en icip e to el i civ e n f b u never e e rd il isa t his govern e al nf r re u ry fa i v s may e ct me tu e min , i n lín to of of th if s on ncer s t o i s lu or tw u a ic t a r e i t y t i l a r at ion he political of h ng there re d he to pr start rg t to io enin d t of in en ce th of ion av e r em he t e th de moc cu gai ned om e ge n n o n. c i og to um impose en in of g wit hout p of mil li ons e ta in es e nurt ured – r c a c t le lt f lobal op ul s pol he ep res enta t almost oc ight is F all reat g ram Brazil, fut ra soc n ur and th s r e d la e ader ce con e ree do po lit ic t of p and memoirs t one ot dem k c o M ( h racy ir nt s ty e he e. itical once aradoxi e ure new e for rac ism ie without e me Lat vio r explaining st cap sp o co m of a lesson Muc de b ev and de c it t from f C and o s ruc y pr au insp the y o m at and them, len r is s . ital t c olombi in , ead system r th to rut ac fo is s u es en rac ate that, r ton is io an m Fernando h un d an t t renewed. t e scrat ch’. es e rm ce call he d n a Am ris k he negoti ati ng, for ive ive ise d it y he fi ir h, a as unic wil mo d y d ght are of o es l ns and in s wit all . learnt an d ersto nat t ted l m d . ) 2 0 0 2 y so c eric i to o r w . hr l n an d st s a st emo today’s espect new . of not th ss depend at y no th w o p m e ay, emo and H h ‘Votes In The – o persuading. r ion d iet y e on Trust Henrique io It ugh a IV at in of t c ea l va t su enough. a o in od cit t he con is iti p an n c e h f as al to g an to af f his c ra c ol r pr ccessfu reaf f th is pow no world, mo ze n ion ie civ do in isks rac r y r c and and as wi t decide as it em tr d gl esour o e h T s and ec t it eight an longer rd e e rs e p ical he on y. e il ce on bilise i izen ob A go y but e s h The t Cardoso ir mati on ac tio legit imacy of th e To th c ains elect ion, IDS of y r ss es soc political ar region e th eir not ha pter t al th e he years e h is tr sy st em. without h e ac k e p c a e l day Bog possi ble and par sit ave a p ans es s ut iety civil z i t i c ex di ine ( to n develop u imp ca de t i t c at ion o hor q sa f aft er, now ar l nb er o m a r of t (2006) as of and ive -in-h al p even ue otá leadership pare icip vitab pa ve don Oliveir o reser must ci s s n e li stening, further a rid ly society a fe ct io n citizen it of und l s, s city so cia l n re evel. s for led I ar , one ation t th f e d civ ic g i e says ncy. an an d a le on s tn u th e the the ing ian ed , f be the eir nd an g b ro ve ot t of . in d o a a e y REFERENCES Kaldor, Giddens, Barnett, Cardoso, Castells, Mockus, Kekic de Touraine, Polity Internacio nais , Project’ Monroe Desenvolvimento/Centro George Programa (consulted http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy/article_2262.jsp democracy: 2007/8 [Globalisation AIDS], of Malden, La Information de División Colombia, [Civic Tempos (cons ulted 20 07_v3. pdf http://www.eco nomist.co m/media/pdf/DEMOCRACY_ INDE X_ Oliveira, Politics]. Soi: Violencia Laza Mary Culture, Press Anthony : Antanas in Manuel Anthony Fernando Dialogue Alain Communic ative Papandreou. de Price in de MA: (200 7) Globalização, Miguel 1995–1997] das Martin Desarrollo (200 8) 2 29 AIDS’ Age Rio en The July and Blackwell. Progr am May and Democracy Nações (1996) Santa (2004) (200 2) 20 01: (200 7) de ‘The – sur World Darcy Henrique Khosro khav ar, 2007). Econom y, ‘Democracy [Globalisation Albrow, Mary Janeiro: 20 07). le Eco nomist Fé openDemocracy 41 –59. Social, The , ‘Parties ‘Cultura Europe Sujet. Democracia Banco Against (2001)‘Globalização Power Unidas in Kaldor de Brasileiro 20 07’. Rise Helmut and Bogotá, (2006) Civilização Society Paris: Documento Interameric ano in and for as of Social Ciudadana, Violence para (eds) Intelligence the and The Farhad the a Everyone?’ A Democracy. Anheier, e Fayard. and Gl obal Colombia, de Global Art e o Economist. Desenvolvimento Democracy Netw ork , Global Development], 9 Brasileira. Relações Culture, in December SOC-127. (200 0) da Santa Integration Age Programa e Política Marlies Civil Unit’s de Democracia Interview 1995–1997’ Society: London: , La Cambridge: Vol Desarrollo, Fé Society in Recherche index de 2004. Times [The 1. Glasius, Social Contra The Bogotá, Sage. with Art of em of 41 DEEPENING DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page42

42 DEEPENING DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA 43 DEEPENING DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA GCS_Democracy_CH4/5/6/7:GCS Part2_Issues12/7/0722:16Page44

4 DEEPENING DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA 45 DEEPENING DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA