Abstract

Different starting points, similar processes and different outcomes can be identified when comparing East Central Europe and East and South Asia. The two regions face similar global challenges, follow regional patterns of democratization and face crises. In communist times, East Central Europe was economically marginalized in the world economy, while some parts of Asia integrated well in the global economy under authoritarian rule. Europeanization and a favorable external environment encouraged the former communist countries to opt for the Western-style rule of law and democracy. Different external factors helped the Third Wave democracies in Asia, especially South Korea and Taiwan, which benefited from the support of the United States and other global economic, military and cultural partnerships to develop their human rights culture and democracy while facing their totalitarian counterparts, namely the People’s Republic of China and North Korea. The very different positions Taiwan and Hungary have in their respective regions follow from the different capacities of their transformation management since 1988-1989. Taiwan preserved its leading role and stable democracy despite the threat to its sovereignty from the People’s Republic of China. Hungary never had such an influential and problematic neighbor and was ensured security and welfare partnership by the European Union, which Taiwan lacked. While Taiwan was less secure, economic and social conditions were more favorable for democratization than those in Hungary. Hungary, in turn, held a leading position in democratization processes in the period of post-communist transition which was lost during the crisis and conflicts of the last decade (after 2006 and especially since 2010). Despite the fact that liberalization prepared the way for peaceful transition in both countries and resulted in similar processes of democratic consolidation in the 1990s, Hungary joined the ‘loser’ group in its region, whereas Taiwan is among the top ‘winning’ countries in its region. Taiwan at the moment is starting comprehensive reform processes toward enhanced democracy, civil rights and the rule of law, and Hungarian development is criticized by many external and internal analysts as straying from the path of European-style consolidated democracies towards illiberal trends and hybridization. Western global concepts of democratization may help to identify similarities and differences, and compare stronger and weaker factors in the democratic transitions in Asia and Europe within the Third Wave democracies.

Highlights

  • The paper is based on the results of discussions from global and European political science and international relations, including: PP 4 ’18–– the “end of transition paradigm” (Carothers, 2002); –– “anti-democracy promotion and democracy promotion/development strategies”(Carothers, 2015; Whitehead, 2014); –– “hybridization and new authoritarianism” (Diamond, 2002; Morlino, 2009; Krasztev, Til, 2015; Levitsky-Way, 2010; Babayan, Risse, 2015; Soest, Whitehead, 2015; Authoritarianism, 2015)

  • Dahrendorf (1990), in his famous stage model, made it clear that, after the emergence of a new civil society, its political culture will mature only after a long and conflict-ridden period leading to the establishment of a new constitution, political system and market economy

  • Linz and Stepan (1996) reflected on civil society as a prerequisite of democratic consolidation embedded in the framework of democracy, the market economy, statehood, and the new rule of law

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The paper is based on the results of discussions from global and European political science and international relations, including: PP 4 ’18–– the “end of transition paradigm” (Carothers, 2002); –– “anti-democracy promotion and democracy promotion/development strategies”(Carothers, 2015; Whitehead, 2014); –– “hybridization and new authoritarianism” (Diamond, 2002; Morlino, 2009; Krasztev, Til, 2015; Levitsky-Way, 2010; Babayan, Risse, 2015; Soest, Whitehead, 2015; Authoritarianism, 2015).

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call