Peter J. Burnell

Autocratic opening to democracy: why legitimacy matters

Abstract As recent experiments in democratisation around the world show signs of achieving success, or failure, or more usually something in between, the attention of democracy promotion actors in the international community is turning to the worlds remaining outstanding autocracies. This article identifies the autocracies, discusses the notion of autocratic opening, and explores how opening can come about, with particular reference to international intervention. The article argues that, for identifying the prospects for autocratic opening and determining the forms of constructive engagement available to international actors, it is useful to distinguish between the different grounds on which various autocracies claim legitimacy, and the specific vulnerabilities to which their principal legitimating base gives rise.

Promoting democracy – promoting autocracy? International politics and national political regimes

Has the last tide of democratization been replaced by a new wave of democratic reversal? Do two decades of international democracy promotion now have to compete with the promotion of authoritarian rule by powers that have resisted democratization internally? Are there more pressing grounds than ever to investigate international political influences on the prospects not just for transition to and consolidation of democracy but the persistence, resurgence and spread of more authoritarian regimes? These are among the big issues raised in this introduction to the special issue. It does not pretend to provide definitive responses, but rather makes a start on how to look for some answers. The introduction spells out an agenda that should take a central place in future research into the influence of international politics on national political regimes. It gives a window onto how the multinational contributions in this issue add to our knowledge and take that agenda further forwards.

From evaluating democracy assistance to appraising democracy promotion

Organisations involved in delivering international democracy assistance are engaging increasingly with questions about how to assess their activities. A double shift in the terms of reference, from the ex post evaluation of assistance projects or programmes to ex ante appraisal of the broader democracy promotion strategies, could make democracy promotion more effective. This does not mean abandoning the former; on the contrary its status would be enhanced. Improving the chain of learning that leads from assistance evaluations to the formulation of promotion strategies could improve decision-making over how and whether to promote democracy abroad. Because strategies for democracy promotion are constitutive of the political relationship with countries, different strategies have different implications for the possibilities of political self-determination. For that reason and because democratisation and hence effective democracy promotion may be beneficial for human development, international peace and national security, strategies that reflect informed appraisal would be an improvement on a defective status quo. The challenges include: more systematic data gathering; innovative ways of comparing the various democracy promotion options; and institutional changes that connect the research findings to the high politics of policy-making.

Promoting party politics in emerging democracies

This opening section briefly introduces international political party support, that is, assistance to political parties by international organizations, mostly from the US and Europe, to strengthen individual political parties, to promote peaceful interaction between parties and to help to create a more stable and democratic environment for political parties in new, struggling or flawed democracies. Before going on to introduce the contributions to this collection, this introduction discusses three major issues related to international support to political parties: the current ‘party crisis’ in young as well as in old democracies; the intrusive (political) nature of international party assistance; and the difficulties involved in assessing its effectiveness. Political parties seem much more difficult to work with than (other) political and civil society organizations. Subsequently, we will turn to the case studies, which focus on the former Soviet Union, the Balkans, and Africa, with excursions into Cambodia and El Salvador. Most of the contributions dwell on two contrasting country cases, and all of them combine attention to the state of political parties and party systems in their respective countries with the role played by international involvement and party support in particular. We will briefly present and discuss the major issues raised for international party support in the country studies, and try to formulate an answer to the question about where and when party support might make a meaningful contribution to supporting democratic transformation and consolidation.

Building on the Past?: Party Politics in Zambia's Third Republic

From the standpoint of recent and prospective political reform, the most promising cluster of countries in Africa is in the central and southern region. Zambia has been in the forefront. Zambias reintroduction of multi-party politics, following the end of the Second Republic and its one-party state, brought about a new ruling party and a new president. The outlook for consolidating a multi-party system, and developing the political parties further, can be assessed by way of comparison with the countrys first experience of political pluralism, and of the reasons why that came to an end, in December 1972. Account should also be taken of the legacy of the Second Republic. The future of party politics in Zambias Third Republic is uncertain, given the factionalism shown by all three main parties, the failure of the ruling party to maintain its early impetus and the weak opposition displayed by its rivals.

Legislative-Executive Relations in Zambia: Parliamentary Reform on the Agenda

This article examines legislative-executive relations in Zambia’s Third Republic in the decade since the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) came to power in 1991. It claims there is an imbalance in power favouring the executive. There is a deficit of political accountability. By ‘accountability’ here is meant a broad two-dimensional concept that embraces both answerability — the requirement to inform, explain and justify — and enforceability, namely the capacity of accounting agencies to impose sanctions. 3

Good government and democratization: A sideways look at aid and political conditionality

Some aspects of the aid donors’ current interest in political conditionality are examined in the light of perspectives from the aid receiving world. The chances of implementing policies for good government successfully through the attachment of political conditions to aid will be served by: clarity of aims and objectives on the part of the donors; transparency of purpose and consistency in application; a strategic grasp of the political complexities of each aid receiving country, in order that the application of conditionality does not weaken the friends of good government and arm its opponents. Ideally, the modus operandi of political conditionality should exhibit the very same characteristics that are held to provide the reasons for attaching the conditions, such as transparency and greater openness, accountability and the rule of law. In practice this ideal may be unattainable, especially with regard to reconciling the moral of political accountability in the aid‐receiving countries with the realities ...

Democracy, democratization and climate change: complex relationships

Relationships between democracy and more particularly democratization on the one side and climate change and responses to that on the other are underexplored in the two literatures on democratization and climate change. A complex web exists, characterized by interdependence and reciprocal effects. These must be plotted in as systematic and comprehensive a way as possible. Only then can we establish whether democratization really matters for climate change and for responding adequately to the challenges it poses. And only then can we assess the consequences that a changing climate might have for democracy and democratization. Implications follow for international efforts to support the spread of democracy around the world and for climate governance. This collection of theoretically informed and empirically rooted studies combines insights from academics and more policy-oriented writers. A major objective is to facilitate dialogue among not just analysts of democracy, democratization and climate change but with actors in two fields: international democracy support and climate action.

Arrivals and departures: A preliminary classification of democratic failures and their explanation

Many instances of democratic disappointment are beginning to emerge in the wake of the high tide of the most recent ‘wave’ of democratisation. This article offers a categorisation, as a preliminary to investigating the reasons. A review of theoretical frameworks on democratic transition and consolidation reveals a rich choice of possible approaches to explaining the varied experiences summed up by the categories. A reversal of political liberalisation, a stalling or the unpicking of democratic transition, failures to consolidate democracy, and deconsolidation are all analytically distinct. In regard to their explanation, there are both symmetries and asymmetries with the many approaches to understanding successful democratisation. Any framework of analysis should be sensitive to possible new challenges to democratisation and to the established democracies.

Foreign aid resurgent : new spirit or old hangover?

The analysis in this chapter proceeds from a summary of aid’s decline in the 1990s and its recent recovery, to an explanation highlighting two potentially competing agendas: first, globalization and poverty; and second, post-9/11 and other new security concerns. The subsequent sections assess the contribution of political development aid to aid’s reviving fortunes, and argue that confused and imperfect understandings over the relationships between socioeconomic and political variables only make more likely a situation where realpolitik is a major determinant of aid, so that notwithstanding signs of aid’s recovery, its developmental impact will remain insecure.