After the Second World War, America played a fundamental role in the promotion and broadening of democratic aspects in Western Europe. As a result, it enhanced the European integration for the stabilization of the West European democracies. Worth noting is that this concept of the United States was replicated in other parts of the world too. The primary purpose of the US encouraging democratic practices is embedded in its domestic political culture which by origin, as well as, character has been described as moralistic. This essentially makes the promotion of values remain stuck in the foreign policies of the United States. (The Strategic Context 14)
Through this, the democratic politics of the Americans are based on the assumptions, as well as, beliefs related to the human nature and how they should behave towards each other and the relationships of institutions to the country’s citizens. In its interests, therefore, the country holds that these are significant values that cannot just be limited to the United States citizens. An assertion is made that if one has the belief in the provision of people’s equality and just as is endowed by the Creator concerning inalienable rights, then everyone in the world and not just American people should be subjected to equal rights within the democratic spheres.
Why has the spread of democracy been an important foreign policy principle since the end of the cold war?
The spread of democracy has been a vital principle to the United States since the end of the cold war. Essentially, this is because the citizens of a country often live better lives in democratic regimes. This arouses the American mission of generally improving the lives of both Americans and non-Americans. This is because the bonds related to common humanity principles doesn’t just stop at the American borders. However, these bonds are often limited by the competitiveness of various international systems. It has thus been its core principle that it steps up where there are limitations for the improvements of human life.
Also, the principle has been significant to the US for purposes of securing and promoting liberties for the world societies. Basically, the United States was founded on crucial ideas, as well as, ideals that are generally practicable everywhere. Because of the widespread instability that countries were experiencing after the cold war, it held that people had the right of establishing their own governments that would, in fact, be guided upon by the consent of the governed. Lastly, it has been a significant foreign policy because of the increasing inability of the United States to insulate itself from the challenges of the world. This was because of the status that it had acquired following the end of the war.
According to Walt, why is the United States failing to build democracies in other countries especially in the Middle-East?
According to Walt, United States has increasingly failed in its attempt at building democracies particularly in the middle-east region that has been plagued with unrest for a very long time. He asserts that he knows what does not work and the reasons behind it. Consequently, Walt mentions that what would not work particularly in the Middle-East is military intervention otherwise known as ‘foreign-imposed regime change.' The ideology that America can just march in a war-torn country, depose a country's ruler and the henchmen around him, write the country's new constitution, carry out elections and build a democratic state is not viable.
What is wrong with a foreign imposed regime?
Walt has given his ideas regarding the wrongs of such foreign imposed regime changes. Firstly, he mentions that success in a liberal order dependence on a written constitution and the elections of a state. This needs an efficient legal system, commitment to pluralism, sufficient incomes and education levels, as well as, the belief that the groups that have lost in an election would have the opportunity of even doing better in the future. Because several systems need to be aligned for making this aspect work, the West took multiple centuries for its achievement. Therefore, having the belief that the military of the United States could just export their democracy in a quick, as well as, a cheap manner as a military intervention requires some level of hubris.
Secondly, Walt mentions that the use of force for purposes of spreading democracy often culminate to violent resistance from the host. Nationality, as well as, other modalities of local identity have remained a dominant feature in the current world. However, several individuals dislike taking orders from armed foreign occupiers. Besides, those groups of people that have often lost their status, wealth and also power during the transitioning into a democratic state are most likely to oppose by taking up arms. Such occurrences culminating to wars and are the last resorts that struggling democracies need. This is because the violence triggered by such forces always trigger the rulers who are good at it particularly those in the Middle-East.
Lastly, Walt asserts that foreign occupiers in most cases do not have the right information concerning who to put in charge in case of the success of military intervention. Also, efforts that are well-intentioned and even generous for purposes of assisting the new regime in place have mostly fueled corruption and distorted the local politics in very unpredictable manners. Walt alludes that building a democracy in a foreign land is like an enormous project of social engineering and as a result, the expectations imposed on foreign powers to carry it out is like setting up a nuclear plant without having the information regarding the points of powerful earthquakes with a consequent expectation of a quick meltdown. (Walt)
What approaches would be effective in promoting democracy according to Walt?
Walt does not end here but gives two approaches according to him that would substantially promote democracy. He mentions diplomacy as the first approach. He retorts that where a genuine, committed and a significant movement in a democratic space exists, then powerful outsiders such as the United States can actually use subtle ways of influencing and encouraging gradual transitions. As a result, the United States can undertake nonmilitary conditions e.g. economic sanctions for the achievement of their democratic objectives. Basically, diplomacy is a lot more affordable and likely to succeed in comparison to a military invasion.
The second approach by Walt would be by setting a better example to the rest. This means that the democratic practices of America have more chances of being taken up by other countries if they can be considered as just, vibrant and also tolerant. This is in contrast to a country where inequality is highly prevalent; the infrastructures are clearly falling apart, expanding prison populations, and yet none seems to worry about the appalling situation. Generally, this means that the United States can increasingly do better in promoting the democratic ideals in the Middle-East if it does better in its home. It is only through this that democracy would be deemed as appealing by other states.
Can you give a personal example why the democratic ideals are losing appeals?
In some society’s the democratic ideals have widely lost their appeals. This is because they have considered democratic principles to be something of a Western origin. Therefore, failing to follow democracy is perceived by them to be a mode used in gaining their former national independence away from the control of other powers such as the United States.
What could we do about the fact that democracy is losing appeals?
Therefore, in order to minimize this lose in appeal regarding democracy, more information based on the benefits associated with the ideal should be promoted. Essentially, the strides that have been made the democratic states should be used as viable examples.
WORK CITED
Walt, Stephen. "Voice Why Is America So Bad At Promoting Democracy In Other Countries?” Foreign Policy. N.P., 2016. Web. 30 Apr. 2016.
The Strategic Context: Foreign Policy Strategy and the Essence of Choice. N.D
