Post-Conflict Democritization: Rwanda's Illiberal Democracy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Proceedings of GREAT Day Volume 2010 Article 11 2011 Post-Conflict Democritization: Rwanda’s Illiberal Democracy Alexander Berberich SUNY Geneseo Follow this and additional works at: https://knightscholar.geneseo.edu/proceedings-of-great-day Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Berberich, Alexander (2011) "Post-Conflict Democritization: Rwanda’s Illiberal Democracy," Proceedings of GREAT Day: Vol. 2010 , Article 11. Available at: https://knightscholar.geneseo.edu/proceedings-of-great-day/vol2010/iss1/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the GREAT Day at KnightScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Proceedings of GREAT Day by an authorized editor of KnightScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Berberich: Post-Conflict Democritization Post-Conflict Democritization: Rwanda’s Illiberal Democracy Submitted by: Alexander Berberich Introduction some 5.5% in 2009, the 18th fastest in the viii Rwanda, despite successful post-conflict world. Aid money is flowing smoothly into economic growth, is an illiberal shell of a Rwanda, NGOs in part contributing to the democracy as a result of unsuccessful post- continuation of authoritarianism while working conflict democratization and liberalization. The in a difficult political environment. Between 2003 constitution calls for the “eradication of 2005 and 2006, overseas developmental ethnic, regional and other divisions and assistance (ODA) averaged “just over 14 promotion of national unity.”vii Peaceful percent of GDP,” while FDI accounted for .23% elections have been held, but they merely and average savings accounted for -1.4% of ix provide the illusion of democracy. Any GDP. A great deal of caution is necessary for significant political threat to the regime is the international donor community to avoid labeled a “divisionist” and legally barred from supporting and prolonging authoritarian rule. competition with Kagame’s Rwandan Patriotic The international donor community must begin Front, or RPF. The post-conflict path taken in to make concrete demands of the Rwandan Rwanda has resulted in the country’s slide government to truly liberalize its political towards authoritarianism. While some analysts sphere, in the interest of continuing stability. argue that limitations on civil liberties, Rwanda offers a unique opportunity to controlled political participation, and a closely apply post-conflict development theories. monitored press are necessary in post-conflict Fifteen years after genocide, the guilty and the environments to ensure stability in a post- innocent must continue to exist side-by-side in conflict state, by maintaining Rwanda as an the same country and neighborhoods. exclusionary pseudodemocracy, the Rwandan Economically, it has rebounded fairly elite are running a serious risk of inviting further successfully. Politically, however, Rwanda is a acute violence in the future. far cry from a free, liberal democracy. A The 1994 Genocide and the associated question that post-conflict specialists often face collapse of the social order in Rwanda left a today is whether to focus on democracy in the major impact on the state and its people. form of elections, or on peace and stability. If However, just as before the Genocide, the liberalization takes a back seat to stability, how international aid community is currently long can a ruling party continue to maintain a praising Rwanda as a rare Central African closed system before outsiders become success. All the numbers look good. Before radicalized, once again putting stability at risk? taking into account the current global financial Is there a proper “sequence” for the building of crisis, the Rwandan GDP was expected to grow a liberal democracy? Is there a trade-off 77 Published by KnightScholar, 2011 1 Proceedings of GREAT Day, Vol. 2010 [2011], Art. 11 between democracy and stability? The case democracies do not fight one another, the study of Rwanda involves the recovery from process of democratization is a rough and violence that reached an abhorrent extreme, and complex period, in which the risk of violence, thus serves as a highly complex and very both external and internal, actually increases interesting test environment for the application significantly. Mansfield and Snyder noted that of these current post-conflict theories and offers states going from full transition from complete some answers for the questions they raise. This authoritarianism to extensive mass democracy will also generate policy recommendations for are “twice as likely to fight wars in the decade the international community, NGOs, and after democratization.”xii Subsequent work by policymakers in Kigali. Paul Collier delivers empirical evidence affirming the connection between Post-Conflict Democratization and the democratization and internal conflict. According Democratic Peace to Collier, “democracy, at least in the form it From the mid-1990s onward, elections has usually taken to date in the societies of the were viewed as a major step towards success by bottom billion, does not seem to enhance the policy-makers in post-conflict environments. prospects of internal peace. On the contrary, it For practical and logistical reasons, elections seems to increase proneness to political xiii gave the statebuilding process a point where violence.” success could be claimed and the exit strategy A substantial argument emerged in the could be pursued. In academia, this belief was 1990s that elections do not imply liberal not as widely accepted, but did gain a following. democracy, and to believe otherwise is Elections became a major benchmark and dangerous. As Fareed Zakaria wrote, “While it indicator of the relative success of a given is easy to impose elections on a country, it is statebuilding mission. The acceptance of more difficult to push constitutional liberalism elections as a key part of post-conflict on a society. The process of genuine reconstruction was in part a result of the liberalization and democratization is gradual welcome adoption of Democratic Peace Theory x and long-term, in which an election is only one by former U.S. President Bill Clinton. step.”xiv Lessons learned in Iraq and Democratic Peace Theory holds that Afghanistan, both places where elections and developed, liberal, or “consolidated” violence exist side-by-side, lend credence to this democracies do not engage one another in viewpoint. The Democratic Peace Theory only violent conflict. Applied to post-conflict applies to consolidated democracies, and development, this theory implied that if therefore cannot be used to predict or democracy and elections were made a priority understand the behavior of states undergoing the objective, international peace would logically tumultuous process of post-conflict follow. Policymakers largely subscribed to this democratization. belief during the planning and carrying out of Democracy v. Stability statebuilding operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.xi Contemporary post-conflict development theorists largely acknowledge that democracy This focus on elections delivering peace and elections are not equivalent and that the vis-à-vis the democratic peace was misplaced. goals of democratization and those of peace While it may be true that consolidated 78 https://knightscholar.geneseo.edu/proceedings-of-great-day/vol2010/iss1/11 2 Berberich: Post-Conflict Democritization building and security enhancement may differ. democratizing states move towards liberal Scholars such as Jack Snyder have firmly democracy in a safe manner? established that not “all good things go together” as once believed. Democratization and Sequencing peacebuilding efforts can often have opposite, One answer is provided by the theory of contrary, and even opposing goals and sequencing. First made popular by Fareed xv practices. For example, in a post-conflict Zakaria, Edward Mansfield, and Jack Snyder, situation where violence was very recently a sequencing does away with the viewpoint that legitimate means to air social grievances, the immediate development of democratic elections premature holding of elections may result in is always a good thing, and instead proposes disappointed political losers returning to armed that national elections with universal suffrage struggle, a case of democratization interfering should wait until the rule of law and a well- with peacebuilding. Conversely, peacebuilding functioning state is in place.xviii The sequencing efforts intended to assuage potential spoilers strategy views democracy as a long-term goal to such as inclusion of rebel groups in the be strived for, not as something possible in the democratization process can lead to difficult short-term. Mansfield and Snyder write, problems with the holding of democratic, free, “Without reasonably effective civic institutions, xvi and successful elections. the outcome in culturally diverse societies is Benjamin Reilly notes the “security likely to resemble Iraq and Lebanon. Once a dilemma” which arises during elections after a country starts on an illiberal trajectory, ideas are period of violent conflict, whereby “competing unleashed and institutions are established that ethnic, religious, and political actors will often tend to continue propelling it along that mobilize against the possibility of future threats, trajectory. A key danger is that premature democratization will push a country down this triggering a cascading tit-for-tat