The Third Wave of Democratisation

Globalisation, Democracy and Civil Society in Contemporary Central Asia

SWATI MADAN 11/26/2013

The meaning of democracy Modern usage of democracy dates back to revolutionary upheavals in Western society at the end of the 18th century. In the late 2 th century! three general approaches have emerged in debates over the meaning of democracy 1" #emocracy as a source of government authority 2" #emocracy as the purpose served by government $" #emocracy as the procedures for constituting government. %erious problems of ambiguity arise &hen democracy is defined as the source of authority or as the purpose of government! so a procedural definition is used in this study. In other &ords! the ho&' of democracy is more important than the &hy' or to &hat end' (his vie&)that studies of democracy should focus on empirical! descriptive! institutional and procedural definitions as opposed to idealistic definitions)&on out from the 1*+ s on&ard. In this tradition! &e can define a 2 th century political system as democratic to the e,tent that its most po&erful collective decision makers are selected through fair! honest and periodic elections in &hich candidates freely compete for votes and in &hich virtually all the adult population is eligible to vote. (his definition also implies that citi-ens en.oy the civil liberties /ie speech! assembly! etc" needed to facilitate this electoral process. (his definition provides benchmarks by &hich &e can better measure the development of a democracy against other democracies or itself over time! ie ho& many people vote! ho& many parties share po&er! is any group systematically e,cluded from po&er. %everal addition points on defining democracy in this &ay0 1. #emocracy defined in terms of elections is necessarily minimal. 1 broader definition of democracy)responsible government! informed and rational deliberation! effective citi-en control of policy! e2ual participation and po&er of all groups)is &eak in this conte,t because fu--y norms do not yield useful analysis. 2. It is important by this definition that citi-ens elect the real decision makers in a society! not the freely chosen puppets of some e,ternal force! ie the military or another government. $. %ystems that 2ualify as democratic may vary significantly in their stability)the stability of a system differs from the nature of the system. 3. 1nalysts disagree over &hether democracy should be seen as a binary or continuous variable4 &hen you have a clear definition! one can treat it as a binary variable and avoid the problems associated &ith &eighting the characteristics of democracy as a continuous variable. 5. 6ondemocratic regimes do not have electoral competition and &idespread voting #ifferent scholars defined democracy differently ! democracy is the &orst from of government e,cept all other / Winston 7hurchill" . 8obert #ahl defined democracy on the bases of polyarchy that is ruled by many.

The Waves of Democratization (here have been three &aves of democrati-ation! the first t&o follo&ed by limited reversals of that progress. 9irst &ave /1828:1*2;". (his &ave had its roots in the 1merican and 9rench revolutions. (&o criteria marked this first development0 5 < of males &ere eligible to vote and a responsible e,ecutive &ho had to maintain the support of a ma.ority of voters or of an elected parliament. 9irst reverse &ave /1*22:32". (his period &as characteri-ed by a shift a&ay from democracy to&ard traditional authoritarian or ne& ideologically:driven! mass:based totalitarian regimes. %econd &ave /1*3$:;2". 1llied occupation post:WWII encouraged democrati-ation in former 1,is po&ers! &ith e,ception of %oviet influence in =ungary and 7-echoslovakia. Mean&hile! the beginning of the end of Western colonial rule produced a number of ne& states &ith democratic tendencies. %econd reverse &ave /1*58:+5". >specially in ?atin 1merica! political development in the early 1*; s took on an authoritarian cast. (he decoloni-ation of 1frica led to the largest multiplication of authoritarian governments in history. @ne third of the &orking democracies in 1*58 had become authoritarian by the 1*+ s. (hird &ave /1*+3:". #emocratic regimes start to replace authoritarian and considerable liberali-ation occurs in authoritarian regimes. (his takes place in every region of the &orld and is intensified by the fall of 7ommunism.

Importance of Democracy %ocial scientists have tried to assess the importance of democrati-ation. (he big issues are the e,tent and permanence of democracy in nations and in the &orld. Its form of government is not the only important thing about a country! nor probably even the most important thing. Aut democracy still matters because0 (he correlation bet&een democracy and the e,istence of individual liberty is e,tremely high #emocracies! &hile unruly! are rarely violent. #emocracies do not fight &ars against other democracies.

1s the &orldBs premier democracy! it benefits the Cnited %tates for the rest of the &orld to be democratic.

The Third Wave of democratisation 1 &ave of democratisation! originating in Dortugal and %pain in the 1*+ s! s&ept across the developing &orld in the 1*8 s and 1** s. (his so:called E(hird WaveB /=untington! 1**1" moved across ?atin 1merica and >astern >urope! and later 1sia and 1frica. (he transformation in the nature of political regimes &as remarkable0 &hile in 1*+3 there &ere 31 democracies among the e,isting 15 states! by 2 $ about three:fifths of all the &orldBs states1$ &ere considered formal democracies /#iamond! 2 ;"! ho&ever imperfect they might be. #emocratisation can be understood as a process subdivided into three phases0 /i" the liberalisation phase! &hen the previous authoritarian regime opens up or crumbles4 /ii" a transition phase! often culminating &hen the first competitive elections are held4 and /iii" the consolidation phase! &hen democratic practices are e,pected to become more firmly established and accepted by most relevant actors /@B#onnell and %chmitter! 1*8;4 ?in- and %tepan! 1**;". (his final phase is essential for establishing durable democratic regimes. 1s &ill be discussed later in this section! it has also proved to be the most challenging for emerging democracies in the developing &orld. It is essential to remember! ho&ever! that democratisation processes need not be linear! and in a number of cases democratic openings and transitions have not resulted in consolidated democracies. Instead! many regimes end up Egetting stuckB in transition! or reverting to more or less authoritarian forms of rule. (hese so:called EunconsolidatedB or EhybridB regimes have become the focus of considerable attention for academics and policy: makers alike. Modernisation vs. process oriented approaches to transitions to democracy (he mainstream literature of the 1*; s and 1*+ s /?ipset! 1*5*4 1lmond and Ferba! 1*;$4 Moore! 1*;;" espoused a modernisation approach to democratisation! emphasising that democracy &as more likely to emerge in countries &ith high/er" levels of socio: economic development.13 %ome studies also emphasised the importance of cultural and religious factors! and of historical legacies /i.e. previous e,periences &ith democratisation". %uch structuralist approaches to democratisation understood the emergence of democracy as a conse2uence of the transformation of class structure! the emergence of a bourgeoisie economic development! increasing urbanisation! the prior development of democratic values and other socio:economic factors. (he (hird Wave of democratisation challenged this concept of Eprere2uisitesB for democracy. While the modernisation argument provides an e,planation for transition in %outh Gorea! (ai&an! (hailand and 7hile! many of the movements to&ards formal democracy took place in countries &here such transformation &ould not have been e,pected based on lo& levels of economic development and other socio:economic indicators. 1 large number of

countries e,periencing a transition to democracy during the (hird Wave fell in the bottom third of the =uman #evelopment Inde,. (hird Wave transitions also defied cultural arguments positing that democracy is incompatible &ith certain faiths and religious values.15 (he only region that seems to remain relatively outside this &ave of democratisation is the 1rab World /%tepan &ith 8oberston 2 $".

The factors that lead to the changes in independent variables in the 1960s and 1970s produced the dependent variable of a democratizing regime change in the 1970s and 1980s are as follow !. ". (. *. ,. Deepening legitimacy problems of authoritarian systems #lobal economic gro$th of the !%&'s )hanging doctrine of the )atholic )hurch )hanges in the policies of e+ternal actors -no$balling effects

!. .egitimacy /roblems Dost WWII H prevailing democratic ethos developed throughout the &orld. >ven authoritarian regimes increasingly used democratic rhetoric to .ustify their legitimacy. Dolitical legitimacy inevitably declines over time! and authoritarian regimes! unlike democracies! have no mechanisms for self:rene&al. Door economic performance and military failures undermined legitimacy of authoritarian regimes! bIc they had no procedural legitimacy to change policies! as in democracies. ". 0conomic Development and 0conomic )rises 7orrelation bI& &ealth and democracy indicates that democratic transitions should occur in countries at middle level of development. Aroad:based economic development &ith industriali-ation #@>% contribute to democrati-ation! but &ealth from sale of natural resources /i.e. oil" goes directly to state! discourages ta,ation! and therefore does 6@( necessarily contribute to democrati-ation. Increased economic &ell:being shapes societal values! increases levels of education! facilitates compromises /as there are more resources to be distributed"! promotes trade opening! and e,pands middle class. Most active supporters of third &ave democrati-ation came from urban middle class. %hort:term0 8apid economic gro&th can undermine authoritarian regimes if combined &Ishort:term economic crisis or failure /author discusses the 1*+ s oil crisis and other economic crises". (. 1eligious )hanges (here is a correlation bet&een Western 7hristianity /esp. Drotestantism" and democracy. Most prominent case of e,pansion of 7hristianity in third &ave democracies is %outh Gorea! &here post WWII .ust 1< of population &as 7hristian! by mid 1*8 s 25< 7hristian. 7hurches became principal forum for opposition to military regime and helped achieve transition to democracy in 1*88.7hanges in political alignment of 8oman

7atholic 7hurch led to 8epositioning from accommodating authoritarian regimes to opposing them. %econd Fatican 7ouncil and Dope John Daul II used po&er of 7hurch to defend human rights4 politically motivated papal visits played a key role.6ational churches brought many resources /Kesp national net&ork of members" to &ar against authoritarianism in countries like Dhilippines! Gorea! 7hile! Ara-il! Doland! 6icaragua! #8! Danama etc.7atholicism second only to economic development as force promoting democrati-ation in 1*+ s and 1*8 s. *. 2e$ /olicies of 0+ternal 3ctors Ay late 1*8 s! ma.or sources of po&er and influence H Fatican! >uropean 7ommunity />7"! C.%. and %oviet Cnion H &ere promoting liberali-ation and democrati-ation. The European Communit >7 officially formed in 1*;*! first e,pansion in 1*+$. (o be a member! countries had to be democratic. Membership also helped prevent regression to authoritarianism. /Lreece .oined in 1*81! %pain and Dortugal in 1*8;".7onference on %ecurity and 7ooperation in >urope /7%7>"! =elsinki 9inal 1ct influenced development of human rights and democracy in >urope! particularly by helping to foster openings in >astern >urope. The !nited "tates 1s of 1*+3 H shift to promoting human rights in foreign policy. 7arter administration strengthened this commitment post 1*++.8eagan administration introduced promotion of democratic change as ma.or foreign policy goal and created the 6ational >ndo&ment for #emocracy (summarizers note: this is the Endowment that created NDI, where I used to work, and IRI, as well as the business and labor solidarity groups whose acronyms are escaping me !C% democracy promotion efforts included0 diplomatic action! economic pressure! material support for democratic opposition forces! military action and multilateral diplomacy. (herefore it is difficult to make definitive evaluation of C% role! but C% support &as clearly instrumental to democrati-ation process in many countries /see te,t for many specific e,amples". The "oviet !nion >ven more dramatic policy shift has been noticed than in the case of the C% Lorbachev revoked the Are-hnev doctrine and conveyed to >astern >uropean governments that %oviet govBt &ould not act to maintain their e,isting communist dictatorships. (his opened the &ay for ouster of communist leaders! elections! opening of frontiers &IWestern >urope! and market:oriented reforms. ,. Demonstration 0ffects or -no$balling #efinition0 %uccessful democrati-ation occurs in one country and this encourages democrati-ation in other countries. Why did this happen' 7ountries sa&0 (hat it &as possible to bring do&n authoritarian systems =@W to do it What dangers to avoid! difficulties to overcome

Leneral role of demonstration effects in the third &ave is more important in $rd &ave than in first 2 &aves because of improved communication. %econdly despite this demonstration effects still strongest among countries that &ere geographically close and culturally similar /influence of %panish democrati-ation on all of ?atin 1merica". Most dramatic sno&balling is seen in >astern >urope in 1*8*. ?astly! #emonstration effects &ere more influential at the >6# of the &ave than at the beginning. 1t the end of the 1*8 s! demonstration effects influenced countries &here other conditions for democracy &ere &eak or absent. 4ourth Wave of Democratization >vents in Gyrgy-stan combined &ith previous events in ?ebanon! Dalestine! Ira2! Ckraine! 1fghanistan and Leorgia! are making me &onder if maybe! .ust maybe! &eMre at the beginning of the fourth &ave of democrati-ation. In his book (he third &ave! %amuel =untington observed that previous moments of democratic regime change took place in clusters. (he first /small" &ave &as in the early 18 Ms! the second took place immediately after the %econd World War! and the third &ave started in %outhern >urope in 1*+3 and ended &ith the collapse of the %oviet Cnion in 1**1. 1ll &aves of democrati-ation are follo&ed by counter:&aves! &hich happened in the mid:to:late nineties! &ith authoritarian and semi:authoritarian regimes emerging in a lot of the post: %oviet states. =o&ever! the e,ogenous shock of *I11! the 8ose 8evolution in Leorgia! and the strong rhetoric of the Aush administration on this front has combined to trigger some serious political change across the >urasian land mass. (he Gyrgy- e,ample is likely to send chills do&n the spine of t&o much larger countries :: 8ussia and 7hina. In Mosco&! Fladimir Dutin canMt be thrilled &ith the fact that he canMt have a tea break &ithout some country in his near abroad overthro&ing a ruler that &as on decent terms &ith Dutin. (he fact that ousted Gyrgy-stan president 1skar 1kaev is reportedly feeling to 8ussia &ill highlight this painful fact. 1s for 7hina! Aei.ingMs first preference is not to have a democratic revolution take place in 7entral 1sia so close to Nin.iang :: 7hinaMs &estern:most province &ith plenty of restive Cighurs chafing at Aei.ingMs control. ?etMs be clear :: thereMs a fair amount of fragility in this nascent fourth &ave0 Ira2 could curdle! Gyrgy-stan could descend into chaos! =amas could &in Dalestinian elections! and ?ebanon could be split by sectarian strife. Ay and large the 1rab &orld has proved to be remarkably stable. =afe- al:1ssad! the current %yrian presidentMs father! governed &ith an iron hand longer than all of his predecessors combined4 >gypt had only four presidents /all of them authoritarian" in its modern history4 at his death Ging =ussein had governed Jordan for more than 35 years4 and in %audi 1rabia and Gu&ait royal families control politics and po&er to this day. While the rest of the &orld has &itnessed dramatic political change! the 1rab &orld seems trapped in limbo. (here are no& more time:tested democracies in 1frica! a continent raked by manmade and natural disasters! than in the 1rab &orld.... It &ould be

nice to hope that the Dalestinian and Ira2i models &ill serve as launching pads for rising democracies4 but for the foreseeable future! the odds are against it. 1rabs may be e,cited and fascinated by political ferment in Ira24 but they are also alarmed by the absence of public order! the cacophony of %hiite! %unni and Gurdish voices! and the seemingly irrepressible and violent insurgency. #espite genuine desire among millions of 1rabs for greater openness! there &ill be no rush to&ard democracy. 6or should &e be surprised by the formidable capacity of these authoritarian regimes to 2uash meaningful reform. In this regard! getting %yria out of ?ebanon may &ell take much longer than many anticipated. Darado,ically! the 1rab:Israeli conflict! &hich most of these regimes generally &ant to see resolved! serves as a firebreak against the kind of political reform that many of these regimes donMt &ant. 7learly! &hen the 1rab public is riled up by events in Dalestine! it is less focused on events at home. If the Aush administration &ants to pursue democrati-ation in the 1rab &orld effectively! it should &ork to defuse the 1rab:Israeli conflict and deny the regimes the ability to use it to avoid political and economic reform.%o far the Ola&less unilateralismO of the Aush administration! along &ith its failure to OdeliverO Israeli concessions! has generated not the 1rab nationalist backlash that the root:causes school predicted! but the end of the ?ibyan nuclear program! elections in Dalestine and Ira2! a move to&ard elections in >gypt! and a nationalist uprising against %yrian occupation in ?ebanon. (hese events &ould seem rather good evidence for the proposition that the Dalestinian issue is only one of several important concerns in Middle >ast politics! not the pivot on &hich all regional events turn. (he 1rab &orld is in the throes of a prolonged historical crisis! as its societies! economies! and polities struggle to overcome their various internal problems and make a successful transition to modernity. (he Dalestine:is:central dogma offers little insight into that crisis. 8ecogni-ing this! the Aush administration has &isely decoupled the Dalestine 2uestion from the other ma.or issues that bedevil 1rab:1merican relations. %o far this strategy has &orked &ell! bringing benefits to both the Cnited %tates and many 1rabs. Ay putting the Dalestinian issue in its proper perspective! it could even end up helping Dalestinians and Israelis as &ell. )52).6-I52(hese &ere the general causes of the $rd &ave of democrati-ation! 2uite different from causes of the first t&o &aves. 8elative significance of these causes varied by region and evolved as the $rd &ave progressed. >mergence of social! economic and e,ternal conditions favorable to democracy is necessary! but not su""icient! to produce democracy0 political leaders have to be &illing to take the risk of democracy to make it happen. =o&ever the factors responsible for third reverse &ave are Weakness of democratic

values among key elite groups and the general public! severe economic setbacks! social and political polari-ation caused by leftist governments and e,clusion of populist! leftist! and lo&er:class groups from po&er by conservative groups. =ome:gro&n Mar,ist: ?eninist regimes! continuation of personal dictatorships! military regimes! one:party systems! radical Islam and the absence of e,perience &ith democracy are the obstacles to democracy. %ome form of leadership change &ithin authoritarian systems typically precede democrati-ation and &eakness in democratic values among aged leadership usually continues throughout the lives of the autocratic leadership

10401102)0=untington! %. /1**1" (he (hird Wave0 #emocrati-ation in the ?ate (&entieth 7entury. 6orman 0 Cniversity of @klahoma Dress. ?evitsky! %. and Way! ?. /2 #emocracy 5" EInternational ?inkage and #emocrati-ationB! Journal of

Lershman! 7. and 1llen! M. /2 ;" E6e& (hreats to 9reedom0 (he 1ssault on #emocracy 1ssistanceB! Journal of #emocracy 1+ /2"0 $;:51. ?arry #iamond. EIs (he (hird Wave @ver'BJournal of #emocracy +.$ /1**;" pp.2 : $+. #emocratisationBs (hird Wave and the 7hallenges of #emocratic #eepening0 1ssessing International #emocracy 1ssistance and ?essons ?earned 0 ?ise 8akner /7hr. Michelsen Institute"! 1lina 8ocha Menocal /@#I" and Ferena 9rit- /@#I" (he fourth &ave of democrati-ation! article from foreign policy (he 9ourth Wave of #emocratisation and dictatorship 0 6on cooperative transition in the post communist &orld World Dolitics!vol 53! no.2! oo.212:233 the&ashingtonrevie&.orgIarticlesIe,plaining:democratic:failure:in:the:post:soviet:space dank&art 8usto&Bs article E (ransitions to #emocracyBin #avid Dotter and #avid Loldblatt!Margaret Giloh Daul ?e&is #emocrati-ationB! 7ambridge0 Dolity Dress in association &ith the@pen Cniversity! 1**+! pp.13:15 113 #avid Dotter and #avid Loldblatt! Margaret Giloh Daul ?e&is #emocrati-ation 7ambridge0 Dolity Dress in association &ith the @pen Cniversity! 1**+!pp.13:15