Posts Tagged ‘democracy’

You don’t know how lucky you are, boy

Monday, March 3rd, 2008

The recent presidential “election” in Russia creates some interesting moral conundrums for the rest of the democratic world. One could be forgiven for wondering whether things have really improved for those living in the largest country within the former Soviet Union since the heady days of Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika. It is indeed true that Vladimir Putin’s Russia is by and large a friend of the broader West, at least, much more so than was the case when the Communist Party controlled the Soviet Union. And yet, he is, in a not dissimilar way to Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan, a dictator. He personally wields a truly disgusting amount of power for a single individual, ruling over such a large country.

The latest, blatantly obvious manifestation of Putin’s near-monarchical control of his power base is the Russian presidential election, won convincingly (numerically speaking) and yet unconvincingly (transparent process-wise) by the President’s chosen candidate, Dmitry Medvedev. Putin, of course, is continuing on in true dictatorial style as Prime Minister, where one would think he will likely continue to pull the nation’s strings. As David Hearst comments in the Guardian, Medvedev is somewhat stuck between a rock and a hard place in his new role:

But even greater danger lies in Medvedev being too successful and becoming his own man. For then, he will be sucking both limelight and power away from his political master and that is a dangerous thing to do, unless Putin agrees to it first and is planning his early retirement. There is no indication that he is. In the short term at least, Medvedev has to steer a middle course between failure and success. He has to be competently mediocre.

It will be interesting indeed to observe how the international community works with Medvedev (and Putin, his putative puppet-master) moving forwards. Gordon Brown has already extended something of a fig leaf, in the hope that relations between Russia and the United Kingdom might stand to improve as a result of this change in leadership at the top. True to form, President Bush admitted, a couple of days ago, not knowing much about Medvedev. As far as I can tell, neither Foreign Minister Stephen Smith nor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd have been asked about their thoughts on developments. One hopes that the international community takes a constructive approach, but also attempts in the most diplomatic way possible to remind Putin and Medvedev that they are not painting a particularly rosy picture of the state of Russia’s democracy with their tag-team approach to the government of the nation.

Postcards from the birthplace of democracy

Sunday, March 2nd, 2008

To be honest it was not much to look at. While throngs of tourists on the streets below rambled along the main drag on the winding route up to the more highly renowned Acropolis, this little patch of space, known as the Pnyx, sat all on its lonesome, with only a couple of people in sight or earshot. 

dsc04121.JPG
  

But would you believe it if I told you that this was the meeting place of the world’s first known democratic assembly – and that it is believed that this happened over five hundred years before the birth of Christ?

dsc04124.JPG
 

While in Athens recently, I found it hard to truly comprehend and come to terms with the relics of history that were often thrust into my immediate contact. Awe does not quite capture it; it’s something beyond awe. Bewilderment, perhaps. A small reminder that in case you had forgotten, you are just another insignificant piece of fungus along for the ride on this ball of rock of ours; a ball of rock that is constantly turning and moving the seasons ceaselessly onward. A hundred years ago objectively speaking is a long time for most, at least in terms of individual human experience. To just sit back and consider that over 2500 years ago, right here in this particular location in Athens where one can potter around today, the essential germ of what we know as democracy was arguably born, is a fairly humbling thought.

The view across to the Acropolis from the Pnyx is also somewhat humbling. 

dsc04125.JPG
  

dsc04126.JPG

Glory be to secularism in an unpredictable land

Friday, February 22nd, 2008

Booker Prize nominated writer Mohsin Hamid has a nicely written piece in the Guardian that sums up his feelings about the election results in Pakistan. What is truly wonderful about the result, as he points out, is that it does seem to offer credence to the idea that Pakistan has a secular heart:

Instead, Pakistan managed a relatively free and fair election that delivered a crushing defeat to the ruling party of Pakistan’s unpopular President Musharraf. More than that, the country’s religious parties were assigned to the electoral dustbin, with voters even in the supposedly conservative Northwest Frontier province that borders Afghanistan flocking to secular candidates. The winners were moderate, centrist politicians – suggesting perhaps that Pakistanis, notwithstanding acres of newsprint to the contrary, are at heart a moderate centrist bunch.

There’s more detail on that point over at OpenDemocracy:

The MMA, the major alliance of Islamist parties, won only three seats in the National Assembly. In 2002, the MMA won 63 seats in the country’s parliament. Tellingly, the godfather of the MMA and the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-i-Islam, Maulana Fazlur Rahman, lost in his constituency.

Assuming that President Musharraf goes soon and goes quietly, one wonders if there is a lesson to be learnt for the West from these election results. If Musharraf had not been so amenable to the West during his time as dictator, his administration would surely have been targeted by the Bush Administration for a spot of regime change during the heady period immediately following 9/11. It is hard to imagine secular elements within Pakistan achieving the same levels of support today if a more hawkish approach to Pakistan was taken back then; disliking America and the West would have been all too easy a trend to create for extreme fundamentalist groups around the country.

Instead, democracy has been allowed to run its course in Pakistan, and although it is perhaps too early to be sure, the results are promising.

Public pow-wows and reality television

Sunday, February 3rd, 2008

For some reason when I first read about the Rudd Labor Government’s latest intriguing proposal for a summit of 1000 eminent Australians, my thoughts immediately turned to a reality television show that I don’t recall ever watching. The 1 vs. 100 reality game show seems to be doing alright in the United States market, but from memory, it tanked when it debuted in Australia some time last year. Somehow one doubts that the government plans to run its national summit of the learned in quite the same way, but it’s an amusing thought.

In short, I think the summit is a grand idea. It’s another small step towards re-engaging the general public with the state of the nation, and to be frank after the disconnect of the Howard years, every new possibility seems worth exploring. I do have some concerns over Rudd’s assertion that selection of those invited to the summit will be “based on individual merit”. Who will select the invitees? To what extent are they going to be politically motivated? Are we going to get a fair mix of people with all sorts of political views, from Keynesian “socialists” through to libertarians, radical environmentalists and everyday folk? It would seem important that whatever recommendations come from the summit do actually attempt to distill what “the nation thinks”, rather than just a distillation of elite political opinion of any particular stripe.

I would also be interested to know how the government plans to “plug” the results of the summit into its policy program. Rudd has already promised that already announced Labor policy is sacrosanct, and that the results of the summit would not immediately become government policy. In order for the summit not to be a public relations exercise, the government needs to make sure that there is a clear process in place for reviewing its outcomes, and determining which of those should drive policy moving forwards. One of the political dangers of this exercise is that some participants may emerge down the track to condemn the government, if some of the summit’s recommendations (as is inevitable) are ignored or not pursued. This is particularly likely should the government do the right thing in a democratic sense, and invite Australians of all political stripes to participate.

In any case, the whole exercise will be fascinating to observe. This is bold, interesting policy for Australia.