Recent Dialogue in the U.S. Press on Democracy Promotion
01 February 2006

In an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal of January 31, Frederick Kempe examines the tension between the Bush administration’s “transformational” policies focusing on democracy promotion and their conflict with more traditional ideas that “democracy succeeds only if preceded by the evolution of an educated middle class and civil society.”  Kempe examines the argument over whether or not the Middle East is ready for democracy.

Kempe quotes John McCain as questioning who can judge whether a country is ready or not to have a democracy, responding, “How ready were we for democracy in 1776?”

Examining the idea that participating in a democratic government could moderate the incumbents, Kempe refers to the statements of Georgian President Saakashvilil who said that Hamas might drop their extremist views over time because, “Once you get into the business of governing, you want to construct buildings and not destroy them.”

In the January 25 edition of the Washington Post, Peter Barker examines many of the same themes.  In his report, “The Realities of Exporting Democracy,” he notes that while the Bush administration has succeeded in pushing democracy promotion in some cases, in others, it has been left behind.  For example, it has been harder to promote democracy in countries like “China, Pakistan, Russia and other countries with strategic and trade significance.”  The article notes that the US has been active in democracy promotion in such difficult cases as Kyrgyzstan, Burma, Zimbabwe, and Belarus.  However, according to the article, more can be done.  Barker cites Jennifer Windsor of Freedom House as commenting, “The glass is a quarter full…The administration deserves credit, but it’s just a start.”  

Barker reports that the US is often relatively silent about democracy in countries like Russia.  He quotes a woman from a Russian NGO as stating, “I know presidents and diplomats are not dissidents and when they say they can achieve more in private talks, they may be sincere. But I would still like to hear more. And maybe it will have an effect on our president."

In an opinion piece of the January 23 Washington Post, Fred Hiatt observes the Bush administration’s lack of criticism of Russia.  Hiatt writes, “Of course, no U.S. president is responsible for Russia's fate; Russians are. Yet Syrians and Egyptians will determine their own fates, too, and that doesn't stop Bush from wielding U.S. diplomacy and rhetoric to aid pro-democracy forces in their countries.”  He argues that the Russian backslide from democracy is potentially the biggest failure of Bush’s policy of democracy promotion.