Imposed Democracy on third Worlds #1

Alia Rawi Akbar

The political system of democracy that emerged alongside of the human being political history and their ambition for political power in the course of history of and final crystallized in western world during twentieth century and now it is considered to be one of the most effective and powerful forms of government. Although, the effectiveness of democracy in solving social and economical problems are substantial and have greatly benefited from the democratic system of government, but in the development of third world is controversial yet and need a century to analyze the outcome. However, the democracies of the third world – the least developed nations in Africa, Latin America and Asia – have demonstrated mixed characteristics – while some like India, China etc. are emerging as powerful nations, in many other countries democracy has not been effective in solving the political and socio-economic issues and developmental issues affecting the society such as Turkey and Pakistan. Imposed Democracy, is a form of foreign imposed government, in which the enforced voting of people play the pivotal citizenry of the state, commonly referred to as ‘the people’, is empowered to draw out or alter the basic laws and forms of government itself. A question often raised in political forums is whether the democratic system in third world countries is real at all.

Collapsed of Soviet Union have brought attention of the public to the question that would happen to the third world? And, how would be the relationship between westernization, democracy and development of political Islam. What comes first in 21th century? Is there a choice between democracy and stability? Can democracy be promoted from outside or imposed by invasion or democracy is outcome of economical, political and social of democratic culture from within a country? Are multi ethnic cultures equally develop under democratic government, is the development of democracy is part of world political and social development? And finally, what are the respective roles of national governments, international democratic organizations and civil society? Why does democracy failed to take root in multiple third world countries between 1960 and 2000?

The explanations are very widely and depend to each country, social, cultural, economical development, ethnic and religious compassion and historic event, national wealth resources, history of foreign invasion, social conflicts and civil war history. According to theory of democracy economic development must precede democracy development, but how it is possible to expect development of infrastructure of country under dictatorship and tyranny? The answer is related to development of Russia and China three decade ago and while the infrastructure development which is substantial part of economical development did not happened in the rest of third world countries under dictatorship government. Other theory insist that the backward cultures and social composition of the country of the third world precludes any progress for government in the path way similar to western counties model. In the third world conservative social culture play substantial role in development of dictatorship and suppressing of democracy.

Pakistan built by British as political and military backyard in south Asia. Although, its creator was (Britain) developed in the pathway of democracy but its creature followed the pathway of dictatorship and tyranny. Dictator General Ayub Khan (1958 to 1969), upon seizing power in Pakistan’s first military coup gave the following justification about democracy in his address to the nation: “We must understand that democracy cannot work in a hot climate. To have democracy we must have a cold climate like Britain.” Aube’s believes and comments were quite clearly ridiculous, and completely baseless in explaining why democracy theory works in some places but not others, regardless of social, political and economic development. Unfortunately, Afghanistan’s 1964 democracy collapsed in the lap of presidential dictatorship in 1973.

Irans liberal society windup in the Islamic conservative society. These regressive evolutions are in many nations need answers. We were witnessed repeatedly the collapse of “democracy” and the rise of authoritarian regimes in Africa, Middle East, Fareast and Latin America. After analyzing the political, social, military, and economic obstacles to democratization in the third world, this analysis concludes that traditional convention cries, whether liberal democratic , political Islam or socialist based on economic interest of society, are unlikely to produce the desired results are not more than a political slogan. Theatrically the highly experienced contributors to this analysis suggest there is a specific relationship between the two: practical democracy implies liberal society development of infrastructure and government checks and balances windup more accountability and less corruption—all of which is conducive to sustainable development. In order to answer the question, it is imperative to have a definite understanding of the meaning and characteristics of democracy. Democracy, as stated earlier is a form of government, in which the voting citizenry of the state, commonly referred to as ‘the people’, is empowered to draw out or alter the basic laws and forms of government itself.

 The governmental decisions are made by representatives of the people who act according to the will of the people, as enforced by elections and the rule of law or the written constitution of the state. Thus democracy is a form of government characterized by the rule of the many over the few, the leading maxim being – “of the people, by the people and for the people.” Though direct voting is crucial to decision-making in democratic system, democracies often function through representatives of the people elected through an electoral process, who take decision on all matters during their term of governance. The electoral system of democracy emerged when the purpose of establishing representative institutions was taken for granted. In an electoral democracy, the process of election is often assumed as crucial to the functioning of democracy. In electoral democracies the various political parties compete in a fair and free election, after publicizing their agenda for governance.

The authoritarianism prevalent in many of the third world nations, particularly in Africa and Latin American countries have given rise to what is called procedural democracy. The procedural democracy essentially refers to the competition of parties in an electoral system — it is described as an imperfect, minimal definition of democracy, expressed in largely procedural and electoral terms defined as voters choosing, in free and fair elections contested by competing candidates who fill public offices that are governed by constitutional law. Procedural democracy assumes that the electoral process is at the core of its authority and ensures that all procedures of election are duly complied with. However, in procedural democracy, it is common that the corrupt elites might use electoral procedures to maintain themselves in power against the best interests of the people, thus thwarting the establishment of real democracy.

 The case of South African countries such as Namibia, Angola, Mozambique etc. where procedural elections are conducted through international assistance are examples of procedural democracies, where the assisting nations influence the election and the elected government, upsetting the true functioning of democracy. The case of Pakistan, where the democratic rituals – the procedures and practices are duly conducted, is another example of a third world procedural democracy, where the spirit and imperative dimensions of democracy such as ‘people’s will” in crucial decisions are definitely lacking. Political analysts claim that there has been a gradual degradation of democratic norms and values during the past one-decade in Pakistan. The case of India, an emerging third world country and the world’s largest democracy, is quite different from the rest and needs mention. India is often cited as a true democratic system, with a free and fair multiparty electoral system.

However democracy in India, characterized by the high corruption in institutions, has not been beneficial to development as it could have been. The uncanny post-electoral alliances between the elected representatives, which has no direct support and consent of the people, has been detrimental to real democratic functioning and development. The system of democracy is repeated resorted to and hailed as an effective system of governance. The effectiveness of a democratic system is very much dependent on the sense and sensibility of the voting citizenry. However, in the third world countries, where the common man in too much loaded with the burdens of life, the democratic system is often manipulated by either corrupt elite within the system or external agencies trying to implement their agenda. In order to understand why imposing Democracy on underdeveloped third world nations is actually complex and controversial idea, one need to understand both the dynamics of democracy in the first world in convergence of science and technology versus third world developing of ethnic and cultural conflicts under influence of political and economies situation and growingly fast destructive force liberal democracy in the bottom of conservative feudally society of the third world.

A basically homogeneous society is important, if a democratic electorate is to keep away from the type of ethnic factionalism seen today in most multi-racial, multi-cultural third world countries. Ethnic conflicts may lead to physical oppression of minorities, or it may lead to voting coalition manipulated by the same kind of oligarchy. The development of late 20thcentury democracy theory, were much more concerned with freedom or human rights and social justice rather than with old-fashioned democracy theory that allowed an inclusive citizenry to choose their government .Democracy in this sense is political democracy seemed to be an almost in contradictory , 19th century idea of Marxism and new theory of political Islam.

The Marxism and political Islam had many complaints about overwhelming poverty, devastation of the environment, lack of basic freedoms, and corruption in the third world. It was remarkable, however, that they saw lack of democracy, the absence of honest, effective elections, as basic to their predicament and the introduction of free elections and free expression as an essential part of any solution. The events of the last few years such as US invasion in Iraq and Afghanistan do not permit easy optimism that the third world is moving in a freer direction – war, terrorism, government repression and crushing poverty still victimize millions of people. It is important to remember, however, that in the last third of the 20th century, independence and pre-democracy were stored or introduced into many East Europe countries but Pakistan that had been written off as not ready and maybe hardly ready for democracy. Although, in most of third world democratic regimes have failed or are in perilous condition, but some countries for instance, South Korea, Taiwan, Poland, and Portugal – democracy seems as healthy as it is in first world. Further, despite various failures, democracy developed greater prestige than at any time since the end of the Second World War.

 After the collapse of the Iran Kingdom, another version of political Islam under name of “people’s democracy” more relevant to Marxist theory rather than Islam political view, which is opposite to western “(bourgeois) democracy” was implemented in Iran. Historically, once opened to thorough investigation, the people’s democracies” had little to offer freedom and in self-justification in society. Despite the growing popularity of democracy theory, many of those interested in the big questions of forward policy of NATO expansion toward third world and whether it has been a benign of spiteful influence of neocolonialism or spread of democracy theory. In 1980s it was commonly believed, that the failure of democracy to take firm root in the third world and former British colonies in North America indicated that democracy was culturally foreign to most inhabitants of the globe. Anglo-European democracy was seen as rooted in the development of certain specific ideas and values over the very long term. The road to modern democracy was marked by unique milestones that western countries had passed in good time after Second World War, but that everyone else country had missed opportunity.

 The necessity of passing through these stages of democracy in a timely fashion seemed to be proved by the subsequent failure of many countries – notably in some country of Asia, Latin America and Africa but also in southern Europe – to establish stable democratic regimes in the 20th century was A dream. In 21th century, it might be argued that if people in most regions of the world have had great experience of democracy, they might just be not waiting for their chance. In 21th century it is easy to conclude that many of third world countries would have a chance, to develop democracy. The protection of individual rights is the goal of modern theory of democracy with greater economic freedom, the active involvement of the citizenry in government, and real elections. The experience of established democracy in third world was indeed irrelevant to theory of democracy. In the third world countries new regimes with repressive ambitions had to present themselves as offering to democracy was the main obstacle toward democracy.