Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Democracy, imposition of
Section C. International relations

This debate focuses on whether democracy can and should be imposed by military, diplomatic or economic action. However, it is often hard to disentangle such interventions from their other possible motives; for instance, while many think that the intervention in Iraq (from 2003) was essentially to impose democracy, cynics say that it was more about obtaining oil, and the official line remains that it was to prevent Saddam Hussein’s development of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Both teams must avoid descending into ’example ping-pong’, in which they simply list case studies, but must deconstruct the actual reasons that those particular instances have succeeded or failed.

Pros

[1] Democracy is desirable in itself as the best system of government. Despite its obvious flaws, any other system is bound to be worse. It ensures that governments are accountable to their people, guards against corruption, protects individual liberty and allows flawed policies to be corrected. Economies are more likely to be open, competitive and prosperous. If we believe in these benefits, we should promote them vigorously to others.

[2] Democracy is not a purely domestic issue, as it tends to produce governments that co-operate internationally. There has never been a war between two democracies.

[3] Democracy carries with it a selfcorrecting mechanism;if Western pressure leads to the replacement of a dictatorship with democracy, then the electorate can always choose to return to dictatorship — an unlikely prospect. So-called Western cultural imperialism actually consists of trusting the people to choose for themselves.

[4] As well as imposing democracy through force, it should also be promoted peacefully through diplomacy, trade and aid. In such cases, countries can choose whether to listen to us, but we can make their people well aware of our commitment to democracy and the reasons for it; for instance, through the BBC World Service. Choosing only to trade with or give aid to other democracies is sensible as their economies are more stable and any use of aid can be openly monitored.

Cons

[1] It is one thing to believe our system to be the best, and quite another to impose it on other countries. This is a breach of the UN policy of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of independent nations. Just as Western citizens fought for their political institutions, we should trust the citizens of other nations to do likewise if they wish to. Moreover, some countries may not have the prerequisites for a successful democratic system, such as a strong rule of law, and to impose democracy on them would not produce beneficial outcomes.

[2] There has also never been a war between two countries with a McDonald’s (although the Georgia versus Russia example has weakened the ’Golden Arches’ theory); democracy is not necessarily the causally important factor here. In fact, economic development may explain both why countries are more prosperous and why they are more peaceful, which would not make the case for forcing democratisation. In any case, India and Pakistan, Peru and Ecuador, and Greece and Turkey are all examples of pairs of democratic states with violent and nationalistic histories.

[3] The differing types of democracy make it impossible to choose which standards to impose. Britain, the USA and European countries all differ in terms of restraints on government and the balance between consensus and confrontation. Moreover, there is a serious risk of imposing superficial democracy, which in fact leads to the same single party simply using elections to legitimate its rule; almost no country does not bother with the pretence of elections.

[4] We should be prepared to engage constructively with countries and pressurise them to hold elections, or in some cases boycott them, but this is not the same as imposing democracy. The use of force against other countries, other than in selfdefence, is fundamentally incompatible with the qualities inherent in democracy.

Possible motions

This House would impose democracy with the barrel of a gun.

This House believes that democracy is so good we should force it on everyone.

Related topics

Democracy

Dictators, assassination of

Non-UN-sanctioned military intervention

Sanctions, use of