Even bad elections may beat none at all
While some worry that an “undemocratic party” will win Egypt’s parliamentary elections and others worry about violence and irregularities in presidential and parliamentary elections in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), it appears that the voting in both countries Monday and Tuesday went off unexpectedly well.
That is a low bar. There were lots of problems of course–names missing from voter rolls, missing, confusing and inaccurate ballots, campaigning too near polling places, paying for votes–but violence was relatively minor and people were clearly enjoying the opportunity to register their preferences. We of course have to await the considered judgment of observers, and there are several more rounds to go, but it is looking as if this first phase of elections in Egypt will be credible. DRC is less certain. Four opposition presidential candidates have already rejected the results, but Kabila’s main opponent, Etienne Tshisekedi wa Mulumba, has not yet spoken. He seems still to harbor hopes of winning.
If it happens, something like credible elections in these two countries would be excellent news, whoever wins.
The Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt certainly advocates things I find distasteful, including applications of sharia that are blatant violations of human rights. But that does not really make them undemocratic. It wasn’t so long ago in the United States that politicians regularly advocated segregation, which we now recognize as a blatant human rights violation. I shouldn’t even mention capital punishment.
DRC President Joseph Kabila, who is likely to win the first-past-the-post contest in DRC for a second term, is also not my kind of guy. In office for 10 years, he has not managed to move DRC from its unenviable position at the very bottom of the development scale. But what counts now is not the results but the process, which for the first time is being administered by the DRCers themselves. If the population believes the election was even remotely acceptable, that would be a big step forward.
I’m not keen on elections as a way of solving problems. Egypt will have just as many next week as it had last week, as will DRC. But as a marker of change, and an opportunity for citizens to participate and express their preferences, elections have virtue. Just look at Burma: its grossly unfree and unfair elections in 2010 have opened the door to reforms that were unthinkable only a few years before. Even bad elections may beat none at all.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The third law of holes
The first, well known, is that when you are in a hole, stop digging. The second, less known, is to fill it in to keep it from becoming a hazard.
The third: a hole not filled in will cause more damage in the future than it would cause if you took care of it now.
Europe needs to keep the third law in mind as December approaches. That is when the European Union, already facing an existential challenge from the euro crisis, is to decide on Serbia’s candidacy for membership. The EU can choose to ignore what is going on in northern Kosovo, where local Serbs are insisting on remaining part of Serbia, and go ahead with candidacy. Or it can insist on a clear and enforceable commitment by Belgrade to accept integration of the north with the rest of Kosovo, in accordance with the Ahtisaari plan. If it fails to do the latter, it will be violating the third law of holes.
Europe does not need another candidate for membership in this difficult moment. Serbia has done well in meeting many EU requirements since the fall of Slobodan Milosevic, but Serbia’s small population and its aging demographic make it a marginal addition to the Union, at best. At worst, it could become a financial burden on the other 27 or 28 members (Croatia is already slated to become the 28th). While certainly not a candidate for the euro zone, Serbia’s economic performance is not going to contribute much to European vitality: the latest IMF projection is 2% growth in 2011 with 11.3% increase in consumer prices. Next year the IMF is projecting 3% growth and 4.3% increase in prices, which sounds unlikely in both dimensions.
The counter-argument is this: getting Serbia irreversibly on track for EU membership will ensure that problems like Kosovo and Belgrade’s relationship with independence-minded Republika Srpska (the Serb-controlled 49 per cent of Bosnia and Herzegovina) fade rather than grow. These issues will evaporate as Serbia gets closer to EU membership. Besides, Serbia has parliamentary elections next year. It would be better if Boris Tadić’s pro-Europe Democratic Party were to win once again. Giving Serbia EU candidacy will help.
I repeat these arguments for the sake of completeness. I don’t know of any evidence that they are true. Tadić has had more than ample opportunity to choose Europe over Kosovo, something he has steadfastly refused to do. Maybe someone with less tarnished nationalist credentials would be able to accept what everyone knows: Kosovo is lost. But this unsubstantiated pro-Tadić reasoning provides ample justification for kicking the can down the road, which is where most of the 27 EU members would like to see it. They don’t have any stomach for worrying about additional bits of Balkan real estate when their common currency is on the verge of going down the drain.
I am hoping that there is at least one EU member that will see the situation differently and invoke the third law of holes. This is one of those odd situations–like the Dutch insistence on turning Ratko Mladić over to the Hague Tribunal–when a single EU member can have a profound impact by standing on principle. That’s what the third law of holes requires.
I know you are wondering: no, there is no fourth law of holes. That’s it!
PS: I’ve corrected in the above text a mistake in the original that said presidential elections will occur next year. In fact, parliamentary elections will occur next year (the rumored date is May 5–certainly there is no reason to rush candidacy for that deadline) and presidential elections will occur in 2013.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Showing up is half an election
Egypt’s first post-Mubarak election, run according to astoundingly complex rules, looks as if it passed its first test today: a lot of people showed up. There will surely be lots of reports of abuses and improprieties, and there are several more rounds to go in the effort to choose members of a parliament whose only clear responsibility is to choose a committee to write a new constitution. But the big turnout will validate the decision of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) to proceed despite continuing protests against military rule and complaints about the electoral system. Many Egyptians don’t like the instability that deprives the country of foreign tourists and weakens an already struggling economy. They voted with their feet today.
One tweep opined before the election: “…losing an election is far more politically advantageous than boycotting them.” Unfortunately, some of our dear democratic friends in Egypt seem to have decided the opposite. Even if they did not boycott, they spent far too much time and energy trying to get people to demonstrations in Tahrir square against the military’s blatant efforts to insulate itself from civilian control rather than getting out the vote and trying to make the elections go their way.
Their fear is that the military is establishing a regime in which it will remain above and apart from civilian authority, unaccountable and protective of its privileges. Many of the most determined demonstrators also fear that remnants of Hosni Mubarak’s National Democratic Party (NDP) or the Muslim Brotherhood’s newly organized Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) will do well in the elections. That will almost surely be the case for the FJP, which has the advantage of a well-ensconced infrastructure, great discipline and a history of determined opposition to a regime that fell less than a year ago.
It is difficult to say you are in favor of pushing the military out of power and at the same time oppose the elections that are a prerequisite for pushing the military out of power. It is time for secularist democrats to realize that organization and coherence count. They are unlikely to win big in any event, but they would surely do better if they focused more on grassroots organizing and less on challenging the SCAF in the piazza. That will be especially important for the presidential elections next year, where fortunately the main protagonists appear to be from the moderate middle of the political spectrum.
Democracy is a long-term game: showing up is half an election, but an election is just a moment in a decade-long transition. The important thing is to put in place a mechanism that people regard as legitimate and useful, one that can be used many times in the future. It will be great for Egypt if these elections lead in that direction.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Getting ready for post-Assad Syria
While my enthusiasm for nonviolent revolution in Syria has not waned, some of the best pieces of the past week have focused on the risks involved.
International Crisis Group (ICG) weighed in with an analysis of where things might go wrong:
- the fate of the Alawite community;
- the connection between Syria and Lebanon;
- the nature and implications of heightened international
involvement;- the long-term impact of the protest movement’s growing
militarisation; and- the legacy of creeping social, economic and institutional
decay.
Patrick Seale offered a more generic warning of civil war and a far-fetched (or is it imaginative?) proposal for BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) mediation to avoid it (with thanks to Carne Ross for tweeting it).
Meanwhile, back at the Arab League they imposed in principle serious sanctions on Syria, including a ban on transactions with its central bank as well as travel by regime big shots and a halt to Arab development projects in Syria. As usual, some of the important stuff is not mentioned. Commercial air transportation with Syria will continue, assets in the Gulf have not been frozen, and neighbors Lebanon, Iraq and Jordan have not committed to complying with the sanctions, which will probably be implemented slowly and incompletely. Even if all were willing, the regime would find ways of taking advantage of sanctions to enrich its least savory characters.
One other thing is also certain: the longer it takes to get rid of Assad, the more difficult the transition to a democratic regime will be. No one can pretend that the Syrian National Council (SNC) is yet ready to govern, even if Libya and France have recognized it (the latter as a partner for dialogue and not a government). It needs to hasten its preparations, which so far seem rudimentary. The SNC (and other elements of the opposition?) will reportedly meet in Cairo within a week to elaborate its vision and plans for the transition. The Syrians could do worse than take that ICG list of issues and work on serious plans to resolve them.
PS: The UN Human Rights Commission “Report of the independent international commission of inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic,” published this morning, makes grim reading. Here are a couple of randomly chosen paragraphs:
48. Several defectors witnessed the killing of their comrades who refused to execute orders to fire at civilians. A number of conscripts were allegedly killed by security forces on 25 April in Dar’a during a large-scale military operation. The soldiers in the first row were given orders to aim directly at residential areas, but chose to fire in the air to avoid civilian casualties. Security forces posted behind shot them for refusing orders, thus killing dozens of conscripts.
49. Civilians bore the brunt of the violence as cities were blockaded and curfews imposed. The commission heard many testimonies describing how those who ventured outside their homes were shot by snipers. Many of the reported cases occurred in Dar’a, Jisr Al Shughour and Homs. A lawyer told how security forces took positions in old Dar’a during the operation in April. Snipers were deployed on the hospital rooftop and other buildings. “They targeted anyone who moved”, he said. Two of his cousins were killed on the street by snipers.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Next week’s peace picks
Tuesday, November 29th
6:00 – 7:00 PM
Registration and Networking Reception
7:00 – 8:00 PM
Panel Discussion and Q&A
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
1779 Massachusetts Avenue Northwest
Speakers: Steve Hayes
Speakers: The Weekly Standard
Speakers: Josh Rogin
Speakers: Foreign Policy
Moderator: Elise Stefanik
Moderator: Foreign Policy Initiative
Michael D. Swaine, David Lampton, Geoff Dyer Wednesday, November 30, 2011 – Washington, D.C.
9:00 AM – 10:30 AM EST
Register to attend
As the world’s predominant political, economic, and military force, the United States faces a significant challenge in responding to China’s rising power and influence, especially in Asia. This challenge will require more effective U.S. policies and a reassessment of America’s fundamental strategic assumptions and relationships.
Jane Harman, Director, President, and CEO, Woodrow Wilson Center
Jonah Blank, U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Polly Nayak, Chair, Woodrow Wilson Center Working Group on Pakistan
Robert M. Hathaway, Asia Program Director, Woodrow Wilson Center
Others to be announced
Daniel W. Drezner will be speaking on his new book from Princeton University Press, called Theories of International Politics and Zombies. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a senior editor at The National Interest. Prior to Fletcher, he taught at the University of Chicago and the University of Colorado at Boulder. Drezner has received fellowships from the German Marshall Fund of the United States, the Council on Foreign Relations, and Harvard University. He has previously held positions with Civic Education Project, the RAND Corporation, and the Treasury Department.
- Host:
- School of International Service
- Contact:
- Catherine Favier Kelly
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
All the action is not in the streets
The streets are dangerous in both Egypt and Syria.
In Egypt, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) has named a new civilian prime minister and intends to proceed with the first round of parliamentary elections next Tuesday. While there is talk of boycotting among secularists, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists intend to participate. As the violence of the last week ebbs, Tahrir square has been filling, but odds are that SCAF will have its way and elections will proceed. It is starting to look as if the secularists will be the big losers. Might they have done better to devote more time and energy to organizing their voters and less to occupying Tahrir?
The Arab League has issued an ultimatum to Damascus demanding admission of international observers. Failure to do so will supposedly lead to vigorous travel, trade, investment and other sanctions. The Bashar al Assad regime seems determined to continue its crackdown, which is still killing dozens of demonstrators every day, principally in Homs yesterday. The Arab League, not known for taking decisive action, needs to be ready to make good on its bluff.
Military action in Syria, despite French blague, still seems to me not just far off but nigh on impossible. Moscow is still blocking action in the UN Security Council, the Arab League is not asking for it, the Americans don’t want to think about it, and the Europeans are not going to do it on their own. The best bet for the Syrians is still nonviolent protest, though it may be better to focus on boycotts, general strikes and work stoppages rather than putting large numbers of people in the now very dangerous streets.
Revolution is an emotional business. Often the headiest experiences are in mass rallies. But there are other ways to protest, and the ballot box should not be ignored. All the action is not in the streets.
RSS - Posts
