Democracy: Does America have a right to define what it is?

The Global Geographic Times, People's Republic of China

America's Iraq Failure is

No Failure of Democracy

Are America and the West unfair to China for browbeating it for its democratic failings? In this ironic op-ed from the chief editor if China's state-run People's Daily and published in Huanqui [the Global Geographic Times], Gang Ding argues that the catastrophe in Iraq stems from America's fallacious assumptions about democracy in general. He writes in part, 'By observing U.S. national security strategy, one observes how far democracy has fallen in the world, so that now it serves merely as a tool for the safeguarding of America's own national interests.'

By Gang Ding [丁刚], People's Daily Senior Editor

Translated By Mark Klingman

February 11, 2008

The Global Geographic Times - People's Republic of China - Original Article (Chinese)

If we take a good hard look at why America's Iraq policy has failed, it will help us develop a more open attitude toward building our own path toward democracy.

The failure of U.S. policy in Iraq is a failure to force that country to implement American-style democracy, but this isn't a failure of democracy itself. We shouldn't see the failure of the Bush Administration as democracy's failure. On the contrary, democracy is developing and expanding in different ways around the world. In fact, the diversification of global democracy is in itself “democratic.”

Democracy is the most basic pursuit of all humanity, but different cultures at different stages of development and social environments will have different forms of democracy. Therefore, democracy in the world today is not universal.

The Americans have made at least two basic errors in Iraq: The first was to take American democracy as the global standard; the second was to assume that American democracy could be adopted by all countries regardless of their level of development. To put it succinctly, to regard American democracy as universally applicable is to regard America's model of development universal as well. It is not. Further, by observing U.S. national security strategy one observes how far democracy has fallen in the world, so that now it serves merely as a tool for the safeguarding of America's own national interests.

Democracy is a good thing for everyone in the world. Americans are no exception and neither are the Iraqis. Iraq's people, like people all over the world, have the right to enjoy democracy - which includes the right to define and develop their own democratic institutions. It should be obvious that the choice of what kind of democracy to choose can only be decided by the Iraqis. The people of every nation have the desire to pursue democracy and must have the freedom to choose the right democratic model consistent with its own conditions.

Democracies differ around the world. The world is a colorful pageantry - so how could the world's democracies be any less so? Democracies are different because each nation's culture, history, values, and stage of social development is different. We can say that the "soil" of the society determines what kind of democratic "tree" grows. Democracy needs nurturing, sure, but most important of all is the soil it grows in.

Democracy cannot be wholly transplanted. Whether democracy takes root and goes on to flower and bear fruit depends on whether the majority of people believe that it's suitable for the country's political, economic, and cultural soil. And whether one looks at history or at current events, the lesson is that forcibly transplanted democracy carried the seeds of its own destruction, and will result in very dangerous consequences.

Events taking place in Iraq also tell us that as developing countries explore the democratic process, there are many twists and turns and more than a few difficulties - including foreign interference. The crux of the problem may lie in whether people of all walks of life accept the idea of democracy in a peaceful and stable fashion - so that it can develop according to national conditions that promote economic development for all.

Posted by WORLDMEETS.US

Over the years, Western media and academics have shouted "Democracy, Democracy!" at every turn, putting on their academic caps and lecturing others, simply to say that such-and-such country isn't democratic and such-and-such country should be more democratic - as if Western Democracy were the only kind under the sun. Westerners occupy the dominant position in today's world, and they sometimes talk as though they have a patent on the concept. The perception is that other countries have no right to talk on the subject, but had better just clear their ears out and listen to Westerners instruct them.

In fact, democracy doesn't belong to the West. The narrowing of the definition of democracy robs developing countries of their right to contribute their views to a certain extent, but also diminishes the prospects for democracy in the world. In the era of globalization, developing countries should find their own path of development by creating their own models of democracy.

Posted by WORLDMEETS.US

We must hold high the banner of democracy, and speak the language of democracy in our own voice. For unless developing countries make their own contributions, there will never be a democratic international system. Only then will we have reason to believe that democracy is still the "mainstream" of global civilization.

CLICK HERE FOR CHINESE VERSION

[Posted by WORLDMEETS.US February 25, 9:55pm]