Paper- Political Institutions and processes in Comparative

Perspective

Chapter- Process of Democratization in Post-Colonial,

Post-Authoritarian and Post-Communist Countries
Prasanta Sahoo
Assistant Professor
Bharati College
University of Delhi
Process of Democratization in Post-Colonial, Post-Authoritarian and Post-
Communist Countries

Introduction
Transition To Democracy
Understanding Democracy
Defining Democracy
Main Principles Of Democracy
What Is Democratization?
Main Factors Of Democratization
A Brief History Of Democratization
Democratization In Post-Colonial Countries
Democratization In Post-Authoritarian Countries
Democratization In Post-Communist Countries
Fourth Wave Of Democracy
Democratic Consolidation And Its Challenges
Conclusion
Long Questions
Multiple choice questions
References
Web links
Introduction
The process of democratization has been a very complex issue since its beginning. The
process has been witness of many ups and downs in its way of development. Though the
concept democracy has been a subject of debate since its origin in the ancient Greece it
becomes a mass movement only in the mid-1970s. The movement, as described by several
political scientists, spread through several waves popularly known as the first wave, second
wave, third wave and the recent fourth wave of the process of democratization. The first
wave of democratization started in Western Europe and North America after the Industrial
Revolution. The second wave of the democratization claimed to be started with the de-
colonialization of Asia, Africa and the Latin America, mostly with India’s achieving
independence and adopting the secular democratic system. The most famous third wave of
democratization was started with the end of dictatorships in Portugal and Spain in 1974.
The popular fourth wave of democracy, as analyzed by some political scientists, started with
the Arab Spring recently in twenty-first century. However, the concept democratization
became a mass movement with the popularization of the Third Wave of democracy.
The moment right-wing nationalist dictator regimes fell from power in the Southern Europe
in 1970s, a new wave of democracy swept the entire region. Later, in the late 1980s,
the USSR’s sphere of influence on the communist states was replaced with liberal
democracies both in Central and Eastern Europe. Also in 1990s and 2000s several other
regions like much of Eastern Europe, Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, and many
Arab, Central Asian and African states, including the Palestinian Authority moved towards
liberal democracy.
Transition to Democracy
As per the Freedom House analysis, while in 1990 only 25 countries in the world had
adopted liberal democracy with universal suffrage, in 2000, more than 120 out of 192
countries. Where in 1990 only 13% of world’s nations practicing a very restricted
democracy in 2000 there percentage was nearly 62. The exact numbers may be a matter of
debate but these are indicative of the expansion of democracy during the twentieth century.
A contentious but ultimate successful democratic transition started in Portugal and Spain
thirty years ago in 1974. This transition started through a global democratic revolution that
began with the Portuguese military revolution which overthrew the long decades of
dictatorship in that country. This is according to Prof. Samuel Huntington as the starting of
the famous ‘Third Wave of Democracy’. This was the most powerful wave of
democratization the world has ever seen. This “third wave” of global democratization then
spread along with Spain to Greece and Latin America, and eventually to a number of
countries in Asia, Africa. Later, the wave broke the Berlin Wall in 1989 and spread to Central
and Eastern Europe as well. Huntington argues, in the mid-1990s, the percentage of states
in the world that were democracies had increased from 27 percent (in 1974) to over 60
percent (in 2000). Liberal Democracy had become the dominant form of government over
all the other types of governments existing in the world.
Since then, several things have been striking about the global trends in democratic
development over the past decade. The overall number of democracies in the world has
remained increasing till now. At the same time, there are many democracies continued to
perform very poorly and few of them have broken-down to renewed authoritarian rule. For
example, there were military coups in Nigeria (in 1983), in Sudan (in 1989), and in Thailand
(in 1991). However, within 17 months, the trend was started reversing.
Faraway, in the Islamic main lands of Middle East and Arab, the scarcity of democracy and
freedom had led many to question whether Islam and democracy are compatible. There are
only nine out of 47 Muslim-majority countries in the world are democracies including Mali.
While the rest three-quarters of the remaining countries in the world are mostly
democracies. In the Arab World, over the last two decades, political liberalization has
proven to be not more than a tactic of political survival. With substantial Muslim population,
in Mali, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda, it was found that the large majority of Muslims as
well as non-Muslims support democracy in these African countries.
According to some scholars, in the recent past (twenty-first century), a fourth wave of
democratization has started. The Arab Awakening well-known as Arab Spring and the
regime change in Myanmar along with the democratic movements across several African
and Asian nations have proved it. The democratic movement that started in Tunisia later
spread to Egypt, Libya, and rest of the Middle East. However, this has been a curious
question in the minds of several political scientists whether this is beginning of the Fourth
Wave of democratization?

IMPORTANT NOTE

Before discussing the process of democratization, this is pertinent to understand

some issues closely related to it. These are very important to understand the
concept democratization. These are as follows:
What is democracy?
Why, how and when democracy had become the best form of government?
Why people choose democracy over other types of regimes all over the world?
Importantly, democracy is also combined with other developmental issues i.e.
liberalization, privatization, human rights, etc.

UNDERSTANDING DEMOCRACY

Watch: Prof. Georg Sørensen of Aarhus University on Democracy and

Democratization. Audio Visual Speech on YouTube. Watch at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjxk5EmbWAQ. Duration: 1:26:11.

The term “Democracy” can be traced back to the ancient Athens in the Sixth Century
B.C. Democracy is popularly known as a political movement. It is a form of government
perhaps the best available form of government and has become a way of life. The term
democracy has been in use in the tradition of western political thought since ancient time.
According to Jermy Bentham, the concept derived from the Greek root ‘demos’ which
means ‘the people’; ‘cracy’ or kratos stands for ‘rule’ or ‘government’. Thus literally,
democracy signifies ‘the rule of the people’. In the Gettysburg Address, the American
President Abraham Lincoln declared ours a "government of the people, by the people, [and]
for the people." Lincoln’s definition of democracy is very close to its literal meaning. It
understands now democracy as a form of government which implies that the ultimate
authority of government is vested in the common people. This ensures that public policy is
made to conform to the will of the people which can serve their best interests.
Democracy is a type of political system, or a system of decision-making process where all
the members or parties have equal share of power. This formal equality in modern
representative democracy is embodied primarily in the right to vote. Democracy originally
meant rule by the majority, the plebeians where it was meant rule by the untrained
ignorant mob. Plato defined it as the worst form of government and less than tyranny. He
criticized it saying in democracy freedom degenerates into license and equality into
insolence. Aristotle unlike Plato considered it as the rule of the poor. Defining democracy he
emphasized three meanings of the concept: i). intellectually, democracy meant equality; ii).
Constitutionally, it meant rule by the majority; and iii). Socially, it meant the rule of the
poor.
Democracy as a system contrasts with two forms of governments. Firstly, as in an absolute
monarchy where power is held by an individual and secondly as in an oligarchy where power
is held by a small number of individuals. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast
to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their
leaders and to oust them without the need for a revolution. Though, there are several
variants of democracy exists only two are basic forms. One form of democracy is direct, in
which all eligible citizens have direct and active participation in the political decision making.
The second one is indirect where the political power is exercised indirectly through elected
representatives and called as representative democracy. However, in these types of
democracies like most modern democracies, the whole body of eligible citizens remains the
sovereign power.

The History of Development of Democracy Across the World.

The Acropolis of Athens by Leo von Klenze. A Symbol of Ancient Democracy.

Source: Wikipedia, at https://wikipedia.orgwikiHistory_of_democracy.
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of
Magna Carta of 1215 by King John. the Citizen, France, 26th August 1789.

Important Milestones of Liberal Democracy: Chronologically Year-Wise

1. The first milestone on the way of democracy starts with ‘Magna Carta’, the first
formal charter agreement signed between King John of England and common
people on 15th June 1215.
2. The second milestone was made by the Kingdom of Poland and Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth in the name of Nobles' Democracy.
3. In 1619, the Virginia House of Burgesses became the first representative legislative
body in the New World.
4. In 1628, the Parliament of England passed the Petition of Right for common people.
5. In similar fashion, in 1689, a bill of rights, like fundamental rights, was passed by
the Parliament of England.
6. In 1707, the first Parliament of Great Britain was established.
7. The French Revolution that went on from 1789 to 1799 was one of the biggest
milestones for democracy.
8. On 26 August 1789, the French government proclaimed the Declaration of the
Rights of Man and of the Citizen.
9. In September 1792, Universal male suffrage system was started for the National
Convention.
10. Middle East got first parliamentary system in 1905 after the Persian Constitutional
Revolution.
11. For few months, in 1917, liberal democracy was seen in Russia after the February
Revolution under Alexander Kerensky.
12. America’s indigenous peoples, called "Indians", were got full U.S. citizenship by the
Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.
13. Democracy was adopted in Western Europe, outside Europe and Japan after the
World War-II.
14. In 1950, India became a Democratic Republic and became world’s largest liberal
democracy with universal suffrage in 1952.
15. Through the 15th Constitutional Amendment of 1965, America enforced the Voting
Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act.
16. In the 1970s, several right-wing nationalist dictatorships defeated across Southern
Europe.
17. Later, in the late 1980s, the communist states in the USSR were replaced with
liberal democracies in Central and Eastern Europe.
18. From 1990s and 2000s, Eastern Europe, Latin America, East and Southeast Asia,
and several Arab, Central Asian and African states moved towards liberal
democracy.
19. Arab Spring started by demanding greater democratic rights in Tunisia,
Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, Jordan, Syria and other countries across the Muslim
region .
20. Democracy movements have become common across the world in the 21st century.

Source: Wikipedia, at www.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_democracy.

DEFINING DEMOCRACY
In 422 BC, Greek philosopher Cleon defined democracy is “of the people, by the people and
for the people” which was later repeated by the former American President Abraham
Lincoln. It was only after the movements like reformation and renaissance that the case was
made for the democratization of state, society and politics. The classical democratic
elements were provided by John Locke’s attack on the doctrine of divine rights of the kings.
Locke sought to free the individuals from arbitrary government to establish him as an
independent sovereign being. Government, according to him, must derive its authority from
the free consent of the governed.
According to Joseph Schumpeter (1942) “at its most basic level, the democratic method is
that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire
the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote.” Bentham
elaborates this concept as a “mode of decision-making about collectively binding rules and
policies over which the people exercise control, and the most democratic arrangement to be
that where all members of the collective enjoy effective equal rights to take part in such
decision making directly - one, that is to say, which realizes to the greatest conceivable
degree the principles of popular control and equality in its exercise...”. Robert Dahl (1971),
one of the pioneers in the field of democracy, while expanding the definition, identifies
seven key criteria that are essential for promotion of democracy, namely:
1. Elected officials control over governmental decisions regarding policy;
2. Conducting free fair and periodic elections;
3. Universal adult suffrage;
4. Equal right to contest and run for public office;
5. Freedom of expression, belief and faith;
6. Right to free access of sources of information; and
7. Right to form association and assemble without arms (i.e. political parties, interest
groups, etc).

MAIN PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY

Now, there is a general view among scholars that free-and-fair election is not enough. The
periodical election and the voting patterns percentage cannot become a definer of
democracy in a state. Democratically elected leaders are capable of acting very
undemocratic acts to influence the election and justify the state actions even if it is arbitrary
in nature.
Nowadays, democracy is considered as the embodiment of a set of principles including:
i) Maximum individual freedom;
ii) Providing and protecting human rights;
iii) Equality on the ground of religion, race, ethnicity, colour or gender;
iv) Providing and protecting equality of opportunities for participation; and
v) Free atmosphere for electoral competition.

WHAT IS DEMOCRATIZATION?
Development of democracy or the process of democratization has often been slow, violent,
and seen with frequent reversals. The logical deduction of the strengths and the weaknesses
of non-democratic form of rule cannot become the basis of theorizing democratic transition.
Although there are many different possibilities exist. Whether particular individuals prefer
democracy or distrust it depends on subjective factors as well as objective conditions.
Democratization is a process or transition towards a pure democratic political atmosphere.
It can be a transition from an authoritarian political system to a semi-democracy or to a
full-fledged democracy. It can also be a transition from a semi-authoritarian political
structure to a democratic political system. The outcome of the transition process can be
consolidated or may face frequent reversals. For example, while the democratic transition
was more consolidated in the United Kingdom it has been facing frequent reversal in
Argentina. It is also true that the process of democratization has been influenced by various
factors i.e. economic development, history, and civil society. The right to vote and have a
voice in the political system is the direct result of the process of democratization.
It is now understood by the conflict-resolution practitioners that the process of
democratization is one of the most important concepts and trends in modern political
science today. Therefore, the idea of democratization is simply the establishment of a
democratic political regime. And, in such process of democratization a country adopts a
particular system. However, there have been different opinions among political scientists
regarding the beginning of the process, the criteria for determining the process and timing
of change in the political regime. There are instances in the world where countries collapsed
in military coups or fallen in the traps of authoritarian regime who had adopted democratic
regimes. There are also experts who argue the process of democratization is a peaceful
transfer of power from one political party or coalition to other.
This is true that there are no clear indications about how the process of democratization
begins. The process took a very long period to develop even in the industrial countries like
Western Europe and North America. There is no doubt that the processes takes a long
period of time to begin and prosper. Democratization takes time because it requires the
development of new institutions and widespread trust in them. S.W.R. de A. Samarasinghe
defined “democratization as a process of political change that moves the political system of
any given society towards a system of government that ensures peaceful competitive
political participation in an environment that guarantees political and civil liberties.” This is
an idea which promotes the dynamic quality of democratic evolution in any society
especially in poor countries.
The process of democratization can be defined as the process that leads towards a pure
democratic system. Democratization is a complex process of political, social and cultural
development which has taken different shapes in different parts of the world. The term
“democratization” defines a political process which once attained continues to evolve. The
democratic process has been a multi-way-road. According to Samuel Huntington “the
democratization waves and the reverse waves suggest a two-step-forward, one step-
backward pattern.” In short, consolidation of democracy remains a major challenge in most
parts of the world even in the developed and highly industrialized countries.

Why and how Democratization or Transitions to Democracy happens?

The general propositions on democratic transitions in the Third Wave can be

summarized as follows:
• Emergence of democracy needs some preconditions.
• High level socio-economic development is not sufficient or even necessary.
• Political will and commitment of key elite actors is a necessary condition for
democracy.
• Key political actors and their choices are critical for democratic institutions.
• Domestic commitment is equally significance like external factors and role of
international actors.

Source: Lise Rakner, Alina Rocha Menocal and Verena Fritz, “Democratisation Third
Wave and the Challenges of Democratic Deepening: Assessing International
Democracy Assistance and Lessons Learned,” July 2007, at
http://www.odi.org/publications/201-democratisation-challendes-democracy-
assistance.

MAIN FACTORS OF DEMOCRATIZATION

The factors that affect democratization, has been a big debate in academia. There are
several issues in the category – economics, culture, and history – has been impacting on
the process. Some of the powerful factors that impact the process most are:
1) Economic Status- Some experts claim that the wealthiest democracies have never been
observed to fall into authoritarianism because it is said that higher GDP cooperates with
it. It has been commonly observed that democracy flourished after the Industrial
Revolution. Empirical research like modernization theory argues to believe that economic
development increases chances for a transition to democracy and helps newly established
democracies to be consolidated. Democracy campaigners believe that democratization will
become inevitable with the development of the economy.
2) Social Factors- It is believed that though the social issues are complex in nature still
one of the most important and powerful factors impact the democratization in many
countries. As per Acemoglu and Robinson’s argument the relationship between social
equality and democratic transition is very complicated. They say people will have less
incentive to revolt in egalitarian societies therefore the possibility of democratization would
be much lower. Similarly, in a highly unequal society, democratization may face unique
challenges so the process would be much lower. For example, in South Africa
under Apartheid, the wrong distribution of wealth and power would be so harmful to elites
that they would do everything to prevent the process of democratization.
3) National Culture- many believes that the culture plays a very important role in the
process of democratization and also in the consolidation of democracy. It is claimed by
some political scientists that some cultures are simply more conducive to democratic values
than others. They argue it is the Western culture which is best suited to democracy. In
many other cultures it is argued to be containing values which make democracy difficult.
Generally, this argument is often used by undemocratic regimes to justify their policies and
failure to implement democratic reforms in the country.
4) Intervention by External Powers- This is a very typical situation seen in many places.
The powerful countries often found imposing democracies as alternative to military
intervention. This has been seen in many occasions like in Japan and Germany after World
War-II. In some other cases, decolonization was facilitated through establishment of
democracies which were soon replaced by authoritarian regimes. For example, the similar
situation was seen in Pakistan after her independence from British and later in Bangladesh
after her liberation from Pakistan.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF DEMOCRATIZATION

The world has witnessed the way many countries those were formally non-democracies
have become democracies in last 40 years. It is almost proved that in the way the societies
are organized prior to the democratization is the sole responsibility for them to become
democratic. As per the Huntington (1991) notion there have been three waves of
democratization seen in the world. He argues that the first wave of countries positively
adopted democratic principles in the Nineteenth Century. They are including: the USA,
Switzerland, France and Britain. The second wave, as he states, consisted of countries
those are democratized after the defeat of Fascism and Nazism in 1945. Those countries
are: (the then) West Germany, Italy, Japan and Austria.
The third wave, Huntington argues as the most powerful among all waves, began in 1974
with the overthrow of the authoritarian government of Portugal. Along with the death of the
Spanish dictator Francisco Franco, the military government in Greece also fell in the same
year 1974. All these three southern European countries successfully had become
democracies by 1980. By 1990, the majority of Latin American countries had changed
subsequently from non-democracies to democracies. Similarly, many African countries also
adopted democracies by the end of the 1980s or early 1990s. Furthermore, in the late
1980s, several Eastern European countries had rejected communism and adopted
democracy.

The Third Wave of Democracy

The Third Wave of Democracy refers to the
third major surge of democratization
happened in history. Samuel P. Huntington, a
political scientist at Harvard University, coined
the term in his article and later in 1991, in his
book The Third Wave: Democratization in the
Late Twentieth Century.
Professor Samuel P. Huntington According to him the Third Wave of
democratization began in 1974 with the Carnation Revolution in Portugal. The other
major historic democratic transitions took place in Latin America in the 1980s, Asia
Pacific countries like Philippines, South Korea, and Taiwan from 1986 to 1988 and in
1989 after the collapse of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe. The exact number of
democracies varies from scholars to scholars depending on the criteria used for
assessment. Some scholars like Huntington argue more than 100 democracies existing
in the world today and increasing rapidly. However, these newer democracies are
facing enormous difficulties to be “consolidated”. Several reasons are responsible for
their fragility include elite dominance in politics, economic instability, military
interference in civilian affairs, external powers intervention and others.

Source: Wikipedia, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Wave_Democracy.

However, region like Latin America has suffered several waves of democratic breakdown so
far. The most important occasion when the setbacks took place was in the 1930s, 1960s
and early 1970s. In Continental Europe, the majority of those parliamentary governments
set up at the end of the First World War were broke down in the 1920s or early 1930s. It
was observed in the 1930s, fascism or communism not democracy would be believed the
wave of the future governments. But, interesting and surprising, since 1980s there has
been much less democratic breakdowns than earlier ‘waves’ of democratization. Well over
50 countries that were not democracies at the beginning of 1974 had become democracies
by the middle of the 1990s.
In the 1980s and 1990s the entire developing world was swept by the wave of
democratization that originated in the 1970s. This is popularly known as the third wave of
democratization. This time the process of democratization spread across regions like Latin
America and Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa. The movement had remarkably transformed
the nature of political regimes in all these regions. Interesting while in 1974 there were 41
democracies in the entire world the number become about three-fifths (nearly 120) by 2003
with considering formal democracies.
The process of democratization in a given state is understood to be subdivided into three
phases: the liberalization phase; transition phase; and the consolidation phase. The first
phase happens when the previous authoritarian regime becomes liberal. The second phase
completes when the first competitive elections are held. The last phase, which is also known
as the most important among all, starts when democratic practices are become more firmly
established and accepted by all relevant actors in the state. This final phase essentially
certifies the durability of the newly established democratic systems in that country.
Three Waves of Democratization: Democracies and Breakdown of Democracies

Source: Three Waves of Democratization. At

https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~vwang/ps240/Handouts/HO011.pdf.

DEMOCRATIZATION IN POST-COLONIAL COUNTRIES

Some scholars believe that democracy started with the end of the First World War in Europe
then to France and later to Germany. Earlier in Finland, full modern democratic rights,
universal suffrage for all citizens were implemented constitutionally in 1906. In the same
year a proportional representation and open list system were executed there. The
Jacksonian democracy through suffrage was granted to the majority of white males in the
United States of America which was later expanded to all females, in 1920 by the
Nineteenth Constitutional Amendment. America’s indigenous peoples, called “Indians”
granted full U.S. citizenship through the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. On 2nd June 1924
President Calvin Coolidge signed the act into law. Until Benito Mussolini rose to power
in Italy in 1922 the first wave saw nearly 29 democracies at its peak in the world.
However, by the end of first wave (1942) the number of democracies was decreased to 12.
A very unique situation was seen where some regions adopted democratic representative
systems other regions either converted to authoritarianism or came under influence of
Russian communism. But, the victory of World War-II brought democracy back into the
focus. It brought representative governments in Western Europe that reflected the general
will of their citizens. While Western Europe adopted liberal democracy, the Central and
Eastern Europe became communist and the Southern Europe came under the right-wing
authoritarianism. Countries in Central and Eastern Europe became undemocratic
Soviet Russia’s satellite states. Right-wing authoritarian dictatorships continued to exist in
Southern Europe i.e. Spain and Portugal. The world saw nearly 36 recognized democracies
as part of the second wave which began after the victory of Allied powers in the World War-
II and lasted for 20 years. While all the old colonial powers strengthening anticolonial
sentiment worldwide, the seeds of democracy was also planted outside the Europe. In
exchange for their support for embattled colonial powers during the war, many restive
colonies were promised subsequent independence. Israel was the first Middle Eastern
country to become a representative democracy with a parliamentary system and universal
suffrage in 14th May 1948.
Similarly, after achieving independence from Great Britain in 1947, India became a
Democratic Republic in 1950. In 1952, after the first general election, India became world’s
largest liberal democracy with universal suffrage. Most of the former British and French
colonies were also given independence by 1965. All those countries liberated from the
British Empire adopted the Westminster parliamentary system. Unfortunately, the story was
totally different in Africa and parts of Asia where the process of decolonisation created
political upheaval which experiencing often rapid changes in forms of governments. The 15th
Constitutional Amendment brought the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Civil Rights
Act into enforced in the United States of America. The draconian Poll Tax which was a
technique commonly used to restrict the African Americans from voting was completely
abolished through the 24th Amendment. Simultaneously, the Voting Rights Act was passed
which granted voting rights to all Native Americans. The 26th constitutional Amendment of
1971 reduced the voting age for the adults to 18 years old.
It is very interesting to note that in many regions of the world nearly equal numbers of
democratization and democratic breakdown efforts were seen. The most suitable examples
are Latin America and Continental Europe. Importantly, in the 1930s, 1960s and early
1970s, the Latin American region suffered several waves of democratic breakdown. In the
case of Continental Europe where parliamentary systems that were set up at the end of the
First World War were reversed in the 1920s or early 1930s. It was believed to be the
fascism and communism and not the democracy became more popular in the 1930s.
Surprisingly, it is important to note that there has been much less democratic breakdown in
the whole world since 1980 than earlier ‘waves’ of democratization. Over 50 countries
became democracies by the middle of the 1990s even most of them were not democracies
at the beginning of the third wave (1974). These democracies are mostly in the Third World
and interestingly so far the majority of these transitions have not been reversed yet. There
are also some countries have never seen having any kind of problem with their democratic
system i.e. India. But, there are some countries created entirely new countries due to
democratic breakdown like Bangladesh in 1971.
However, all ex-colonial countries had not adopted democratic systems of government for
themselves. For example—USA, India, Ireland and Pakistan—while first three countries
adopted democratic form of government, the last one has been struggling with it. It is said
that America’s achieving independence from the British Empire had been most important for
the spreading of democracy all over world. The presidential system of government
pioneered by the USA has become the main alternative to parliamentarianism. Former Latin
American colonies of Spain and Portugal also brought into existence new states and new
constitutional after securing their respective independence.
Several new states came into existence in 1918 after the collapse of the Austro–Hungarian
Empire. And, in all these countries, efforts were made to set up democratic parliamentary
systems. But, surprisingly, all of them fell into the traps of authoritarian forms of politics by
the 1930. Many were then occupied or controlled by the Nazis during 1941–45. However,
many of them followed Redemocratization after the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 and
the collapse of Communism in the 1980s.
In some cases, independent countries adopted democratic institutions from their former
colonial powers. It was also known that those countries achieved independence in the
condition that they would follow the democratic line like India. While Britain retained good
relations with India it also adopted and maintained a parliamentary system based on the
British model. British Honduras, which became known as Belize, gives the similar picture
after her independence. Even Ireland loved to adopt parliamentary institutions in 1922 after
fought bitterly in its independence movement with the British.
The democratic transformation of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union is the result
of Gorbachev’s policies and the end of the Cold War. In Africa it is the external intervention
which compelled the region for transition to democracy. Besides external or international
factors there is another force effects the transition to democracy is popularly known as
‘snowballing’. The best example can be seen in the case of Eastern Europe and Latin
America that transitions to democracy in some countries often trigger transitions in other
countries within the same region. There are also other regional and international
organisations provide positive and constructive assistance and cooperation for democratic
transformation. Organizations like the African Union (AU), the Organization of American
States (OAS), European Union (EU), United Nations (UN), International Monetary Fund
(IMF) and World Banks have given several such instances. In the case of Africa, the New
Partnership for Africa’s Development is now widely seen as the continent’s main official
development framework. NEPAD strongly believes that the region cannot progress positively
unless and until it loves true democracy and respect for human rights, peace and good
governance.
In Asia, Africa and Latin America, as the Third Wave experienced, internal political will is a
necessary condition for democratic transition in their respective regions. In the case of Iraq
it is clear now that the external force would not be sufficient for the establishment of
democratic set ups until the required support come from within. Even if the democratization
happens forcefully then there would not be any guaranty of its sustenance in true spirit. But
it cannot be avoided that the external forces play a very significance role in the shaping and
sustaining of democratic transitions.
Scholars argue that the Third Wave of democratization reached the African shores in the
late 1980s. As a result 41 out of 47 countries in sub-Saharan Africa underwent significant
political reform. Between 1989 and 1994 the external and internal demand for democratic
changes was so high that some countries started competitive elections. During 1989 to
2000 sub-Saharan Africa witnessed 65 presidential elections because the egger for
democratic transitions within the continent was very positive. In 42 countries general
elections were held with involvement of at least two political parties. However, until 2006,
countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Somalia, Swaziland and Uganda
faced difficulties to maintain multiparty elections.
Providing limited choice to voters in those elections were evidences of weakness of
democratic institutions. Scholars argue that African political parties are weakly
institutionalized and have poor organizational capacity. Compare to Africa the Eastern
Europe and Latin America have witnessed the development of party structures with more
positive functional interests in society. In Africa, Party formation remains a personal
ambition and ethnic differences rather than a political issue. Similarly, outside South Africa,
associations of civil society remain weakly developed. The press has little freedom and often
harassed in a number of ways in the hands of few groups. Civil society organisations and
newspapers who are critical of policies often find themselves victims of government
sanctions.
However, this is also equally true that few African political systems have developed into
more institutionalized and have consolidated democracies. Moreover, the democracy indices
such as Freedom House are based on crude quantitative measures which cover only a
limited number of indicators. Available cross-national data tell us little about qualitative
aspects of democratic developments and the role of external actors in the processes of
democratization.
DEMOCRATIZATION IN POST-AUTHORITARIAN COUNTRIES

Worlds Popular Authoritarian Rulers.

Adolf Hitler, Chancellor or Francisco Franco, Caudillo of

Fuhrer of Germany from 1933 Spain from 1936 to 1975.
to 1945.

Source: Wikipedia, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism.

In 1919, when the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed several newly independent countries
came up. Surprisingly, all most all these countries followed the authoritarian mode of
system. Though many efforts made to introduce democratic institutions but failed. By
1930s, all those states became victims of authoritarian forms of politics. Though the
scenario was completely changed when the Nazis defeated in 1945 and the Soviet
communism collapsed in 1980s.
The story of authoritarianism in Arab is also one of the important case studies in the history
of process of democratization under the third wave. The history of democratization in the
Arab World has been narrated by some scholars as very interesting. Since the first Arab
liberal that started with al-Tahtawi to UNDP report of 2002 Arab was mapped for the
process of democratization in three patterns of rule. The encounter with the Europe can be
studied as the first Arab liberal. The encounter was seen in two contexts, positively it was
seen as challenges of modernity vs. traditionalism and negatively it was seen in the colonial
context. Democratic experiments in Egypt, Syria and Iraq in early post-colonial period are
come under the first Arab liberal. The dominating of the military populist rules which was
the result of the failure of democratic systems under a multiparty comes under the second
Arab liberal. Though, some argued that it was a different model of democracy. In a way or
more, Arab democracy tried to justify the dictatorship. The Six-Day War of 1967 which
opened up the road to democracy defeated the secular-populist regimes of Arab and ended
the self-criticism of intellectuals of the region which known as the third Arab liberal. Now,
democracy has officially become alien to the Muslim world where it had its roots in the
Greek polis.

Watch: Arab Spring: The Documentary. Audio Visual Documentary on You

Tube. Watch at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iqLaPS4Zv8.

Some Arab scholars have been arguing that Islam needs to be restricted to Islamic ethics of
democracy. This is important if cultural underpinning for democracy in the Arab World is to
be established. This seriously proves the approaches taken by scholars like John Esposito
and John Voll, regarding Islam and democracy, is completely wrong. The attempts should
be made to rethink Islam and Islamic reformation by enlightened Muslims of the region
themselves. There should be a clear distinction between Islam and Islamism and on the
political front distinction should be made between institutionalism and jihadist Islamism.
After decades of dealt with Arab dictators, western politicians consider the democratization
in the Middle East is their alternative strategy in 21st century. The 9/11 (2001) incident
forced them to promote democracy seriously in the Arab World to deter terrorism. It was
not only the West attempted to promote democracy in the Arab region, before them Arab
leaders themselves had been discussing the problems of Islam, freedom and democracy
there. The lack of democracy and human rights anywhere is a theme to being further
elaborated upon by the “Culture Matters” as democracy is a political culture.
Problem of democracy and the challenges on the way of achieving it has become a hot
debate in the context of post-Saddam Hussein Iraq. It is clear now that the Iraq war was
waged in the name of promoting democracy and human rights but no democratization has
taken place yet. It seems the situation in Iraq has reversed the strategy of West from jihadi
culture to the road of democracy. This was one of the major strategies of West to promote
the democratization process in the post-cold war period. The Arab World has different
understanding of democracy and its relation with development and religion.
A big negative propaganda or an Orientalist bias is very common among Americans and
Europeans about the Arabs. They believe that Arabians are unfit for the practicing of
democracy because they are known as ‘sons of the desert’. Western scholars justify it giving
example of Iraq scenario regarding their bias. Though all blames cannot be left either on
Arab because of orientalists or even on West having the bias of Islam’s incompatibility with
democracy. Except some home-grown shortcomings, foreign dominance is another
unavoidable reason of Arabs incompatibility with democracy. According to Arab Opinion
Leaders (Limmassol in 1983), cultural change in Arab societies is the precondition for the
promotion of democracy in the region.
The issue of an ‘Arab democracy’ needs to be discussed in the perspective of the
contemporary Islamic revival. Arab, Islam and its relation with the democratic culture can
be discussed in many ways. Thus, there needs to make a distinction between the Islam in
general as a religion of millions of people and Islam in the political angel that argues for the
Sharia Law and Sharia State. It is well-known that long before the rise of Sharia Islam, the
Lebanese political scientist, Hassan Saab, published his book on a pro-democracy form of
Islam as opposed to an Islam of despotism and paved the path for liberal democracy in the
Arab World. As per the liberals, democracy is important and efforts should be made to
achieve it and which can be possible even in the Islamic societies of Arab.
The Arab liberalism had declined due to failing of Arab liberals from achieving democracy.
The cultural innovation and the political awareness are the first and foremost requirements
before introduction of a new system without which no system can be flourished. These kinds
of vision have been completely absence in the thinking of the Arab liberals. While it is
necessary to include Islamic institutions in the efforts of democracy it should also be
remember that such kinds of decisions should not derail the process of democratization. The
fear of jihadism could be one of the major challenges to the process of democracy because
jihadists believe in the direction of violence.
Some argue that the democratization in the Arab World would have more positive impact on
Europe than America. It is also true that if democratization fails in the Arab region the
Islamis diaspora living in Europe will never be integrated. Liberal society or Political freedom
in Arab societies cannot be implanted from outside or will not fall from heaven. The positive
and mass efforts should be created from inside the region. It cannot also be gifted by a
successful ruler seating outside the region. As History argues that people have to fight for
their rights and will continue fighting till they have not achieved it. This is now a point of
discussion that does political Islam ready for bringing the little light to the dark Middle
Eastern region.
Islamisation or radicalisation of politics in the Arab World is not the right to think
about a liberal Islam who can cooperate with the democracy. There is no doubt that
democracy understood as a political culture or rule based on pluralism. It is not a procedure
where people vote for a particular direction that can have confrontations with democracy.
Else, it would become a plural society in favour of a religion-based rule respecting of ‘nizam
islami’. This kind of society has no ways towards the democratization. It cannot be an exact
Xerox copy of the Western model of democracy perfectly fit for the Arab societies.
The democratic revolution that started in Latin America, East Asia, and Eastern Europe has
already crossed 40 years. Good to know that in most of the cases the democratic process
has been sustained except very few reversions. Nowadays, all the stakeholders in these
societies, be it the military, business or political elites have unanimously respected the
democratic norms. But, bias political completion among political parties, corruption, failure
to control organized crime, voters declining turnout can become some major hurdles in the
way of democratization in these regions. Though, it has been a major debate among
scholars: whether people take risk to support a demagogic populism or electoral
authoritarianism as in the cases of Venezuela.
Seriously, the reformers in Latin America, East Asia, and Eastern Europe might have a
common dream for democracy but they have to set very different strategies to reach the
goal. Particularly in Latin America and East Asia countries had been under authoritarian
rules of military juntas and would face tuff challenges to adopt democratic norms. By
contrast, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe were communist regimes which
sought to build a new society through the mechanisms of the one-party state. As a result,
they cultivated a civil society that was bifurcated between an official civic sector and a large
underground opposition movement.
Although the perspective and implementation of democracy differs worldwide for different
people but everyone believes that it is the best form of government system. Democracy is a
relationship between a responsible citizenry and a responsive government that encourages
participation in the political process and guarantees basic rights. Under the democratic
system laws and institutions while aims to benefit the majority, ensures individual rights,
and a strong civil society.
Nowadays, due to the existing instability between quasi-authoritarian and quasi-democratic
regimes, a new global regime may begin. It is become very common that millions of people
taking too much risk of their lives to achieve democracy around the world. It is now a
growing demand by the whole world for the human rights and addressing the old issue for
the sake of protecting individual rights. New democracies have a huge task of addressing
the previous abuses of power on citizens to improve their lives and earn their loyalty.

Authoritarianism and Authoritarian States

Authoritarianism is an ideological form of government believes in concentrating more

and more power with the ruler. Juan Linz (1964) characterized
authoritarian regimes as types of political systems have four qualities: (1) “limited, not
responsible, political pluralism” which constraints on groups and political institutions; (2)
legitimacy based on emotion and prone to underdevelopment or insurgency; (3)
believers of repressive tactics against opponents and anti-regime activity; and (4)
“formally ill-defined” because executive power often shifts.
However, there is no precise definition of authoritarianism but Freedom House made a
list of authoritarian systems in the world. The following is a list of states which are
currently (or frequently) characterized as Authoritarian:
Armenia under the Republican Party of Armenia; Azerbaijan under Ilham Aliyev;
Bahrain under the House of Khalifa; Belarus under Alexander Lukashenko;
Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge and Hun Sen; Cuba under Fidel and Raúl Castro;
Egypt under Abdel Fattah el-Sisi; Hungary under Viktor Orbán; Iran under Ali
Khamenei; Laos under the Lao People's Revolutionary Party; North Korea under the rule
of the Kim dynasty and Korean Workers' Party; People's Republic of China under
the Chinese Communist Party; Republic of Macedonia under Nikola Gruevski;
Russia under Vladimir Putin; Saudi Arabia under the House of Saud; Syria under Bashar
al-Assad; Turkey under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the Justice and Development Party;
Venezuela under Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro; and Vietnam under the Vietnamese
Communist Party.
Examples of States which were Historically Authoritarian:
Argentina under the Argentine Revolution period of military rule; Brazil during both
the Estado Novo period under Getúlio Vargas; Burma from a 1962 coup until a transition
to democracy beginning in 2011; Chile under Augusto Pinochet until a transition to
democracy in 1990; Egypt under Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak;
Libya under Muammar Gaddafi until his deposition and death in 2011 at the end of
the Libyan Civil War; South Africa under the National Party from 1948; South
Korea from the early 1970s; Spain under Francisco Franco from 1936 to 1975;
Taiwan from the 228 Incident of 1947; and Turkey from 1925 through 1945.

Source: Wikipedia, at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism#Examples_of_authoritarian_states.

DEMOCRATIZATION IN POST-COMMUNIST COUNTRIES

Popular Communist and Totalitarian Leaders

Benito Mussolini, Prime

Vadimir Putin, President of Minister of Italy from 1922
Russia Since 2012. until his ousting in 1943.

Source: Wikipedia, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism.

The movement for change in Central and Eastern Europe has brought a huge transformation
in the political order in the region. The two regions completely shifted from an authoritarian
Communist Party rule to democracy. The wave of communist regime collapse after 1989
was so powerful and very sudden that observers failed to anticipate such dramatic changes.
The reasons and factors responsible for the transformation to democracy is still a subject of
debate among scholars. According to the Freedom House, countries like Czech Republic,
Hungary, Lithuania and Slovenia had achieved the highest rankings of political rights by
1993. Some other countries like Poland did so in 1995, Estonia in 1996, Latvia in 1997,
Slovakia in 1999, Bulgaria in 2001, but Romania and Croatia are still struggling in their way.
The heterogeneous process of democratization in Central and East European countries can
be understood only when the process of democratic consolidation of other regions can be
compared. Some specific historical and socio-economic factors are mainly responsible for
political transformations in post-communist Europe. Many large-scale post-socialist
transformations in this region took place because domestic developments are strongly
influenced by transnational forces particularly by the European Union. All these countries
have seen competing with each other to become and survive as members of the EU.
The creation of a plethora of political parties in Central and Eastern Europe is the result of
the democratization process that took place after 1989. But one of the most surprising facts
is that the post-communist societies were again regenerating the previous communist
sentiments after 1989. In Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and some other several countries, the
former communist parties were returned to power. The scholars were trying to understand
the political development in the post-communist countries of Europe comparing with the
democratization process in other regions of the world under the second and third waves.
The high point of challenge for the post-communist countries was fighting against liberal
movements like democratization, privatization, regionalization and globalization processes.
These are the exact challenges of economic and political transformation facing other regions
like East Asia, Latin America or China.
Consolidation of democracy in Central and Eastern Europe after 1989 was become
possible because of economic development, political commitment to democracy,
building of democratic institutions and protecting ethnic composition of society. In the case
of Europe, EU has performed a very crucial role in the spreading of democracy in the region.
The post-communist states of Central and Eastern Europe began to integrity into the
community of European states following the immediately shifts in political power. As
blessing in disguise, for some post-communist states, the integration with Western Europe
encouraged them to break from communism.
The political transformation in the majority of post-communist states either brought partially
democratic systems or generated new types of authoritarian regimes. First time in the
history, on 9-11 November 2005, academic experts and political leaders came together
under the IV General Assembly of the Club of Madrid held in Prague to discuss the result of
democratization in Central, Eastern, Southeastern Europe, and Central Asia. They studied
political situations of the region and recommended relevant solutions and policies to
promote democracy and quality of life in post-communist Europe.
As per a study conducted by the Freedom House on political rights and liberties, found that
the recently joined post-communist countries in the EU have progressed considerably on
both political and economic dimensions. They are simultaneously on both the fronts while
working on the terms of market economy also works to improve the democratic institutions
to strengthen the individual’s rights and liberties like Western European countries. However,
this is also true that comparing to the post-communist countries of the EU, the old members
were more politically stable and economically advanced by the mid-1990s. They have
benefited from the liberal consolidated democratic system. They have brought numerous
reforms in several sectors i.e. economics, political and social welfare. They have become
wealthier with faster-growing economies and lower levels of income disparity among
themselves.
As Freedom House argues, some countries were “consolidated autocracies” and some others
were semi-reformed democratic-autocratic hybrids. Several post-communist countries along
with doing progress in building democracy became faster market economies more durable
than any advanced economy. After the collapse of communist regimes three types of
political systems can be found in the region i.e. democratic, semi-democratic, and
autocratic.
EU is the reality of consolidated democracy which is characterized by stable political
institutions, rule of law, and protection of political and civil rights, transparency and
predictability in the political process. Social scientists argue that explaining economic
success is as difficult as explaining political success of any regime. Various authors admit
that the democratic consolidation depends upon many important factors including historical
legacy, initial social and economic conditions, types of democratic breakthroughs, choice of
democratic institutions, domestic political competition, proximity to the West, and mood of
powerful international actors.
Better state capacity, improved welfare, and better economic performance have a close link
with improvements in democratic standards, human rights, and ethnic minority rights. In
the cases of Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Croatia where there was no consensus made
among the elites regarding promoting democratization and subsequently joining with the
EU. Such a consensus was elusive because elites whose political success depended on
domestic policies and conflict between liberal democracy and comprehensive economic
reform.
Many scholars have often argued that EU have been trying to put more efforts to promote
democratization in Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. A
successful political and economic transformation, according to Lucan Way and Steven
Levitsky, depends on the involvement of international actors like multilateral organizations,
individual nation-states, and NGOs to private actors. Sometimes it is also very difficult to
map the democratic development in the former Soviet Union because of insufficient data.
In 1989, nobody had any idea and imagination regarding the soon-to-be-post-communist
societies but all of sudden the Soviet Block was collapsed and everything is changed. Now
efforts have been made to promote democratization in the disintegrated part of the
communist Russia. Unfortunately, since 1989 the post-communist world has witnessed
many political and economic upheavals: economic catastrophe, ethnic warfare, civil conflict,
political instability, and lingering and authoritarianism.
Before asking the question of how healthy the post-Communist new democracies are, it
must be known: Why did the old Communist order collapse so suddenly? The reason was
that terror lay at the heart of the totalitarian system and destroyed any vestiges or
opportunities for dissent and political opposition. Uprisings in the Soviet satellite states were
large in number. The United States and the Western Left believe that it was the terror as
the main reason for which the noble Soviet communism was collapsed so badly? Freedom
House observed an unprecedented burst of freedom in 1989–91 which was reversed itself
and backfire immediately become danger for the communism in the disintegrated parts of
Soviet Russia.

Totalitarianism

Totalitarianism is defined as a political system where state grips absolute control. The
government controls every aspects of public and private life. This is the extreme version
of authoritarianism. Though, authoritarianism primarily differs from totalitarianism
because of governmental control over the social and economic institutions.
Weimar German first developed the concept of totalitarianism in the 1920s. Later Carl
Schmitt (Nazi academician) and Italian fascists elaborated it. In 1927, Schmitt used the
term, Totalstaat in his book The Concept of the Political. The concept became prominent
during the Cold War era in Western anti-communist political discourse. It was used to
make similarity and differences among Nazi Germany, Fascist states
and Soviet Communist states.
The leader of the Spanish reactionary called the Spanish Confederation of the
Autonomous Right declared to “give Spain a true unity, a new spirit, a totalitarian
polity...” and went on to say “Democracy is not an end but a means to the conquest of
the new state. When the time comes, either parliament submits or we will eliminate it.”
Source: Wikipedia, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism.

FOURTH WAVE OF DEMOCRACY

Read e-Book on Google: Democracy's

Fourth Wave?: Digital Media and the Arab
Spring.
By Philip N. Howard (Author), Muzammil M.
Hussain (Author)
Paperback: 160 pages
Publisher: OUP USA; 1 edition (4 April 2013)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0199936978.
Read the e-Book at:
http://philhoward.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/09/Democracys-
Fourth-Wave-First-3-Chapters.pdf.

While discussing about the three waves of democratization Carl Gershman mentioned about
the “reverse waves” or breakdown of democratic processes in some regions. The first
reverse was seen in the rising of fascism and communism in the 1920s and 1930s. The
second and very powerful reverse impact was found in the resurgence of authoritarianism in
Latin America, Africa, and Asia particularly in the 1960s and 1970s.
While all these reverse political development was happening a powerful nonviolent
democratic protest broke out against the authoritarian ruler in Tunisia. This non-violent
democratic movement immediately spread to Egypt, Libya, and rest of the Middle East. The
question came to minds of several scholars: is this the beginning of Fourth Wave of
democratization? The impact was so powerful that it reached every corner of the Middle
East and compelled every Islamic believer to think about the liberalization of their
respective societies through democratic spirit.
As Gershman argues, it is too early to assess the global impact of democracy on this new
Arab Awakening popularly known as ‘Arab Spring’. He found at least four reasons regarding
the great movement that started in the Arab World for the promotion of democracy in the
region. Firstly the incidents occur in the entire Middle East provides several evidences
supporting the democratic systems in the region. Secondly, the events happened
throughout the region compels peoples’ attitude changed towards democracy. Thirdly, the
fast spreading of movement could make the autocratic regimes vulnerable and unstable.
Several new factors also responsible for creating vulnerability are the rapid growth of new
communications technologies and social networks. In the Tunisia and Egypt revolutions
technologies played the most important role. The awakening was started with Tunisia and
Egypt with overthrowing the military dictators.
This is also a true fact that the Middle East transitions may vary from one country to
another. It completely depends on local circumstances of a particular country. The next turn
is of Bahrain, Jordan, Yemen and Morocco, depending on the political leader there to
recognize that the timely reform is now unavoidable and inevitable for the country.

DEMOCRATIC CONSOLIDATION AND ITS CHALLENGES

The most important in the process of democratization is the consolidation of democracy. In
the case of the East European states it seems they have completely got stocked in the
condition of ‘phony democracy’. States those were claiming as democracies have been badly
infected by the corrupted political parties who have made the mockery of democracy in the
region. In the Arab World states are still arguing that Islam and democracy are incompatible
and the regimes claim that democracies are lack in electoral processes, constitutional
provisions and institutional structures necessary for the sustaining of democratization.
However, there was a big competition among the regimes of the region to become pro-
democratic and reforms in the early 1990s. All these post-communist parties wanted to
become pro-EU regimes instead of pro-communist. Therefore, it was justified that the EU
was viewed as a “gravity model according to which fast and deep democratisation is
explained to a significant degree by the proximity and possibility of anchorage and
integration with a major world center of democracy”.
Thus, democratization is a notion which describes the political transformation process in a
non-democratic society. It is a gradual and lengthy process but sometimes countries
achieving free elections are also considered as democratic. Several scholars argue in the
same voice that along with the free, fair and periodic elections democracy needs some other
political conditions: civil liberties, the rule of law, independent judiciaries and effective and
accountable institutions, powerful civic society and military control by civilians.
Some even compare and try to seminaries democratization with Europeanization as process
of transformation because of the development policy it maintains in and outside the region
to promote of democratization. The conditions for the new membership in the EU requires
that the candidate country must have achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing
democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.
Though, the similarity between EU accession and democratization is a very difficult objective
to achieve. EU also uses the monitoring criteria to judge the newly joined states having the
eligibility conditions as liberal societies. It monitors the sectors such as civil service reform
and reform of the judiciary.
The EU gives next importance to governance. The commission expects that the newly joined
states should have effective and transparent administrative system so that when they get
funds they can really absorb it. The next important condition is political and administrative
corruption free society. The commission believes that a transparent administrative
procedure can make the proper use of its funds. It is seen that in all the member countries
anti-corruption legislations and special anti-corruption courts have been established under
the pressure of the commission. EU’s last serious condition is reform of the judicial system.
But the Copenhagen criteria do not specify judicial independence except under the political
criteria for ensuring “stability of institutions guaranteeing...the rule of law”. Rule of law
involves provision of legal system, establishment of courts, judges, a bar and enforcement
mechanisms.
Finally, democratic consolidation needs the evolution of a democratic political culture where
the elite and the mass public, parties, organized interests, forces and institutions view and
accept democracy as the only way of development. The first and foremost requirement is a
broad consensus among both the elites and the mass public to uphold democracy. Economic
development also plays another important role for transition and sustenance of democracy.

CONCLUSION
Democracy does not flourish overnight. It takes a large span of time to be consolidated as a
complete democracy. Democratization doesn’t have a definite definition. There is no
agreement among scholars regarding theory of democracy. It is said that democracy is the
best possible/available form of government in the 21st century. Nowadays, in every region,
across the globe, from American continent to Africa or Asia or Arab world, democracy is the
only hope for people’s freedom. Though, it is equally true that, there are several types of
political systems existing where people enjoy better facilities than that of a good
democracy. There are also several evidences of reversal of democratic systems.
The third wave of Huntington or so-called fourth wave of democracy has swept the entire
world. The less expected region, the Arab world, has also been seeing a great shift in their
political attitude towards democracy. The great Arab Spring has been spread to the whole
Arab and other Muslim regions where authoritarian rulers were reigning without any
opposition since long time. The famous revolution for democracy that started some forty
years ago with overthrowing of the decade long dictatorship in Portugal had laid the
foundation of the third wave of democratization. This wave of democratization then spread
to other regions of world like Spain and Greece, Latin America, Asia and Africa. The wave
was so powerful that it demolished the Berlin Wall in 1989 and changed the political
systems in Central and Eastern Europe as well. The number of democracies since the third
wave regularly went increased from time to time. While in 1974 the percentage of
democracies was 27, by the mid-1990s the percentage reached 60. The number of
democracies which was 117 in 1995 reached 121 in 2002.Today, democracy has become
the dominant and most powerful form of government in the world.
The meaning of democracy narrated by the Greek philosopher Cleon in 422 BC has proved
absolutely true today. Democracy is now seen as the only hope for the poor people and for
their emancipation and liberation from the oppressed. Democracy gives importance to
several political principles of individual development including: equality; freedom of choice;
respecting human rights; non-discrimination on the ground of religion, caste/ethnicity or
gender; equality of opportunity for participation; and free fair and periodic electoral system.
Democratization is the process of political transition from one system to another which leads
towards democracy. However, this is a complex political, social and also cultural procedure
that has taken different shapes in different parts of the world in different time. The process
of “democratization” has never seen as static or complete. It always continues to evolve to
achieve the political situation where people get opportunity to develop their personality
completely. This is also equally true that the evolution of democracy in a society has never
been a one-way-road. It is well said by Samuel Huntington: “The democratization waves
and the reverse waves suggest a two-step-forward, one step-backward pattern.” It means
successful democratization doesn’t mean successfulness of consolidation of democracy. It
has been seen a major challenge in most parts of the world. But, it is interesting to
remember that the process of democratization and the number of democracy has been
increasing in a fast pace.
LONG TYPE QUESTIONS

1. Write an easy on Liberal Democracy.

2. What is Democratization and analyse process of Democratization in Post-colonial
Countries?
3. What is Democratization and analyse process of Democratization in Post-
Authoritarian Countries? Give special emphasis to the Middle East.
4. What is Democratization and critically analyse process of Democratization in Post-
communist countries of the Eastern Europe and Central Asia?
5. “The Process of Democratization is a complex matter”. Explain it.

SHORT TYPE QUESTIONS

1. What is Democracy?
2. What is democratization?
3. What are the post-colonial countries adopted democracy in the Third World?
4. What are the post-communist countries in the Central Asian region?
5. What are the post-authoritarian countries adopted democracy in the Arab and other
Muslim World?
6. What is Third Wave of Democracy and Who said it?
7. What is Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism?
8. What is the Fourth Wave of Democratization?
9. What is Democratic Consolidation?
10. What are the main characteristics of Democracy?

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS

1. Carnation Revolution seen in which country?
a. Portugal
b. America
c. Cuba
d. Greece
Ans: a

2. Orange Revolution was seen in which country?

a. Kazakhstan
b. Ukraine
c. Uruguay
d. South Arabia
Ans: b

3. Arab Spring started with which country?

a. Egypt
b. Syria
c. Libya
d. Tunisia
Ans: d

4. The book “Third Wave” is written by whom?

a. Joseph Schumpeter
b. Robert Dahl
c. Samuel Huntington
d. Francis Fukuyama
Ans: c

5. Which two countries adopted democracy in the First wave of Democracy according to
Huntington?
a. America and France
b. Britain and Ireland
c. India and Pakistan
d. Russia and America
Ans: a

REFERENCES AND FURTHER READINGS

Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, (London: Saunders and Otley, 1835).

Authoritarianism, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism.

Barbara Geddes, “What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years?,” Annual
Review of Political Science, Vol. 2, June 1999, pp. 115-144.
Bassam Tibi, Islam, “Freedom and Democracy in the Arab World,” at www.ibrarian.net/.

Bruce L.R. Smith, “What Is the State of Democracy in the Post-Communist Countries?,” at
https://www.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/demokratizatsiya%20archive/05-
04_smith.pdf.

Charles Hauss, “Democratization,” August 2003, at

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/democratization.

“Democratization after the Cold War: Managing Turbulent Transition,” at

www.idea.int/publications/dchs/upload/dchs_chapter_2.pdf.

“Democratization Process in Third World Countries,” at

http://www.directessays.com/viewpaper/26413.html.

“Democratization,” Wikipedia, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratization.

Fadi Elhusseini, “The Arab World and democracy, Middle East Moniter,” 10th June 2013, at
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/middle-east/6238-the-arab-world-and-
democracy.

Fareed Zakaria, The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad, (New
York: Penguin Books, 2003).

“Freedom House,” at https://freedomhouse.org/.

G. Philip, “Democracy and democratization,” 2011, at

http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/sites/default/files/programme_resources/lse/lse_pdf/
subject_guides/ps3086_ch1-3.pdf.

Grzegorz Ekiert, Jan Kubik and Milada Vachudova, “Democracy in the Post-Communist
World: An Unending Quest?,” East European Politics and Societies, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2007, pp.
7-30.
“How can genuine democracy emerge from authoritarian regimes?,” The Millenium Project,
at http://www.millennium-project.org/millennium/Global_Challenges/chall-04.html.

Jason Brownlee, Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization, (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 2007).

Jeffrey Haynes, Democracy in the Developing World: Africa, Asia, Latin America and the
Middle East, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001).

Jeffrey Kopstein, “Postcommunist Democracy: Legacies and Outcomes,” Comparative

Politics, Vol. 35, No. 2, January 2003, pp. 231-250.

John S. Dryzek and Leslie Holmes, Post-Communist Democratization: Political Discourses

Across Thirteen Countries, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002).

Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, (London: Allen and Unwin,
1976).

Larry Diamond, “The State of Democratization at the Beginning of the 21st Century,” The
Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, Winter/Spring 2005 at
http://blogs.shu.edu/diplomacy/files/archives/04_diamond.pdf.

Larry diamond, Marc F. Plattner and Philip J. Costopoulos, Debates on Democratization,

(Baltimore: JHU Press, 201).

Lise Rakner, Alina Rocha Menocal and Verena Fritz, “Democratisation’s Third Wave and the
Challenges of Democratic Deepening: Assessing International Democracy Assistance and
Lessons Learned,” Working and discussion papers, July 2007, at
http://www.odi.org/publications/201-democratisation-challendes-democracy-assistance.

Nina Bandelj and Bogdan Radu, “Consolidation of Democracy in Postcommunist Europe,”

2006, at https://webfiles.uci.edu/nbandelj/web/bandelj-radu-csd-wp-06-04.pdf.

Noam Chomsky, Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy, (New
York: Henry Holt and Company, 2006).
Raymond Hinnebusch, “Authoritarian persistence, democratization theory and the Middle
East: An overview and critique,” Democratization, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 373-395.

Robert Alan Dahl, On Democracy, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000).

Roberto Foa, “Civil Society and Democracy in Post-Authoritarian and Post-Totalitarian

Regimes,” at http://paperroom.ipsa.org/papers/paper_3498.pdf.

Ronald Meinardus, “Democracy, Democratization and the Challenges of Sustaining and

Promoting Democratic Governance,” 12-25th August 2004, at
http://www.fnf.org.ph/liberallibrary/democracy-democratization.htm.

S.W.R. de A. Samarasinghe, “Democracy and Democratization in Developing Countries,”

July 1994, at https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/ihsg/publications/pdf/No-7-1.PDF.

Samuel P. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century,
(Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1993).

Terry Lynn Karl, “Dilemmas of Democratization in Latin America,” Comparative Politics, Vol.
23, No. 1, October 1990.

Tim Niblock, “Democratization: A Theoretical and Practical Debate,” British Journal of Middle
Eastern Studies, Vol. 25, No. 2, November 1998, pp. 221-233.