Turkey: It's All About Accountability

This week’s events in Turkey show that local issues can have a dramatic influence on national politics.  What started as a protest against top-down plans to replace a small park adjoining Taksim Square in Istanbul has become a grassroots movement spreading across the country.  In all, there have been protests in 67 cities and towns, including Ankara, Eskiesehir, Adana and Antalya.

Because Taksim Square has a long tradition of being a public gathering place for discussion and protest, it is hard to imagine a more tone-deaf decision than to replace this small green space with a replica Ottoman-era army barracks, shopping mall and mosque. What started, however, as a protest against urban “development” has become a much larger protest movement focusing on the lack of central government accountability.

This public protest is being carried out on the streets and on the Internet.  Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s response—“Now we have a menace that is called Twitter…to me, social media is the worst menace against society.”

If the opposition movement wants to move beyond dramatic but unsustainable streets protests, however, it will have to connect with Turkish civil society—especially Turkish NGOs that focus on democracy and human rights. A study by CIVICUS, an international NGO focused on civil society, concluded that human rights groups and the women’s movement in Turkey have increased in size and are well connected with each other. Overall, Turkish NGOs are playing an active role in sustaining and strengthening Turkey’s democratic traditions. 

One of the conclusions of my new book about three other countries is that real political change may have to start, as in Turkey, at the grassroots level. Importing Democracy:  The Role of NGOs in South Africa, Tajikistan and Argentina focuses on democratization NGOs that strengthen human rights, promote political participation, strengthen the loyal opposition and, to sustain all the rest—democratize political culture.  A crucial component of a democratic political culture is governmental accountability—what protestors are fighting for in Turkey.

Democratization NGOs and Loyal Opposition

This blog entry first appeared in the blog of the Council on Foreign Relations entitled "Emerging Voices" on March 13, 2013.

In a classic study written over forty years ago, Ghita Ionescu, a political scientist, and Isabel de Madariaga, a historian, described loyal opposition as “the most advanced and institutionalized form of political conflict.” Loyal opposition unites support for a democratic constitution and political system with opposition to a particular political regime.

Most scholars tie loyal opposition to political parties. In many developing countries, however, democratization NGOs promote new and different forms of opposition. Because democratization NGOs are afraid of losing their nonpartisan image, these forms are not tied to political parties. Indeed, democratization NGOs sometimes become a part of the opposition themselves. Although this may not build loyal opposition in the traditional sense, it does contribute to policy dialogue and push governments to become more accountable to their citizens. On the other hand, political parties are too often the orphans of the democratization movement. Building deeper democracies will ultimately require this to change.

One way that democratization NGOs become part of a loyal opposition is to join or organize a coalition on socioeconomic issues of interest to other NGOs. In South Africa, democratization NGOs were leaders in a civil society coalition called the Treatment Action Campaign that successfully sued the government over its failure to prevent mother-child transmission of HIV through antiretroviral drugs. Since the South African legal system is strong and independent of the executive, this decision also reinforced government accountability, conformity to the constitution, the right of judicial review, and children’s rights.

Another example comes from Tajikistan, where the League of Women Lawyers provided a draft law and space for public discussions about human trafficking to Dubai. The league organized a wide coalition of NGOs that successfully promoted an anti-trafficking law.

Advocacy related to political and legal processes is often even more visible at the provincial or municipal level. With support from national democratization NGOs and forty citizen monitors of the city council in Rosario, Argentina, an NGO called Ejercicio Ciudadano (Citizen Practice) cooperated with the city in creating a transparency agreement that NGOs in six other provinces subsequently adopted. In Tajikistan, a democratization NGO called Jahan teaches local police about human rights. When I asked how they were able to do this given Tajikistan’s authoritarian government, Shahlo Juraeva, the director of Jahan, explained that the regime “doesn’t want trouble at the municipal level.”

Democratization NGOs also strengthen local civil society through their support for political dialogue. In Argentina, Fundacion Ciudad (City Foundation) uses public deliberation to build ties between NGOs and community organizations. In a poor neighborhood in Buenos Aires province, a series of eight deliberative forums co-sponsored by Fundacion Ciudad and a local community library led to a program employing local teenagers to pick up garbage on a daily basis. Once citizens decided to launch the effort, the provincial government cleaned up a huge backlog of garbage and provided financial support. The garbage company provided the teens with gloves and uniforms.

The success of Fundacion Ciudad suggests that democratization NGOs could help create a stronger loyal opposition by enlisting ordinary citizens who belong to community organizations. Democratization NGOs that join coalitions could also do more to educate their NGO partners about the political process and invite them to join political networks.

While a loyal opposition based on civil society is clearly a step forward from autocratic rule, further democratic progress may depend on political parties. Parties are a vital part of the democratic process, but many struggle with small constituencies or leadership based on individual personalities. This privileges narrow ideologies and personal loyalties over policy proposals that address the concerns of citizens. To deal with these pitfalls, democratization NGOs need to overcome their fear of being labeled partisan. NGOs could strengthen their existing efforts to build a loyal opposition by, for example, hosting multiparty workshops with a focus on constituency building. Strategic networking among NGOs would help build this missing piece of the democratization puzzle: stronger political parties.

Dictatorship to Democracy: Two Complementary Points of View

Some weeks ago I read The Dictator’s Learning Curve:
Inside the Global Battle for Democracy, by William J. Dobson. As I now await page proofs of my own book, I am convinced that Dobson’s book and mine are strangely complementary and that his book rounds out my own intellectual journey. And I can’t help wondering if Dobson would have the same reaction were he to read my manuscript.

Dobson’s is the darker story, since he argues persuasively that dictators, in response to democracy advocates, have gotten smarter. In Venezuela, for example, President Hugo Chavez has become adept at using frequent elections for his own purposes. Like me, however, Dobson also writes about the battle for democracy.

His focus is on powerful global players. Among these are Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institution, whose short bestseller From Dictatorship to Democracy has already appeared in 25 languages. Equally important is the Serbian international NGO Otpor (Resistance) that grew out of revolution against Slobodan Milosovic. Otpor trains activists in other countries to figure out their own creative strategies for promoting non-violent revolutions against dictators.

My focus, in contrast, is on democratization NGOs at the national level. Although Importing Democracy is based on 103 interviews with activists in South Africa, Tajikistan and Argentina, these organizations are common in many other countries. The leaders of democratization NGOs generally expect and are prepared for a long, hard slog as they put in place the pieces of the democratic puzzle. An NGO coalition in Tajikistan, for example, forced the government to crack down on sex trafficking to Dubai. An NGO in Argentina used public deliberation to help a squatter community solve the problem of garbage collection. And in South Africa, an NGO is pushing the government to broaden and implement the freedom of information law to improve service provision for poor communities. This is occurring in flawed democracies – Argentina and South Africa, as well as in authoritarian regimes like Tajikistan. Unfortunately, democratization NGOs in these countries and elsewhere are not always in strategic contact with each other or with street protestors activated by social media. Nor, I suspect, after reading Dobson’s book, are democratization NGOs routinely in contact with the global democratic players that he describes.

Despite the wave of democratic change that began in 1974 with the overthrow of António de Oliveira Salazar in Portugal, Dobson is quick to acknowledge that there is nothing inevitable about the overthrow of dictators or the progress of political freedom.

But, as he concludes, “my optimism grew as I sat down to meet with the people who had committed themselves to fight for these freedoms…They were not blind idealists…They were accomplished strategists, propagandists and political analysts.”

I share Dobson’s optimism, based on my own interviews. There is, to quote from Hamlet, “more in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy…” – a sobering reminder that seeing through a glass less darkly requires reading what challenges and expands our own expertise.

After the Arab Spring

During the last three decades of the 20^th Century the number of democracies in the world almost doubled, from 44 to 86, according to Freedom House, a New York City think tank that researches and tracks democracy. This dramatic global trend coincided with and was reinforced by a global associational revolution, as thousands of NGOs (nongovernmental organizations) emerged in Asia, Latin America and Africa, even before the spread of the Internet. In the first decade of the new century, however, the number of democracies (87) barely increased at all.

The Arab Spring of 2011 ushered in a wave of optimism that the Internet would help turns the tide against autocrats everywhere. More pessimistic observers cautioned, however, that Arab countries generally have neither strong political institutions nor strong civil societies.

A year later, even the idea of democracy is under assault in the Middle East, a disturbing trend exemplified by the dissolution of the newly elected parliament in Egypt. Even the election of a president has been clouded by his affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood. Nor does civil society offer much hope for the Egyptian political future. Many of Egypt’s NGOs, unlike indigenous NGOs in the rest of the world, were financially dependent on the government and have struggled to assert their autonomy since Mubarak’s fall.

Meanwhile, in Asia, Africa and Latin America, it is not only the Internet that provides hope for the future of democracy. Although the development of civil society often strengthens democracy indirectly, NGOs with a specialized programmatic interest in promoting democracy have emerged recently in many countries. They are engaged in everything from monitoring elections to re-training police in human rights, from promoting public deliberation in local communities to pushing governments to become more accountable and transparent. These organizations combine imported democratic ideas with the recovery of traditional democratic practices, often common at the local level. They also understand that democratization is a long, hard slog that must encompass more than elections.

Importing Democracy: The Role of NGOs in South Africa, Tajikistan and Argentina, based on over 100 interviews, focuses on the work of these organizations in two struggling democracies (Argentina and South Africa) and one autocracy (Tajikistan). An appendix describes democratization NGOs in 15 other countries.

Given the lack of strong civil societies in the Middle East, it seems unlikely that the promise of the Arab Spring will be fulfilled, with the possible exception of Tunisia. However, in many other countries, the combination of democratization NGOs and online social networking offer powerful possibilities for advancing democracy.