Anti-democratic trends

Hard for long-term ties

Ah, the light this morning.

Most of you have foci other than political science (you lucky folks) where too many conversations ultimately become seeing how many angels can dance on the top of a pin. Political scientists are parsnickety about wording, worry about subtheories of subtheories, and where someone published that article (no, that journal isn’t able to publish yet because the reviewer is three months late on submitting comments to the author). I do really appreciate a former student and ACC paid subscriber (thank you so much) who describes himself as a ‘semi-professional world events junky’ as I could definitely give him a run for is money and that doesn’t taint him as a political scientist.

I only participate sporadically in the field as I abandoned it—or it abandoned me— decades ago. I am interested in practical solutions to problems while the field wants to address data collection and modelling. To each, her or his own.

Thus if most of you are not political scientists, you may well have wondered why Americans are obsessed with democracy. Yes, I know the Greek means a rule (kratos) by the people (demos). As our Declaration of Independence so starkly asserted in the second paragraph on 4 July 1776,

‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.’

We could dissect so much of this today as our system appears poised to ignore part of this sentiment. But that is not why I raise the point today.

We prefer generally democracies for several reasons. The role of rights, the difficulty in changing tenets of government, or something else are important. The importance of rule by elected peers who understand they will face scrutiny for their actions and beliefs is also crucial to us as Americans in our political history.

Arguably one of the more desirable attributes of democracy is the predictability in assuring government’s behaviour. This weekend two stories caught my attention to illustrate why predictability has major implications for the relevant country and its foreign relations when that crucial condition under democratic rule is missing. This is obvious but nonetheless under siege in too much of the world—relevant for us.

Military leaders in Thailand and Niger proved how volatile and unpredictable the future may be, thus how challenging relationships for whomever governs here. The Thai military, long the power behind or overtly in the Southeast Asian country, moved to deligitimise and outlaw the party receiving the highest popular vote—Move Forward Party under Pita Limjaroenrat—in last year’s elections. Keen analyst Zach Abuza explores this development in what is a convoluted political system in great detail but makes clear that without accountability inherent in democracy, the judiciary is at a minimum a ‘two tiered’ system. The favoured outcomes under this rickety system invariably privileges the monarchists or the armed forces rather than the population as a whole.

Sadly, this is not new because Thailand’s dance with democracy has been a painful one for the better part of a century. A constitutional monarchy, Thailand has moved sporadically to allow the development of functioning non-military political parties but they invariably shut down any true reform movements that might impinge on the generals’ power to make the government’s decisions.

This has profound implications as the United States hopes to build a sustained bond with Bangkok against China’s moves into the subregion. Generals have power without accountability, allowing deals that often drive Bangkok’s policies away towards the PRC with its willingness to ignore internal conditions that don’t hurt Beijing’s interests. Even if someone raises accountability issues, the military’s use of the courts to reconfigure policy outcomes towards their desires is extremely problematic for sustainable foreign affairs.

Similarly, the U.S. government hoped to gain a diplomatic and military partnership with the government of Niger despite the military ousting elected president Mohamed Bazoum in July 2023. A region where analysts see significant concerns regarding Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative as well as threats of Islamic radicalisation, Niger recently offered an opening to American interlocutors.

This weekend, Niger’s leaders strongly disputed stories of Iran gaining access to the African nation’s uranium supplies. As a measure of their irritation, they cancelled the counterrorist cooperative arrangements between Washington and Niamey aimed at thwarting Islamic armed groups terrorising smaller rural communities across the Sahel. Washington, as of this afternoon, claims that the ties can endure, in spite of this proclamation but the embarrassment and interference on the Iranian question clearly upset the Niger authorities.

Again, the lack of accountability provided by a democratic government with functioning institutions is horrible for protecting a budding relationship. Additionally, as also true with Thailand, the U.S. willingness to pressure Niger on its internal choices by potentially withholding assistance or sanctioning individual behaviours hover over the entire relationship. Niger’s stark response this weekend illustrates how tough that is for any White Hosue seeking to foster ties to buttress our role in the entire region.

Neither Thailand nor Niger is as central to our global involvement as other states. But the trend of anti-democratic trends in these other states hamper any serious predictable path, regardless of our desires. And anti-democratic regimes seem more common of late as our own politics no longer guarantees we will condemn authoritarianism. In a world where we see the PRC, Russia and Iran as long-term competitors, the non-democratic conditions in states around the world ought to worry American planners and policy-makers.

Democracies are far from perfect. No two are exactly the same but the heart of their openness and accountability far outweigh anything else in non-democratic systems under imperious, pernicious rulers. Governing a nation is the not the same as deciding on a household’s choice for summer vacation.

Thoughts? Responses? Steps we should take? I welcome your comments on this column or any other. I hope you will circulate it to others if you find it valuable.

Be well and be safe. FIN

Zachary Abuza, ‘In Thailand, it’s justice for me not for thee’, benarnews.com, 15 March 2024, retrieved at https://www.benarnews.org/english/commentaries/move-forward-party-pita-limjaroenrat-disbandment-article-112-03152024111151.html

The Declaration of Independence, 1776, https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript

Michael Gordon, Gabrielle Steinhauser, Laurence Norman, and Michael Phillips, ‘Niger Termination of U.S. Military Ties Followed Accusation of Iran Uranium Deal’, wallstreetjournal.com, 18 March 2024, retrieved at https://www.wsj.com/world/africa/niger-once-key-u-s-counterterrorism-ally-ends-military-ties-7db66dbe?mod=world_feat4_africa_pos1