|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| >> Foreign Aid in the National Interest >> Chapter 1 |
|
Jump to Chapter 1 Sections: There is no guarantee that electoral democracy will deliver such transparency and inclusion. But it is illusory to imagine that liberal autocracy is a development option in today’s world. There are precious few well-governed autocracies, and those that exist (such as Singapore) have sustained good governance for highly idiosyncratic reasons that are not broadly transferable. To develop truly good governance, the typical recipient of U.S. foreign assistance needs the openness, competition, and broad and free public participation of democracy. The pursuit of stable, effective democratic governance will involve different sequences of political reform in different countries. In some cases the basic framework for multiparty democracy is in place but needs to be deepened and made more effective and accountable. Some emerging democracies suffer from more specific obstacles to consolidation such as lack of the institutions of rule of law. And in repressive, corrupt, and closed regimes, multiparty competition if it exists at all is largely a façade. In these states, reforming the economy and strengthening civil society might be more viable in the short term than making an immediate transition to electoral democracy. Where democracy is completely absent, one plausible though more gradual path of transition is to phase in electoral competition beginning at the local level and then moving up to higher levels. This is the path that Taiwan followed over several decades.18 It is also the path by which many observers believe that China could become a democracy by extending competitive elections from the village level to the township, county, provincial, and then national level while also eventually allowing competing parties. In other highly authoritarian countries, such as Myanmar and Saudi Arabia, introducing free and fair municipal elections might allow the gradual accumulation of political trust and mutual restraint between regime and opposition, and between competing opposition forces, lowering the risks of transition. The one essential condition for progress along such a path: when competitive elections are held, they must be fairly and credibly administered. Such variation makes it impossible to offer a general strategy or sequence of political reform. That is why democracy and governance must be carefully assessed in each country receiving assistance, especially when resources are limited and strategic choices must be made. That is also why assistance for democracy and governance needs to be pursued with patience and an open mind. No one sector holds the key to fostering democracy and good governance. No one solution fits all cases. And no shortcuts exist. In most countries that lack stable and effective governance today, the United States must be prepared to work on many fronts over long periods. Even so, countries that need assistance for democracy and governance tend to share a few priorities. These involve ensuring that democracy advances development and responds to the needs of society generating capacity for and commitment to using public resources to promote the public good. Such efforts are not new. The foreign assistance community has worked on most of them, particularly over the past decade. What is needed now is not invention but innovation, adaptation, refinement, elaboration, deeper commitment, and an expansion of activity in some areas. page 4 |
 |
|||
|
