US Democracy Promotion Research Articles

US democracy promotion in the Maghreb: much ventured, little gained

ABSTRACT The United States has invested billions of dollars in promoting democracy in the Maghreb. In the decade following the Arab Spring, some of that investment appeared to be bearing fruit, particularly in the case of Tunisia. Today, however, the Maghreb has joined the global trend of authoritarian backsliding. This article will examine US democracy promotion efforts in the Maghreb over the past 20 years to assess what role US support has had in helping as well as hindering democratisation in the region. The article will look critically at the tools and policy approaches employed by the United States beginning with President George W. Bush’s Freedom Agenda and establishment of the Middle East Partnership Initiative, examining the Obama administration’s approach towards the aftermath of the 2011 uprisings, and ending with President Biden’s renewed focus on democracy. The piece will attempt to answer the question of why, despite significant and high-level attention on democracy promotion, US efforts have failed to produce their desired results.

The contested origins of US democracy promotion: the national endowment for democracy and its congressional critics

In 1983, a compromise between the Reagan administration, members of Congress and private groups led to the establishment of the bipartisan democracy promotion organization: the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Tracing congressional efforts to prevent the formation of the NED, this article offers the first comprehensive, archival-based study of the NED’s critics and their arguments and motivations. I find that opposition to the NED consisted of an unlikely and ideologically diverse alliance between conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats, who took issue with its organizational structure and strategic objectives. Although Congress eventually established the NED with minor concessions to its critics, its origin was considerably more contested than previously acknowledged. The case of the NED also demonstrates the substantial influence of domestic politics and individual members of Congress on US foreign policymaking.

Perceptions of democracy and the rise of Donald Trump: A framing analysis of Saudi Arabian media

The 2016 US presidential election, which brought Donald J. Trump to power, raised concerns that his ascendency could undermine US democracy promotion and enable illiberal regimes to resist calls for reform. This article seeks to hold this argument up to empirical scrutiny via a framing analysis of coverage of the US election in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). To some extent, the analysis supports the claim: throughout the election, the KSA media offered several substantive criticisms of democracy. However, Trump’s campaign also served as a catalyst for a discussion about the merits of democracy, revealing some admiration for its key principles, and an acknowledgement of the challenges it faces in the 21st century.

Is there difference in democracy promotion? A comparison of German and US democracy assistance in transitional Tunisia

ABSTRACTSince the 1990s, comparative scholars and constructivists have recognized the universally liberal character of democracy promotion and yet continued the analysis of difference in this area. Mainly in studies of German and US democracy promotion, constructivists have demonstrated the recurring and difference-generating impact of ideational factors. In this article, I hence assume the likeliness of difference and address the question of how we can analyse and explain those differences through a comparison of German and US democracy assistance in transitional Tunisia. I conceive of Germany and the US as a dissimilar pair and adopt a broad perspective to uncover differences at the diplomatic level and between and within the respective approaches to democracy assistance in Tunisia. Theoretically, I argue that national role conceptions hardly impact democracy assistance in a clear manner, and that roles are renegotiated in the process. I rather focus on liberal and reform liberal conceptions of democracy, which shape perceptions of the local context, and democracy assistance agencies different organizational cultures, which impact civil society support. Finally, I account for transnational dialogue and coordination as a factor mitigating differences in democracy promotion.

Foreign policy begins at home: the local origin of support for US democracy promotion

ABSTRACT Citizens hold opinions about what kinds of foreign policy their government should pursue. Because foreign policy often has geographically specific domestic consequences, we expect opinions to vary with the locality of its impact. In this article, we examine whether individual support for US foreign policy to promote democracy abroad depends on exactly where the policy’s domestic impact will occur. We expect individuals to favor policies that bestow local benefits while opposing those that impose local costs. Accordingly, we argue that support for proposed democracy aid grants will be higher when such aid benefits local firms and organizations. Conversely, we expect that opposition to proposed economic sanctions in the form of development aid cuts will be higher when the associated domestic costs stemming from lost jobs fall locally. Using the results from an original survey experiment, we find evidence that a positive local impact of aid increases support for and reduces opposition to democracy promotion, while a negative local impact of sanctions reduces indifference and increases opposition to punitive policy in the case of democratic backsliding.

Harmony and Resilience: US Democracy Promotion's Basic Premises

AbstractScholarship on US foreign policy regularly claims that US democracy promotion policy is informed by a coherent and harmonious set of basic premises. In this article, I first examine the validity of this claim for US post–Cold War administrations. I find operational in US foreign policy rhetoric three stable premises: that democracy is a universal(ly aspired to) principle, that external democracy promoters are legitimately involving themselves in another country's political affairs, and that this policy endeavor is in the best interest of all involved stakeholders. Following theoretical expectations that culture and cultural aspects are relatively stable and adaptable entities and promote stability in behavior, I then pursue the question of how these premises have fared in an environment particularly challenging to their validity, namely in the case of US democracy promotion in Egypt. I show how, even in light of contradictory evidence, the basic premises remain resilient and function as a discursive structure that enables and constrains policy options.

The US Democracy Promotion in the Middle East, A Materialistic Approach, Actions versus Rhetoric

The US Democracy Promotion in the Middle East, A Materialistic Approach, Actions versus Rhetoric

One Size Does Not Fit All: An Analysis of US and EU Democracy Promotion in the Western Balkans

In the post-Cold War era, with democratic peace theory on the rise, efforts to promote democracy around the world have flourished. Western and Western democratic values-oriented states in particular have acted on the belief that democracy promotion would contribute to world peace. Yet this process is not as utopian as described; it is also highly contingent, with no single prescription for success nor common idea of what the end result should look like. This study elaborates the problematic aspects of democracy promotion by examining the case of US and EU democracy promotion in the Western Balkans. The problems uncovered in this analysis fall into three categories: 1) those stemming from the very nature of democracy promotion as an exercise, 2) those specific to the promoters of democracy and 3) those relating to the particular characteristics or circumstances of the target state or region. Based on the analysis, this study concludes that such problems will continue to arise so long as the promoters of democracy continue to approach the process monolithically, without sensitivity to, and synchronization with, the cultural and political realities on the ground in target states.

Containing revolution: democracy promotion, the Cold War and US national security

This article examines the rise of democracy promotion as a US national security priority and the origins of the US’ first democracy promotion organization: the National Endowment for Democracy. During the 1970s, non-state actors called for the foundation of a private democracy promotion organization to overcome strategic and organizational dilemmas which had resulted in the US state limiting its export of democracy in favour of short-term national security objectives and restraining state–private network organizations during the Cold War. Blueprints for a private democracy foundation resolved these dilemmas by removing the US state as the key actor in democracy promotion. However, the fact that private democracy promoters required state funding to be effective led to a reconciliation with the state, and the foundation of the NED as a privately managed but state-funded organization during the Reagan administration. This reconciliation has led to a recurrence of previous dilemmas, which impact US democracy promotion today.

The interaction of interests and norms in international democracy promotion

The existing research on international democracy promotion is characterised by a peculiar tension. On the one hand, many scholars agree that, since 1990, democracy promotion has indeed become a significant aim guiding the foreign and development policies of North-Western democracies. On the other hand, there is a far-reaching consensus that this normative goal is regularly ignored once it collides with economic and/or security interests. This article challenges the notion that we can understand the motives and drivers behind democracy promotion by assuming that interests and norms represent two neatly separated and clearly ranked types of factors. It argues that democracy promotion policies are the result of a complex interaction of interests and norms. After first developing this argument theoretically, the article presents results from a comparative research project on the US and German democracy promotion that support this claim.

Negotiating interference: US democracy promotion, Bolivia and the tale of a failed agreement

Since 2009 the USA and the Bolivian government have been trying to fix their broken diplomatic relations. These negotiations culminated in 2011 in the signing of a bilateral agreement but, ultimately, failed to establish a basis for mutually acceptable development aid relations. This article analyses these negotiations and suggests a partial explanation that accounts for their dynamics and results. Specifically it shows how the negotiations have pitted Bolivian demands for state sovereignty and mutual respect, based on an egalitarian understanding of inter-state relations, against the US emphasis on common obligations and universal rights, informed by a non-egalitarian notion of liberal hegemony.

The New Project for the Middle East: From US Democracy Promotion to ISIL Destruction

The supercilious idea of the United States that, by toppling Saddam Hussein, can rapidly democratize Iraq and unleash a democratic tsunami in the Middle East, has metamorphosed into an apocalypse that swept the core nations of the region. Chaos and destruction became the “manifest destiny” of these peoples and democracy became a dangerous fantasy. The U.S. record of building democracy after invading other countries is mixed at best and the Bush administration’s commitment to state-building efforts in Iraq is doubtful. The United States have failed at developing democracy in the Middle East – which has led to increased instability and anarchy – because U.S. foreign policy has misunderstood the formula for building democracy in the region. The United States is just the latest Western nation to fail in the Middle East. The repercussions of a miscalculated intervention in Iraq were likely to complicate the spread of democracy in the Middle East rather than to promote it. Instead of developing democratic governments in the region the US intervention paved the way for the emergence of more oppressive radical groups that hijacked the reins of power from the legitimate governments and anguished peoples’ lives through acts of terror and bullying. The new paradox that Bush’s neoconservative government created in Iraq and the Middle East has turned a lofty project of democratization into a disaster of destruction. While ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) has seized core leadership positions in Syria, Iraq and other places, it is putting in practice the larger tripartite plan of the disintegration of the Middle East. In the process of establishing the Islamic Caliphate, ISIL is sowing the seeds of its own destruction as the U.S. contemplates increased military action in the Middle East, specifically authorization of military force in Syria. However, if the US desires to preserve American preferential treatment in the region it should reconsider the policies that created so much anarchy.

Promoting democracy in Latin America: foreign policy change and US democracy assistance, 1975–2010

Since the Cold War the USA has articulated and implemented explicit strategies of democracy promotion. One interesting target of such efforts is Latin America, in part because of the region’s geographic proximity to the USA and of the mixed record of US support for democracy there. This paper examines the impact of the end of the Cold War and the 9/11 episode on the nature, purposes, targets and consequences of US democracy assistance to Latin America. Examining democracy aid allocations, social and political factors and other variables, it traces changes in aid strategies, purposes and recipients generated by these paradigm shifts, and assesses the impact of such assistance on the politics of the region. It concludes with implications of these findings for US democracy promotion policies.

A Brief Survey of Democracy Promotion in US Foreign Policy

Democracy promotion has been a centerpiece of US foreign policy for over half a century. This article explores the evolution of democracy promotion in US foreign relations from 1821 to 2014. While the quantity and quality of US democracy promotion policy evolved in a nonlinear fashion, US presidents varied the ways and means of democracy promotion as a way to achieve national security objectives. There is signification variation among US presidents on the specific linkages between democracy and security, resulting in divergent policy applications and technical approaches.

American hýbris: US Democracy Promotion in Cuba after the Cold War — Part 2

This second part of the article deals with the importance of democracy promotion towards Cuba as an internal political issue in the US, the so-called ‘two-level game’. In the last decade, democracy promotion has been receiving criticisms from the academic community and policymakers. The backlash on democracy promotion, the unintended consequences of democratic assistance in developing countries and the difficulty of predicting outcomes of democracy promotion in ‘transitional countries’ posed several questions to US foreign democratic assistance. While at a theoretical level, these problems have helped to redefine US democratic efforts abroad, the Cuban case has been highly dominated by democracy promotion as the cornerstone of US Cuba policy. Apart from Obama's new course with Cuba, which has not dramatically changed US goals on the island, US vision and strategy for the Cuban democratic transition have survived: despite everything, the US has continued to promote democracy in Cuba, with little or no change. In fact, despite Obama not abandoning democratisation, it seems he is pursuing a more ‘teleological approach’ to the matter.

The noble west and the dirty rest? Western democracy promoters and illiberal regional powers

This conclusion summarizes the major findings of this special issue and discusses their implications for research on democratization and international democracy promotion. First, I compare the interactions between EU and US democracy promotion and the responses of non-democratic regional powers. In the cases in which Russia, Saudi Arabia, and China chose to pursue a countervailing strategy, I match the reactions of the US and the EU and explore how the combined (inter-)actions of democratic and non-democratic actors have affected efforts at democracy promotion in the target countries. The second part discusses the theoretical implications of these findings and identifies challenges for theory-building. I argue that the literature still has to come to terms with a counter-intuitive finding of this special issue, namely that non-democratic actors can promote democratic change by unintentionally empowering liberal reform coalitions as much as democracy promoters can unwittingly enhance autocracy by stabilizing illiberal incumbent regimes. I conclude with some policy considerations.

US Foreign Policy and Democracy Promotion: From Theodore Roosevelt to Barack Obama

<i>US Foreign Policy and Democracy Promotion: From Theodore Roosevelt to Barack Obama</i>

Competing perspectives on democracy and democratization: assessing alternative models of democracy promoted in Central Asian states

This study examines alternative understandings of democracy and democracy promotion advanced by the US, EU, Russia and China in Central Asia using frame analysis. In the context of this study, ‘frames’ refer to the relatively cohesive sets of beliefs, categories and value judgements as well as specific ways in which these ideas are packaged for the targets of international democratization. The study assesses the implications of alternative representations of democracy promotion and competing models of governance for the prospects of democratization in Central Asia. It concludes that the substance of US and EU democracy promotion in Central Asia has neglected the cultural and political contexts of these states, while the Russian and Chinese models of governance and development have provided a better match to the interests of the ruling elites.

Cosmetic agreements and the cracks beneath: ideological convergences and divergences in US and EU democracy promotion in civil society

This piece examines the substance of EU democracy promotion from a comparative point of view and from a perspective placing under inquiry the meaning of the idea of liberal democracy itself. Instead of assuming that the democratic ideal that the EU promotes (‘liberal democracy’) has a clear, fixed meaning, the article examines in detail what actually constitutes the ‘ideal of democracy’ at the heart of EU democracy promotion, and compares this vision to that which informs the democracy promotion of the US. It argues that interesting differences, and shifts and oscillations, in the models of liberal democracy that the EU and the US promote exist and that these are important to note in order for us to fully appreciate how the substance of EU and US democracy support can be shaped by conceptual and ideological debate on the meaning of democracy. This dynamic is particularly relevant today, in the context of the recent attempts to develop transatlantic dialogue on democracy support. This dialogue, it is suggested, plasters over some subtle but important ideological cracks over what is meant by democracy in EU and US democracy support.

From Cold War to Arab Spring: mapping the effects of paradigm shifts on the nature and dynamics of US democracy assistance to the Middle East and North Africa

Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has articulated and implemented explicit strategies of democracy promotion by providing assistance to governments, political parties, and other non-governmental groups and organizations all over the world. One particularly challenging region has been the Middle East and North Africa, where democratic development and democracy aid opportunities have been limited and constrained by a variety of factors related to social, economic, and political characteristics of the region and policy priorities of the United States. This article examines the impact of two major paradigm shifts – the end of the Cold War (1989) and the 9/11 episode (2001) – on the nature, purposes, and consequences of US democracy assistance to the Middle East. Examining democracy aid allocations, social, democratic and political factors in the region, and other variables, the analysis traces the shifts in aid strategies, purposes, and recipients generated by these paradigm shifts and assesses the impact of such assistance on the politics of the region. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of these findings for US democracy promotion policies and the impact of the Arab Spring events as a potential third break point.