We, Americans, have enjoyed the benefits of democracy for over two hundred years. Here we stand on a firm foundation of our rights, which we know by heart and we do not hesitate to put up a fight to protect them. For most American people the real sense that they can participate in and influence the course of events is vital. The democracy is inbred in us. Our ancestors fought for our freedom; great men secured out rights in the Constitution; we can’t imagine living any differently. And as a fervent believer, we want to spread the truth – we wish to share the principals of democracy with everybody else.
Many countries adopted the democratic system centuries ago. In what is now the Great Britain, parliament has pressed monarchy for more control since the early medieval period. In 1707, after the Act of Union, it has already formed the main basis of the parliament of the United Kingdom. Sweden had a taste of parliamentary rule as early as 1700. The Federal Constitution, which is still a legal foundation of Switzerland, was written in 1848. And of course, the ancient Rome and Greece, where democracy flourished before our ancestors even heard of such a word.
Each country has its own historical background. The world nations have built their ways into the 21st century by separate paths. Some have struggled for the bits of freedom and reason for a long time; some literally are just learning to walk. In order to build a stable political system, it is necessary to have enough people with the understanding of the major democratic principals, who feel entitled to a better life and are willing to work hard to secure it.
Everybody cheered when in 1985 the head of the Soviet Union, Michael Gorvachev loosened the grip of totalitarian rule on the country. The euphoria lasted for a few years, spoiled first by the deficit and then by the escalating inflation. Few devoted believers worked to build a democracy in the newborn nation. It looked as it might just work out for Russia. Then ordinary people got tired of instability. Life was measured by the price on sausage and vodka and it did not look promising. Democracy was something foreign, unknown, unheard of and eventually not welcome in the post Soviet Union. The fact of the matter is the Russians never had a taste of democracy; they never understood its principals. There is no civic society capable of taking control of the course of events.
In 2000 V. V. Putin came to power. Over the past seven years the former KGB officer gave us no doubt on which way he is turning the boat – shutting down liberal newspapers, TV and radio stations; appointing the state governors instead of elected ones; spreading the anti-western mood among the population. But the 80% of Russians welcomed the “Good Tsar”. It seemed as the sheep knew not the way and gladly ran back to the familiar stable.
Some political observers noted that Putin might be good for Russia. They could be right, but I am surely glad I don’t have to witness the “goodness” Putin spreads.
Another country, which for many years has been a hopeful fusion of democracy and Islam, is showing signs of retreat. In 2002 a moderate Islamic Party (Justice and Development Party or AK Party) won the elections in Turkey. For a long time the country has enforced a strict separation of the state and religion. According to the BBC, the secularists, including many army generals, fear that the new president, Abdullah Gul, might undermine such policy. The question is how did the AK party gain such popularity? Will its inclination toward Islamic rule undermine Turkish democracy? Did the election results show that the Turkish people yearn for a stricter government?
Religion, just as the historical background, can be a major factor in choosing political system. Is the democracy, as we understand it, possible in the Middle East? It might be a mere coincidence, but most of the democratic countries are from the Christian background. There are Islamic countries, that do hold elections – Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, Indonesia and a few others. Recently, we have invested our efforts into Afghanistan and Iraq. It seemed that a mere existence of the parliament and free vote should have done the job. But apparently our young tree of democracy is barely surviving out there.
There is a considerable debate about the factors that affect democratization. But some of the more frequently mentioned factors are wealth (the wealthiest democracies have never been observed to fall into authoritarianism, education (better educated people tend to share more pro-democratic values), abundant natural resources (states whose sole source derives from abundant natural resources, such as oil, often fail to democratize because the well-being of the elite depends more on the direct control of the resource than on the popular support), culture of capitalism, social equality, middle class, civil society, culture (some claim that certain cultures are more conductive to democratic values than others), homogeneous population, previous experience with democracy and foreign intervention.
Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan can boast of a wealthy middle class. Iraq’s economy is mostly build on its oil exports; the population is bitterly divided in both countries and there has been no experience with democracy whatsoever in that area. Some believe that the countries which have already established democracy should actively promote it. The most extreme form of such promotion is military intervention, with advocates pointing to the creation of stable democracies in post WWII Germany and Japan. Yet this method failed in many developing countries, where dictators often took power after a brief period of independence.
It is hard to say weather in case of Iraq and Afghanistan we are sowing the seeds of democracy into a cold ground, or we will see the desirable results in our life time. In many countries, democracy is often viewed as a Western influence and can be treated with suspicion. We have become a society of a quick fix and we seem to have little patience. The fact is, some nations might not have matured enough for the democracy as we see it. A Pashtun herder is no Texan cowboy, neither a Russian family is the same as most American families. We are different. And we don’t have to rush the course of events in order to win the next elections. It might take another hundred years for the Middle East to evolve into a society of tolerance and freedom. A “quick fix” can make the situation worse. There are already enough historical mistakes, with which we have to deal in our times for us to be hasty in such matters as a nation’s future.
There is no doubt that many people wish to see their children grow up in a free society. Democracy is a key to equality and freedom. For some it may be a longer journey, but my greatest hope is that someday our world will become a better place for all of us.
