|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| >> Foreign Aid in the National Interest >> Chapter 1 |
|
Jump to Chapter 1 Sections: A strategy for assisting democratic governanceIn recent years much more assistance has gone to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and business coalitions working for greater transparency and accountability, and to efforts to strengthen government institutions to monitor and combat corruption. The surge in complex humanitarian emergencies during the 1990s was met with a better capacity to respond, particularly to the political dimensions of postwar recovery, and with a new ability to move in quickly to assist political reconstruction after violent conflicts. Gradually, democracy and governance programs have been guided by a more nuanced understanding of the political context in each country, and methods of strategic assessment for country programs have been honed. How can the United States foster stable, effective democracies in the coming decades? First, the objective must be clear. The goal is not simply to advance democracy around the world. As the collapse of democracy in Pakistan in 1999 showed, a country can have vigorously competitive national elections with frequent shifts in power and still have governance that fails to generate development and loses public confidence. Nor is the goal simply to promote more capable and transparent government. Few leaders can deliver and sustain good governance with its commitment to promoting the public good and restraining the abuse of power without the institutional accountability to other branches of government and to the people that democracy provides. Even when nondemocratic leaders are sincerely committed to reform, the absence of institutional mechanisms to monitor and restrain power eventually degrades the quality and legitimacy of governance. In almost every country good governance responsible, accountable, public-spirited must go hand in hand with democracy. First, democracy provides the people with an indispensable instrument of electoral accountability the opportunity to remove leaders who perform poorly. Second, when this opportunity is denied through obstacles to fully free, fair, competitive, and neutrally administered elections the incentive of incumbents to restrain themselves and serve the public good withers. Corruption seeps through the financial and political system, as in Indonesia. Rulers become not only venal and distant from public concerns, but also increasingly abusive of human rights, as in Zimbabwe. Third, democracy provides the public with the freedom and the institutional means, between elections, to scrutinize the conduct and policy decisions of public officials and hold them accountable. Fourth, leaders in a democracy thus have more pressures, means, and incentives to explain and justify their decisions and to consult a broad range of constituencies before passing laws and making decisions. Fifth, wider public dialogue and participation in policymaking produce decisions that are more legitimate and sustainable. Free, fair, and competitive elections are the essential factor for democracy. Moreover, other institutions of good governance are much more likely to be vibrant and effective in a democracy than in a nondemocracy. These include an independent judiciary that enforces clear and predictable laws, an elected parliament that is autonomous and capable of checking the power of the executive branch, and a civil society with the freedom and resources to monitor, evaluate, question, and participate in making and implementing policy. When governance is open to the scrutiny and involvement of a wide range of NGOs, interest groups, think tanks, and mass media, it is more likely to be transparent, public-spirited, and thus legitimate. page 3 |
 |
|||
|
