Democracy Digest Democracy Digest
The Bulletin of the Transatlantic Democracy Network - www.demdigest.net

July 18, 2006

Inside this Issue: See Also:

This issue of Democracy Digest is the first in its new format. Technical changes were partly responsible for the Digest's irregular appearance of late but we will now be recommencing a more regular schedule. As always, we appreciate your comments and contributions.

The "Other Russia" Convenes, Defying Harassment…

Russia's beleaguered opposition met in Moscow last week for a two-day meeting highlighting the "Other Russia" ahead of the G-8 summit. In a concerted attempt to sabotage the event, police and unidentified assailants physically abused dozens of opposition activists en route to the event. Some were forcibly taken off trains, and reportedly had drugs and bullets planted on them.

"Over the past few days, dozens of Russian citizens traveling to our conference were subjected to, at best, pressure, summons by special forces, threats, and in some cases to much more brutal treatment," said an activist for Open Russia, the foundation launched by jailed oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky. "We have asked the embassy to try to look into this ... it would be distressing if it were true," said US Assistant Secretary of State Dan Fried, noting that such events "reminded observers of the old days."

The conference venue, the Olympic Plaza Hotel, was picketed by pro-Kremlin youth groups Nashi and Molodaya Gvardiya (Young Guard). Former prime minister Mikhail Kasyanov, one of President Vladimir Putin's most vocal critics, was punched in the face by a Putin supporter who infiltrated the conference. Another regime supporter interrupted a speech by the British Ambassador and had to be escorted from the room. "It's an inspiring thing that so many of them have the courage, like the Soviet-era dissidents, to go ahead despite the bullying," says Lilia Shevtsova, an expert with the Carnegie Center in Moscow.

State Duma Deputy Sergei Glazyev, a Rodina member who was to deliver a speech at the conference, was knocked unconscious on his way to the closing day's events. "The authorities are switching to repression," Kasyanov told the audience. "Systematic repression against the Russian opposition has become, in fact, the prelude to the G8 summit in St. Petersburg," said a statement by conference organizers. "The campaign of repression is centralized and by all means sanctioned by the political leadership of our country."

"All successful democratic movements have found a way to bring people together around a common vision," NED president Carl Gershman told the conference. And, indeed, the conference closing statement affirmed the imperative of unity. "We gathered together from a broad range of political beliefs and overcame a history of strife and mutual reproach," it stated. "We rose above our prejudices to focus on the construction of a new democratic state of Russia under the rule of law." Participants agreed to convene again in September.


Back To Top
.. as Activists, Diplomats Highlight Anti-Democratic Drift

Tatyana Karpova, whose son died in the Dubrovka theater siege, reminded activists of the tragic implications of unaccountable government. "The powers that be have been pulling our leg for years -- nobody has been punished for this terrorist attack," she told the conference.

A Putin aide had warned that Western participation in the "Other Russia" conference would be interpreted as an "unfriendly gesture." But foreign officials, including two senior US officials and the Canadian and British ambassadors, defied the Kremlin and attended the opposition event. "Let's put it this way: if Russian officials attended a summit organized by the Democrats ... the American opposition, we wouldn't regard it as anything other than doing their job," said the State Department's Fried. "In the strongest, most effective, richest societies there is a very strong, rich, energetic civil society, " said Anthony Brenton, the UK envoy. "It is in Russia's interests that such a society develops here."

"We're participating in a very deliberate and conscious manner," said Andreas Schockenhoff, the German government's Russian affairs representative. "An independent, pluralist civil society is in Russia's best interests," he told Der Spiegel, promising to pressure the Kremlin to ensure that the "full breadth of Russian society" is represented at the next St. Petersburg Dialogue in Dresden in October. Under the previous German government, Gerhard Schroeder was criticized for trading democracy for security in his overly cozy relationship with Putin.

Articulating the business community's concerns, Christopher Cox, chairman of the US Securities and Exchange Commission, addressed the event via video link. He reminded the Kremlin that "freedom in all of its manifestations -- including particularly the freedom to say, write, publish, broadcast and think the truth as one understands it, without fear of persecution -- is essential to a free capital market. "Sustainable growth and prosperity to truly grow will require "a genuine freedom that isn't limited merely to the economic realm."

The main goal of the conference was to "give a signal that there is a different Russia, not only the Kremlin and officials, but a society, a society that suffers," said liberal legislator Vladimir Ryzhkov. Russia's embattled democrats hope the 0ther Russia event will generate a movement to solidify ranks across the entire spectrum of the political opposition and mobilize international support. Organizers, including former world chess champion Garry Kasparov and former presidential economic adviser Andrei Illarionov, were pleased that the summit attracted opposition leaders as diverse as former liberal Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov and the National Bolsheviks' Eduard Limonov. Given the National Bolsheviks' dubious democratic credentials, their participation was the subject of some criticism and dispute with Russian democrats' ranks, yet the overwhelming majority of participants had unimpeachable and long-standing democratic credentials.

"The model the official Russia is pursuing is the model of monopoly: a monopoly on the economy, on business, on politics and on so-called managed civil society and on ideology," Illarionov said. "There can be no such thing as a monopoly. We have to present the alternatives so that the country realizes it has a choice."

But the event also highlighted differences within the opposition although many speculated that some pre-conference splits were engineered by the Kremlin. Leading economist Mikhail Delyagin was expelled from the Motherland party after he agreed to address the Other Russia forum, while the liberal Yabloko group and the Union of Right Forces refused to attend.

Democrats used the run-up to the official G8 summit to highlight growing concerns about Russia's anti-democratic drift. "During the summit Russia will be in the focus of international attention, but parade its successes only," said Lyudmila Alekseyeva, chair of the Moscow Helsinki Group and member of the conference's organizing committee. "We want to show that there is the other Russia, suffering from bureaucratic fiat and human rights abuses." Kasparov believes President Vladimir Putin will attempt to retain power after his second term expires in 2008 despite being constitutionally bound to cede office. "The opposition should be ready to oppose such attempts, and I think that our conference, the Other Russia (Drugaya Rossiya), may help us to get together and to present a plan of action," said Kasparov.

Kasparov also attacked the "cynical and morally repugnant stance" of those in the West who argue that strategic interests require that Russia be placated. "It's time to stop pretending that the Kremlin shares the free world's interests," he argued, pointing out that "Moscow has become an ally for troublemakers and anti-democratic rulers around the world", providing nuclear aid to Iran, missile technology to North Korea, military aircraft to Sudan, Burma and Venezuela, and nurturing friendship with Hamas.

Others note that articulating human rights concerns and engaging Russia on vital interests are not mutually exclusive. "It is perfectly possible for the president to expect co-operation on matters such as Iran and North Korea, while supporting human rights and democracy," said Carl Gershman, president of the National Endowment for Democracy. But, he warns, "[t]here could come a point at which a line is crossed which will make it impossible to argue that Russia belongs in a group of advanced industrial democracies."


Back To Top
NGO Curbs Already Felt in Russia's Potemkin Democracy

Some 40 foreign non-governmental organizations have been denied legal status by Russian authorities in the first sign that anti-NGO legislation is starting to bite. The western NGOs, yet to be identified, expect to be closed after the justice ministry cited "negligent filling in of [re-registration] forms."

NGOs have predicted that bureaucratic niceties would be used to shut down groups critical of Russia's "Potemkin Democracy". "The regulations themselves are not transparent and involve such discretion that compliance is impossible if they want it to be," according to the Moscow office of Human Rights Watch.

"It's the new law coming into effect," said Oleg Orlov, from the Russian human rights group Memorial. "If they are doing this before the G8 summit [in St Petersburg, July 15] then imagine what it will be like afterwards".

This latest development came as the Duma gave a first reading to a bill that prohibits extremism, defined as "public slander directed toward figures fulfilling the state duties of the Russian Federation". Deputies also gave a second reading to a bill to end the "against all" option on electoral ballots which allowed critics to exercise their democratic rights while expressing their opposition to the available options.

Almost 100 cultural, intellectual and political leaders including former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt, Nobel Laureate David Trimble, political philosopher Andre Glucksman, and 17 current and former Members of the European Parliament signed an open letter to G7 leaders, urging them to give notice to Putin that Russia's current domestic and foreign policies are "unacceptable to its neighbors, to the international community and to many of its own citizens." They express the fear that Russia is "moving in the wrong direction," citing the new NGO law, state control of the media, nationalization of the YUKOS oil company, abolition of elected governors, the imprisonment of political opponents like Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Mikhail Trepashkin, interference in the affairs of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Lithuania and outright support for the dictatorship in Belarus.

In a further sign of the Kremlin's drive to curb democracy and secure control of Russia's energy resources, authorities recently detained last democratically elected governor, and the first to be arrested while in office. "The slide to authoritarianism is growing and human rights are being mocked," said Dzhibladze. "If the G8 leaders do not talk about this with President Putin that will mean legitimation of the authoritarian drift."


Back To Top
G8 Summit Highlights Hopes – and Frustrations

The G8 summit should pressure Russia to make changes, said Yuri Dzhibladze, president of the Center for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights. "If it wants to stay in the club, it has to play by democratic rules," he said. His views are resonating overseas. "Putin has turned from the path of democracy and is leading the country straight into an authoritarian regime," according to an open letter to G7 leaders from U.S. senators which urged Western leaders to protest against the Kremlin's antidemocratic tendencies. Russia currently holds the G8 presidency and also assumed the chair of the Council of Europe from May to November 2006.

In the run up to the G8 summit the Kremlin tried to divide civil society groups and has also gone on the political offensive. Several NGO representatives described a pre-summit official civil society conference as a public relations stunt. To some degree, the meeting "managed to bring protest movements onto [Putin's] side," said Alexander Cherkasov from the Memorial human rights group. But others were able to extract positive gains from the event. Yuri Dzhibladze outlined several threats to NGOs, from the onerous registration and accounting requirements of the new NGO law to a State Duma Bill that equates criticism of the government with extremism or terrorism.

Dzhibladze's intervention prompted Putin's "most impassioned comments", promising that human rights would be discussed at the G8 summit. While pleased with the concession, Dzhibladze insisted Putin was wrong in claiming that Council of Europe officials had approved the NGO law. In fact, the Council of Europe is concerned about "excessive powers of supervision" under the law. "We had read the experts' conclusions, and there was a clear argument that the law does not correspond to European standards and norms," Dzhibladze said. But he was glad that Putin promised to consider changes to the law. "We'll get him on that."

Putin tried to pre-empt critics of Russia's democratic deficit by attributing the West's concerns to Cold War residues, an approach "based on the philosophy of the 20th century, when our partners always intended to harm Russia, seeing it as a political opponent, or even as an enemy. It is a remnant of Cold War thinking" he said.

Brushing aside concerns that the Kremlin has undermined opposition parties and politicians, closed most independent media, expelled or imprisoned independent business figures, neutered the judiciary and abolished democratically-elected governors, Putin suggested democracy promotion is a form of neo-colonialism. "If we change 'civilizing role' to 'democratization', then you could substitute newspapers of a hundred years ago with those today," he said.

"Russia's leadership is hoping the West will turn a blind eye to its tightening autocratic grip," said Christopher Walker of Freedom House. "But ignoring the problem will not solve it. A strong message from the world's leading democracies should be heard by the Kremlin and, most important, by wider Russian society alike."

Russia "is once again a threat to Europe's stability and security," Edward McMillan-Scott, a British member of the European Parliament member, told the Other Russia conference. "It is a country led by a regime that is selfish, corrupt and unreliable," while "the 'Other Russia' is a Russia which is democratic, prosperous and free."


Back To Top
But Europe Divided Over Confronting Putin

Europe must not trade democratic principles for Russian gas, argue leading European commentators. The concepts of "sovereign democracy" or "managed democracy" advanced by the Putin regime are ominously reminiscent of yesterday's concept of "people's democracy," say Timothy Garton Ash, Dominique Moisi and Aleksander Smolar. "The more you qualify the concept of democracy, the more you run the risk of disqualifying it," they note, recalling the old saw that the difference between democracy and "people's democracy" is like that between a jacket and a straitjacket.

But the EU is reportedly prioritizing energy interests above democracy and human rights. When pressed about human rights abuses in Chechnya, European Commission head Jose Barroso adopted the Russian line, pointing to human rights problems in the EU and US, and saying "no one is perfect". An insight into EU thinking on Russia occurred last month, reports EU Observer, when Georgia asked Brussels to send monitors to observe Russian troop activity in South Ossetia. "One of [EU foreign affairs chief] Solana's senior advisors …. said this is out of the question because Russia is a strategic partner of the EU and Georgia is not," according to an EU diplomat.

The EU's position is also due to differences among member states. Germany, France, Spain and Italy have "prioritised strategic realism over democracy considerations", states a new report from FRIDE, the Madrid-based think-tank, while other members states including the Nordics, the UK, Austria and most new member states, have criticized Russia's backsliding. Consequently, FRIDE argues, the EU and its member states have "struggled to devise a policy capable of meaningfully addressing these concerns over Russia's democratic record in internal and external politics."

Russia's intransigence and European disunity appear have contributed to trans-Atlantic tension on the issue, with the US favoring a more critically robust approach, at least rhetorically. While officially committed to promoting democracy in Russia, Europe's position has been one of appeasement, according to a U.S. official quoted in the Washington Post, suggesting that Brussels has been intimidated. A senior European official confirmed as much, citing dependence on Russian energy supplies in mitigation. "That means we have no choice but to support a powerful center in Moscow," the official said, "so that the necessary investments are made and the supplies are available to us." "Today's Russian leadership strives to legitimize themselves with the West, with the great powers, for their political and economic course ... (but) the West is at a loss, is confused," she said, adding that the West had no "serious opportunity to exert an influence," the Carnegie Moscow Center's Shevtsova told Associated Press.

Evidently, Russia is in danger of losing its status as a shared trans-Atlantic project, in contrast to the 1990s when Washington and European capitals promoted the country's market economy and democratic transformation. This is an issue of particular concern when leading Atlanticists argue that Russia's democratic deterioration necessitates that the EU and US "build on areas of overlap in their agendas" and show more trans-Atlantic "creativity and coordination" in exploiting Europe's economic leverage as Russia's largest energy market and the United States' residual "relational capital" with its fellow Cold War superpower.


Back To Top
…as Kremlin Maintains Its Offensive

Putin's right-hand man and chief ideologist has rejected criticism of Russia's "backsliding" on democracy. "What are we backsliding from?" said Vladislav Surkov, deputy chief of the presidential administration, usually a behind-the-scenes operative. "We are moving further and further away from this non-democracy," suggesting that Putin's "sovereign democracy" had simply restored the order, stability and dignity lost during the Yeltsin era when business oligarchs ran the roost. Russia was resisting "political and economic regimes imposed by centres of global influence - I am not going to mention specific countries - by force and deception." In words that echoed Putin's nostalgic laments for the Soviet Union, Surkov denied that Russia had lost the cold war. "We believe that we defeated our own totalitarian system," he said. "Moscow did far more to democratize eastern Europe and central Asia than Washington or London."

Considered by some as the leading architect of Russia's "controlled democracy", Surkov recently warned, in a significant speech to the ruling United Russia party, of the threat of "a soft conquest of Russia by our foreign friends with their Orange technology", referring to Ukraine's democratic revolution. Such 'soft conquest' had seduced Ukraine, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan and Moldova into the Western camp and Russia was the next target. The speech, widely and positively reported in the Russian media, was published in two consecutive issues of the formerly liberal Moskovskie Novosti, as "The General Line", a telling allusion to official Communist doctrine (further details here) . Surkov has been "stage-managing democracy with demonic energy and Machiavellian cunning," according to a recent analysis for the Trilateral Commission. "Instead of the control by society over the executive of which Putin had spoken, the executive sought tighter control over civil society," the report suggests. "Its aim was to orchestrate nongovernmental organizations and political movements under the Kremlin's baton."

Surkov's comments betray a new defensive prickliness on the part of the Kremlin. One leading member of the Duma complained that the recent Lugar report detailing the backlash against democracy assistance which highlighted Russia's authoritarianism was "about forceful imposing of life norms on other countries," according to a report in Izvestia (June 22). After Freedom House downgraded Russia's democracy ratings for the third consecutive time, the Foreign Ministry charged that democracy assistance programs were being turned into a "truncheon" of foreign policy to punish "uncooperative" regimes. Other commentators believe the Kremlin fears democratization encroaching on its borders because it fears democratization in Russia itself.

The Kremlin has also wheeled out representatives from tame GONGOs to echo, well, the General Line. Claiming to be tired of the Western portrayal of Russia as backward, Ella Pamfilova, head of the official Council for Fostering the Development of Civil Society, cited the hypocrisy of those who castigate Russia while condoning other post-Soviet authoritarian regimes.


Back To Top
"Modernising Stalinism": From One-Party state to One-Pipeline State?

Russia's position and influence make it the market leader in the democratic decline of energy-rich states the former Soviet region, according to a report from Freedom House. "In Russia, the new oligarchy is state officials," said Ivan Krastev, a contributor to the study. "The transition has been from a one-party state to a one-pipeline state," he argues, referring to Russian state takeover of Gazprom, the country's largest energy firm. The study, Nations in Transit 2006, uses key indicators to track countries' movement toward or away from democracy. This latest report confirms that high demand and prices for oil and gas are increasing the economic influence of states such as Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkmenistan which are characterized by rising corruption, weak institutions, and deteriorating standards of governance, media and judicial autonomy.

"Talking democracy without fighting high oil prices does not make sense any longer," Krastev argues. "The European Union's democracy-promotion effort will have results only if it is combined with a common EU energy policy."

Some observers dispute the idea that Putin's Russia is radically different from the Yeltsin era. "I don't think there was ever democracy here in the 1990s," says the director of a St. Petersburg think-tank. "There was oligarchic capitalism, very crude, very jungle-like. The situation now is not less democratic because it was never democratic." But others are less sanguine.

Putin's political project amounts to "modernising Stalinism", argues Yelena Bonner, widow of Andrei Sakharov, Russia's most famous human-rights campaigner, in a new report from the UK-based Foreign Policy Centre. As if to confirm Bonner's analysis, Putin recently appointed Yevgeny Velikhov to the new "People's Chamber" as an extra-parliamentary representative, along with 41 other "especially deserving" citizens. Velikhov's appointment to the Chamber, ostensibly designed to hold the bureaucracy accountable, "is no accident". When Andrei Sakharov was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1975, an "outraged" Velikhov protested against the "degrading and provocative nature" of honoring somebody "who is bringing the political, economic, social and cultural achievements of the Soviet people into disrepute under the guise of the struggle to achieve human rights."

Bonner's argument also finds support from leading experts who suggest that the country is in danger of returning to the Soviet model where absence of prosecutorial independence undermined the rule of law. The think-tank, considered close to British Prime Minister Tony Blair, insists that not only is Russia not fit to chair the G8 but Iacks the credentials even to be a member. G7 leaders should demand "that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin observe the international obligations he has taken on."


Back To Top
Constructive Engagement? – Easier Said Than Done

Disturbing trends in Russia demand Another Look into Putin's Soul, according to leading Russian liberal, Andrei Piontkovsky. "Putinism is the highest stage of criminal capitalism," Piontkovsky argues, observing that far from confronting the oligarchic order that flourished under Yeltsin, Putin secured an accommodation between powerful business interests and his own "Chekhist entourage" of siloviki, from the security services.

Rather than representing a breach with the chaos of the Yeltsin years, the current regime is a "logical continuation of Yeltsin's rule in all its negative connotations," Piontkovsky told a recent Washington meeting. The regime needs to cultivate an image of the West as Russian's enemy in order to justify authoritarian rule, hence Putin's claim that "behind the terrorists in the Caucasus there stand more powerful and dangerous traditional enemies of Russia, enemies that still see nuclear Russia as a threat, and want to weaken and dismember her." Other commentators observe that Soviet marxist ideology has given way to a revived Moscow-centric Russian Orthodox world¬view, a quasi-religious geopolitical system of beliefs that portrays Moscow as the heir of Byzantium, the Third Rome, markedly distinct from, and spiritually superior to, Europe and America.

While the United States is seen as Russia's principal adversary, the Kremlin is also becoming more stridently anti-European as it becomes clear that EU efforts to integrate Russia in a "common European space" have demonstrably failed. To the contrary, "Russia's leaders have given up on becoming part of the West and have started creating their own Moscow-centered system," says the Carnegie Moscow Center's Dmitri Trenin. EU calls for human rights and democracy, Nato enlargement, support for democratic "colour" revolutions on Russia's periphery, and its demands for energy security, have prompted "a mounting hostility towards Europe, a feeling that Europe's multiple demands are devices to weaken Russia and undermine its bid for world status."

A report for the Trilateral Commission takes a different tack, arguing that Russia has had to go through an unprecedented simultaneous and accelerated "triple transition" - from a superpower of 350 million to a middling regional power with a declining population; from a collapsed command economy to a globalized market economy; and from Communist dictatorship and ideology, to "a new political order, the eventual shape of which remains to be determined."

Noting that Russia's leadership proclaims a commitment to democracy but needs time to develop the right model, the authors concede that stabilizing the country is a priority. "But an evolutionary approach needs forward movement," they argue. "Without such movement, the argument that 'Russia is not ready for full democracy' becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The report rejects claims that Putin has reversed the process of democratization begun under Yeltsin. "Yeltsin gave Russians personal freedom— in some cases too much," the authors argue, "because this was not freedom under the law, but freedom outside and beyond law, open to exploitation by the strong, the ruthless, and the opportunistic." As a consequence, by 2000 "democracy" had come to be associated with such "acutely painful experiences" as economic shock therapy and hyperinflation, theft through pyramid schemes and corruption, the economic collapse of 1998, and two wars in Chechnya.

The report outlines two serious concerns. First, the political freedom of Russians is being constricted. Actions against the regime's most conspicuous challengers has had "a chilling effect". Second, the report warns of "a resurgence in the activity of the FSB and the other successor agencies to the KGB, operating outside the confines of law and accountability."

The authors conclude by recommending "constructive engagement" – but with significant qualifications: engagement "should not just, or even primarily, be a matter of engagement with state actors …[but] with as wide a range of people and organizations as possible;" it should be "grounded on mutual interests, with less starry-eyed rhetoric, fewer unrealizable ambitions, a firm approach to principles and standards, and a realistic appreciation of Russia's direction of travel"; and the West should "do all we can to prevent unfounded suspicions from preventing normal and transparent support and encouragement being given to people who are working to improve life in their own country."

But constructive engagement is increasingly difficult when Russia appears intent on establishing an authoritarian axis around the Club for Dictators otherwise known as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, comprising Russia, China, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. At the July 2005 bilateral Russia-China summit in Moscow, Vladimir Putin and Hu Jintao issued an open attack on democracy promotion in a declaration that explicitly rejected attempts to "ignore objective processes of social development of sovereign states and impose on them alien models of social and political systems." The Russian and Chinese leaders left their bilateral meeting to join the SCO summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, which issued a statement insisting, in a slightly coded critique of democracy, that "concrete models of social development cannot be exported" and that "the right of every people to its own path of development must be fully guaranteed."

On key strategic interests, Russian "cooperation has become the exception, not the norm", argue former vice-presidential candidates, Democrat John Edwards, and Republican Jack Kemp, co-chairs of the Council on Foreign Relations independent task force on U.S. policy toward Russia. Meanwhile, Russian political institutions are "not becoming either more modern or more effective, but dysfunctional and brittle."


Back To Top
Trans-Atlantic Balancing Act – from Liberalizing Authoritarianism to Democracy?

The European Union's Barcelona process called for those Arab states involved to "develop the rule of law and democracy", conceding each country's right "to choose and freely develop its own political, socio-cultural, economic and judicial system," a clause that Arab rulers have exploited to justify their prevarication and inertia on political reform. The Barcelona Process is explicitly based on the assumption that economic modernization will ultimately generate civil society development and demand for democratization. But, as analysis from the EU-funded EuroMeSCo concludes, "an overview of the last ten years shows that reality lags far behind the aims, and that the causal and sequential link between economic reform and political liberalization has failed to materialize."

While adopting an "evolutionary approach that may look weak-wristed to a U.S. audience," European policymakers nevertheless resent the insinuation that they are less committed to Middle East democratization than their U.S. counterparts, argues Roberto Menotti of the Aspen Institute Italia. Europeans' "philosophical qualms about top-down democratization" and concerns about likely side-effects on Europe instability and migration explains their more incremental approach. Plagued by internal differences, reflecting the varying bilateral links and related priorities of member states, particularly those between France, Great Britain, and Italy, and their former colonies and mandates, the EU has necessarily pursued a consensus that "often equates with the lowest common denominator."

U.S. and European approaches "need not be identical but rather complementary," Menotti argues. Arab reform will be a "balancing act", as summarized by his EuroMesCo colleague Alvaro Vasconcelos: "the challenge is to combine support for reform processes 'from above' with backing for political movements pressing for democratic change 'from below,' such that liberalizing authoritarianism becomes not an end in itself but a stepping stone toward full democratization."

The case for trans-Atlantic cooperation in promoting Arab democracy remains compelling. "If Europe and the U.S. don't try to change the political framework in the region today," argues German analyst Ulrich Speck, "they will pay a huge price tomorrow."


Back To Top
Islamic Renewal Requires Shift in US Democracy Policy

Positive support for "Islamic Renewal", including the engagement of moderate Islamist parties "on normative grounds", and a refocusing and coordination of public diplomacy, democracy promotion and aid, is critical to combating extremism in the Muslim world, according to an important new report from the U.S. Institute of Peace. Reformers must "engage moderate Islam because core aspects of the religion have an enormous moderating and modernizing potential that policymakers have overlooked."

The US lacks an "integrated and sustainable strategy to confront religious extremism in the Muslim world," argues the report's author, Abdeslam Maghraoui, director of the USIP's Muslim World Initiative, and "policymakers have failed to recognize that the challenge is not only a conflict with the West but also involves ideological shifts within the Muslim world. The US should support the establishment of a 'Muslim World Foundation' to promote the development of peaceful, prosperous, and open Muslim societies and polities.

Islamic renewal - "a diffuse but growing social, political, and intellectual movement whose goal is profound reform of Muslim societies and polities" - incorporates civil society groups promoting such issues as human rights and women's equality as well as parties and movements that aim to integrate Islamic values and modern democratic principles. Maghraoui cites the example of Morocco's revision of school curricula and textbooks, and its progressive interpretations of specific clauses in Islamic law (sharia), reforming the family code (Moudawana) to grant women equal civil rights in 2004. Ideological shifts have precipitated a major "battle for the future of Islam as a faith and a civilization", Maghraoui argues. Among several recommendations, he suggests that a Muslim World Foundation could foster the development of peaceful, prosperous, and open Muslim societies and polities, drawing on local and international experts and partners, in a collaborative enterprise with government and civil society. Similarly, grants to American universities would promote Muslim modernist works and ideas, translating them into concrete policies.


Back To Top
Arab Reformers Draw on Rich Heritage

Such arguments for distinctively Islamic reform will find a ready outlet in a new Arabic reformist website that stresses the culpability of Arab governments and elites and their indifference towards the state of the Arab world. In an impressive founding editorial, the anonymous author encourages reformist forces in Arab countries to make their voices heard and highlights the regimes' evident strategy of passive resistance to reform initiatives.

"What concerns them is [waiting for] the remaining two years of the Bush administration to finally come to an end," an editorial charges, "and with them the calls for reform and democracy in the Middle East - [so that] despotism may once again reign in this miserable part of the world". This is the latest in an encouragingly vibrant series of Arab liberal and reformist sites, including The Critic and Metatransparent.

Arab regimes understand that "most American politicians are no longer zealous about spreading democracy, and they think that investing in the modernization of the Arabs and in helping them to establish democracy is a waste of money, time, and effort," the Aafq editorial continues. Conscious of this realist resurgence, Arab governments are "impatiently awaiting the day when… things will return to normal and that they will once again [be free to] impose their hold on their societies."

The view is echoed by Hazem Saghieh, a senior columnist with the London-based Al-Hayat. Arab leaders "put on a show, and when they saw Bush becoming weaker, they revealed their true face and their lack of intention to reform," he suggests. Stressing the cultural peculiarities of the Arab world, Saghieh believes "the question is not whether we do democracy or not…. [but] whether we can develop secular sources for legitimacy in the Arab world."

Reformists are increasingly looking to promote an agenda between Islamists and dictatorial regimes, drawing on the legacy of Islamic and Arab reformers like Egypt's Rifa'a Rafi' Al-Tahtawi, and contemporary reformist Sheikh Dr. Abd Al-Sabour Tantawi, Khayr Al-Din Al-Tunisi in Tunisia, and Syria's 'Abd Al-Rahman Al-Kawakibi, amongst others. These people dedicated their lives to extracting the Arab societies from backwardness, ignorance, and despotism. They called for modernization, [acquisition of] knowledge, and benefiting from the European model of civil institutions, rule of law, and democracy [as] the form of government.


Back To Top
MidEast Democracy Policy "in Ashes" ….

While Arab political activists are drawing attention to the deterioration of political liberties and human rights in the region, their supporters are lamenting an apparent waning commitment on the part of Western governments.

The US Administration's failure to confront Egypt over a series of human rights violations has caused particular concern. In recent weeks, the Mubarak regime has imprisoned leading democratic activist Ayman Nour, violently suppressed demonstrations in support of independent judges pushing judicial reform, threatened press freedoms, cancelled municipal polls, arrested several hundred members of the opposition Muslim Brotherhood, and banned democracy promotion institutes from working in the country. The absence or any public reprimand, let alone sanctions, from Washington prompted Joshua Muravchik, a leading democracy promotion advocate to describe the Administration's policy's "half-hearted" response as "inexplicable."

As for Western, and particularly US enthusiasm for Arab democracy, "it has not completely disappeared, but after the elections in Iraq, the strengthening of the Islamic parties there, and after the strong show of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, there is a little bit of hesitation," says the Carnegie Endowment's Nathan Brown. "They still seem to be trying to push for democracy and democratization, but I think it probably came down a notch in their list of priorities." But Tamara Cofman Wittes, of Brookings' Saban Center for Middle East Policy, believes the US cannot become a neutral bystander. "The U.S. is going to be engaged in one fashion or another," she argues, and "it is wise for the U.S. to have put itself on the side of democracy and freedom in this region rather than on the side of maintaining what in the long run is an unsustainable status quo."

The problem is not that the Bush Administration is no longer interested in promoting democracy, but that it has not forcefully upheld key democratic principles such as non-violence and the rule of law, argues Steven A. Cook, of the Council on Foreign Relations. Democratic legitimacy requires commitment to non-violence and to democratic principles that go beyond democratic procedures, including rule of law, rights of women and minorities, religious and political tolerance, transparency, and alternation of power. Ironically, he notes, in the latest issue of the Carnegie Arab Reform Bulletin, "it is Washington's strenuous effort not to appear to be imposing its agenda in the Arab world that has led to charges of hypocrisy."


Back To Top
… or in Need of Adjustment?

The lamentable state of Arab democracy is news to nobody. But in an interesting attempt at quantifying Arab democracy in the Summer 2006 Middle East Quarterly, Saliba Sarsar conducts a comparison of several indices across 17 Arab states from 1999-2005 and concludes that considerable backsliding has occurred across the region. He suggests that policymakers adopt a more nuanced approach, rewarding reformers by basing relations with Arab states on quantifiably concrete and transparent democratic improvements.

The experiences of Western democracies confirm that "political pluralism and peaceful transfers of power are essential to the development of the rule of law and a modern conception of citizenship," argues political scientist Amr Hamzawy. He warns against "placing hopes in soft diplomacy when dealing with autocrats and punishing Arab citizens for their electoral choices by retreating from democracy promotion. The Arab world is a ticking bomb and only real democratic openings can slow down the timer."

But external assistance and solidarity will not be a determining factor, says Radwan Masmoudi of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy. "Democracy is coming to the Arab world and the Muslim world, whether we like it or not, with or without our support," he believes. "The current regimes and governments are too isolated, too discredited, and too corrupt to last much longer. We are going to see a lot of changes in the next five to 10 years."


Back To Top
A Third Way Between Islamists and Authoritarians?

Democracy promoters are struggling with a range of challenges that can be summarized as the Islamist dilemma. Should the West promote democracy in the Arab world when the short-term beneficiaries are likely to be Islamist parties? Are such parties committed to democracy or to more fundamentalist aims? Would Islamist participation in democratic politics eventually lead to the closure of political space and refusal to give up office if voted out in free elections? Do moderate nonviolent Islamists represent their mass base or present a "human face" of Islamic radicalism?

Islamists have most to gain from democratic elections, a specialist told a recent CSID conference. "The leaders of mainstream Islamist opposition groups are outspoken advocates of free and competitive elections," says Carrie Rosefsky Wickham, "because they know that, with a mass base that is much larger and better organized than that of any rival opposition group, they would be the first to benefit from a genuine democratic opening."

The official US position is that while there may be electoral outcomes which are uncomfortable, the US continues to strongly support democracy while reserving the right, says Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Welch, "to have a policy that contradicts the objectives of a particular political party, even if that political party was fairly elected." The US would seek to engage moderate Islamists, recognizing that "the concept of political Islam represents a broad diversity of views within the Arab and Islamic worlds,…. that violent jihadi groups form a very small minority among Islamist groups [and that] …the majority in many cases are legal Islamist political parties."

But other commentators caution against empowering Islamists, calling for a reorientation away from elections towards institutional development. "It is only after the rise of liberal institutions such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion that Middle Eastern elections can provide the vibrant alternatives that we expect truly democratic systems to provide," argue Daveed Gartenstein-Ross and Nir Boms.

Democracy promotion in the Arab world need not entail a Faustian choice between the unpalatable alternatives of corrupt incumbent authoritarian regimes, or Islamists of questionable democratic provenance and inclination. There is a third way, argues the Washington Institute's Dennis Ross, one that requires Arab reformers to engage in grass-roots organizing and "delivering services, not just rhetoric." Just as Islamists have gained a mass base by providing health and social services, reformers should do likewise. "Reformer-led after-school programs that teach English and computer skills would be a magnet for many Arab parents and kids and put reformers in a position of responding to real needs," Ross suggests.

Elections are only one part of the democratic process, Ross argues, and timing is critical. Rather than press for early elections in Arab states, democracy promoters should focus on boosting the organizing capacity of secular, moderate alternatives and on developing the rule of law and good governance. There should be eligibility requirements for elections, barring armed militias.


Back To Top
EU Needs New Democracy Foundation, says Havel

Václav Havel, former president of the Czech Republic, has thrown his weight behind the push for a European democracy foundation which could, he argues, "add value" to European Union democracy assistance efforts. "The EU should not try to teach the world about democracy," says Havel, "but help it flourish." He secured European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso's endorsement for the proposal.

Havel "knows the importance of democracy assistance programmes from his time as a dissident," says David French, the director of the UK's Westminster Foundation for Democracy, and co-author of the proposal with Roel von Meijenfeldt, director of the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy. The proposal has also been endorsed by the European Parliament's all-party Democracy Caucus. "The EU needs a new strategic approach to democracy and human rights," said Edward McMillan-Scott, Vice-President of the European Parliament and Democracy Caucus chairman. He believes the gravity model of democratization is faltering as "the transformative effect of potential EU membership is reaching its limits."

European democracy promoters have long argued that the EU needs a more flexible and autonomous instrument for democracy assistance. The proposed new €60 million (US$76m) a year foundation, modeled along the lines of the German stiftungen and the National Endowment for Democracy, would operate autonomously from EU institutions, providing functional flexibility and political deniability. The EU's principal instrument of democracy assistance, the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), with a budget of €142m (US$180m) million, has criticized for lack of impact, inflexibility, and long program lead times. The envisaged model reflects earlier demands from key democracy promotion practitioners for a European Foundation for Democracy through Partnership that is "expert, deniable and flexible" yet based on European values.

Recent European-US cooperation against the dictatorship in Belarus seemed to represent a "promising beginning" for a more vocal democracy strategy in support of post-Soviet democracies But proposals for a joint EU-US pro-democracy fund did not make the agenda of the 21 June EU-US summit. Ostensibly, this reflects EU concern to highlight a distinctively European approach to democracy promotion based on consensus, pluralism and diversity. But there is resistance within the EU even to a quasi-autonomous democracy assistance agency on the part of those who fear it would adopt "an overly muscular 'US-style' approach."

According to a report in the Financial Times, Europeans were scathing about US democratization strategy and suggestions that the EU's long term strategy of nurturing democratic institutions amounts to condoning authoritarian regimes. "We have nothing to learn from the US in promoting democracy," said one EU official. "We have been doing it for a lot longer than the US." Such attitudes seem at best unhelpful and may indicate the continuing strength and influence of what Timothy Garton Ash calls Euro-Gaullist forces within the EU, eager to define and develop Europe in opposition to the US.

This is particularly troublesome when the benefits of transatlantic cooperation are considerable, as highlighted in Strategies for Democratic Change, an analysis of how the US, EU, member states, and other international actors can enhance democracy assistance by coordinating common strategies. "While in nearly every case there are positive signs of international support for democratic reformers, much greater political will and coordination among democratic governments is necessary to make a difference," says co-editor Ted Piccone. The book outlines key lessons for EU policy, says co-editor Richard Youngs, specifically that "Europe could be doing more to react to opportunities for democratic reform where these appear, as well as offering better targeted support in the often difficult period after democratic breakthroughs."

Europe does not speak with one voice on such issues. Central European leaders, among the first to warn of President Vladimir Putin's authoritarian tendencies, welcomed the recent speech in Vilnius, the Lithuanian capital, by US vice-president Dick Cheney. "It wasn't anti-Russian," said Pawel Zalewski, chairman of Poland's parliamentary foreign affairs committee, "but it showed that the US is not retreating from central Europe in favour of building stronger relations with Moscow." US efforts to promote democracy in the former Soviet Union have been welcomed by EU member states Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary.


Back To Top
"Faltering" Democratic Movements Need Coordinated Support

"Europe could be doing more to react to opportunities for democratic reform [and] offering better targeted support in the often difficult period after democratic breakthroughs", says Richard Youngs, co-editor of a valuable new analysis on democracy promotion strategies. Long-term perspectives help build democratic values and infrastructure, but democracy promoters also need to respond rapidly to exploit short-lived opportunities for democratic change, according to Strategies for Democratic Change, a report from FRIDE and the Democracy Coalition Project which outlines how international actors can improve democracy assistance by coordinating common approaches and by following local reformers' lead in shaping strategies for change

Democracy promotion debates have largely focused on macro-level issues of diplomacy and political dialogue, but considerable work is needed on micro-level democracy assistance. Recommending a shift from direct US and European efforts towards a greater engagement of regional actors, the report suggests that international reactions tend to be strong at times of dramatic change, especially when political developments are moving on a democratic trajectory. But the international community's response to post-transition challenges is found wanting, characterised by a tendency "to mark down as 'success stories' cases where challenges to democratic quality remain acute."

Development assistance should be consistently linked to standards of democratic accountability and transparency in receiving countries, argue the report's co-editors, Ted Piccone, executive director of the Democracy Coalition Project, and Richard Youngs, co-director and coordinator of FRIDE's Democratisation programme. The book's principal aim is to gauge, six years after the Warsaw Declaration created the Community of Democracies, how far democracies' have fulfilled their promise to give democratic change greater priority.

While the growing concern over democracy assistance is leading to a backlash from certain authoritarian regimes determined to block external resources for domestic groups pressuring for democratic change, it is important to underline the role external actors can play in fostering open democratic societies. Drawing on several case studies - Burma, Togo, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Yemen and Zimbabwe - the book examines international initiatives to advance democratic transition and consolidation.


Back To Top
Chávista Assembly Acts to Curb Venezuela's Civil Society

It is said that if you throw a frog into a pan of hot water, it will immediately jump out. But if you place a frog in a pan of cold water and gradually heat to boiling, it will die passively. Politically, Venezuela's radical populist President Hugo Chávez has effected a similar process, leading the country "in a more authoritarian direction only slowly, carefully calibrating his repressive measures so that they are too incremental to trigger popular outrage."

A "gradual transition to semi-authoritarian rule by selective repression is unfolding," notes the recent FRIDE-DCP analysis, marked by the approval of semi-authoritarian restrictive laws, the concentration of power in the hands of the president and the increasing militarization of policy." "Conflict, in all likelihood war, is the future," according to Nicolas Maduro, a leading Chavista who heads the National Assembly.

Proposals to restrict Venezuela's beleaguered civil society and human rights NGOs are drawing protests from democrats and diplomats, both domestically and internationally. The draft International Co-operation Law, which has already passed its first reading, prohibits NGOs from receiving foreign funding if the state considers their activities unacceptable.

Supporters of Chávez within the National Assembly have been explicit in their purpose. "Of course we are going to control the NGOs," said Iris Varela, a leading member of the Chávista Fifth Republic Movement (MVR) "because that's what the people are demanding." The opposition is unrepresented in the assembly after boycotting last December's legislative election.

After consolidating control of Venezuela's state institutions, the Chávista's authoritarian project is shifting towards the creation of what one academic has called a 'dependent civil society' in which pro-regime groups like the Círculos Bolivarianos, feared by many as embryonic militias, eclipse genuinely independent civil society groups and undermine democratic institutionalization.

The regime has already identified 72 of the 100 or so human rights and democracy NGOs it intends to target. "Our great fear is that regulations of this type will be applied in a biased way that discriminates against groups that are critical of the government," said Marino Alvarado, head of human-rights group Provea. Leaders of citizens' rights group Súmate, which helped arrange a failed recall vote against Chávez in 2004, are already facing trial for receiving grants from the National Endowment for Democracy.

Confirming a trend of copy-cat legislation through which authoritarian regimes have curbed independent NGOs, the Venezuelan law is clearly based on other repressive precedents. "We've compared this bill with legislation in force in Russia, Zimbabwe and Uzbekistan," said a foreign diplomat, adding that it most closely resembled the most restrictive Uzbek law.

Disturbingly, the draft Venezuelan law follows the Russian NGO law in several respects: it imposes mandatory registration of NGOs, and NGOs seeking official registration status will have to submit a charter, mission statement, overview of activities, and financial records, including detailed information about funding sources, mandatory registration requirements which other repressive regimes have used to impose greater control over civil society (the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law notes that mandatory registration requirements violate the right to free association under the major international human rights conventions); the role of the autonomous agency and the nature of the implementing regulations have been left vague, giving considerable discretion to regulators to impose additional restrictions, and the regulatory agency can undertake periodic audits to ensure compliance with all aspects of the law; the transparency requirements are very broad and apparently allow the government to require extensive reporting from NGOs (the article gives to "any citizen" the right to demand certain categories of documents from NGOs, a carte blanche for Chavista cadres to harass independent NGOs); the financial transparency requirements are unclear, but seem to require "detailed" reporting not only of all sources of income but also how income is spent.

The proposed new restrictions on NGOs are generating momentum behind demands that Venezuela's membership of such international groups as the Community of Democracies and the Organization of American States be reconsidered. The OAS's Inter-American Democratic Charter, requires member states to promote and defend democracy, the "essential elements" of "representative democracy" in very specific terms, including: respect for "human rights and fundamental freedoms, access to and the free exercise of power in accordance with the rule of law, the holding of periodic, free, and fair elections based on secret balloting and universal suffrage"; a "pluralistic system of political parties and organizations"; "separation of powers and independence of the branches of government"; "freedom of expression and of the press"; and "constitutional subordination of all state institutions to the legally constituted civilian authority.


Back To Top
Authoritarianism Worries Democrats, Delights Fellow Travellers

Prospects for positive change in the country remain hampered by a divided opposition. Súmate announced on 27 June that it was unable to hold primaries to select a single opposition candidate to face Chávez in December's elections. Although most of the 12 possible opposition candidates agreed in principle to stand down in favor of a unity candidate, they disagree on the best way to find such a figure. Such division is particularly lamentable when commentators suggest that the inter-national community would be much more supportive if the country's democratic opposition was "united, coherent, and engaged responsibly in the political struggle."

Like other groups, Súmate is concerned that the electoral system is unlikely to provide clean elections. The regime has reportedly compiled an electoral list of 17million eligible voters from a total population of only 26 million. The National Electoral Council (CNE) rejected a proposal by three universities to undertake an independent audit of the electoral register, prompting would-be presidential candidate Manuel Rosales, governor of Zulia province, to threaten an independent and parallel audit of the Electoral Registry. Chávista groups recently attacked another would-be presidential candidate, former leftist guerilla leader Teodoro Petkoff, using tear gas.

These authoritarian trends are even starting to worry Chávista sympathizers, concerned that "without an opposition to provide institutional ballast more political polarization is likely to come," and regional figures, including Organization of American States (OAS) secretary general José Miguel Insulza, who has affirmed that legitimacy requires that leaders are not only elected democratically but govern democratically.

"Applause for autocrats undermines the morale of people who insist on fighting for their freedoms," notes center left intellectual Ian Buruma. He undoubtedly had London mayor, Ken Livingstone, in mind when complaining that "the frivolous behaviour of a dogmatic left has already allowed neoconservatives to steal all the best lines."

Pro-Chávez sympathy is not only due to the regime's purchasing of influence through Washington, DC, lobby firms and fellow travelers, including hired staff from the self-styled revolutionary left. Much pro-Chávez sentiment is based on the notion that his regime is delivering improved living standards and conditions for the country's impoverished majority. But under Chávez, GDP per capita sank from $4,760 in 2001 to $ 3,080 in 2004, as British Labour MP Denis MacShane recently noted, citing statistics from the French Atlas Economique et Politique Mondiale 2006 (published by the leftist Nouvel Observateur). During Chávez's term of office, the percentage of the population earning less than $2 a day rose from 43 percent to 53 percent. The government's official data confirms that infant mortality increased in 2003 and 2004, the last two measured years.


Back To Top
News in Brief

Ramin Jahanbegloo

The European Union is particularly alarmed at the continuing detention of the respected Iranian academic Dr. Ramin Jahanbegloo, who, it stated, is well known for his "commitment to philosophical and moral principles, non-violence and dialogue." A recent statement from the EU stresses its concern about "shortcomings in due process" surrounding Dr. Jahanbegloo's detention, and calls on Tehran to provide access to legal counsel. The statement reflected European alarm at the recent announcement by Iran's Intelligence Minister Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei that Jahanbegloo was accused with fomenting a velvet revolution in the Islamic Republic on American orders.

Unite Against Terror – Anniversary of London 7/7 Tube Bombings

On the anniversary of the July 7 London Tube Bombings the website Unite Against Terror has added an Arabic translation of the statement 'Communities United Against Terror'. The statement and website, created in the days after 7/7, was signed by several thousand people around the world and is now co-sponsored by the UAT organisers, openDemocracy and the French group, Mouvement Pour la Paix et Contre le Terrorisme. Please consider publicising the Arabic translation today.

The anniversary also provides cause for remembering Giles Hart, an engineer who died in the Tavistock Square bombing. Giles, a leading supporter of Solidarnosc, was posthumously granted the Knights Cross of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland, for his services to democracy.

Arab TV Channel to "Promote Democracy"

A new Arab satellite television channel based in London started transmitting last week, with a commitment to "promoting the values of tolerance and democracy, and respect for freedoms and human rights." Al-Hiwar TV (Dialogue) will "serve the Arab peoples' aspirations for a better future," according to one of its founders.

The Emerging Shia Crescent

A video of a symposium on the Shia crescent's implications for U.S. policy in the Middle East can be viewed here. It features Fouad Ajami, M. Khadduri Professor of Middle Eastern Studies, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University; F. Gregory Gause III, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Vermont; Vali R. Nasr, Adjunct Senior Fellow, Middle Eastern Studies, Council on Foreign Relations; and Richard N. Haass, President, Council on Foreign Relations.


Back To Top
Opportunities

International Forum for Democratic Studies Deputy Director
The International Forum for Democratic Studies at the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is seeking a deputy director to work with the co-directors in overseeing the overall operations of the International Forum. Responsibilities include budgeting and personnel management; managing the preparation of proposals for developing and sustaining Forum programs; developing new Forum initiatives, especially in the area of promoting the translation and dissemination of literature on democracy; managing the planning and organization of Forum conferences and events and directing the global Network of Democracy Research Institutes; acting as principal liaison between the Forum and the NED program staff; and representing the Forum's co-directors at conferences and meetings with visitors and outside groups and organizations. Ph.D. strongly preferred; 10-15 years applicable experience, with 5-7 years of nonprofit management experience preferred; a record of scholarly achievement and publications; knowledge of and experience with democracy promotion. Full details here.

Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellows Program, Washington, D.C.
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) invites applications to its Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellows Program. The program is intended primarily to support practitioners and scholars from new and aspiring democracies. Distinguished scholars from the United States and other established democracies are also eligible to apply. Practitioners are expected to have substantial experience working to promote democracy. Scholars are expected to have a doctorate, or academic equivalent, at the time of application. The program is not designed to pay for professional training or support students working toward a degree. A working knowledge of English is an important prerequisite for participation in the program.

The fellowship year begins October 1 and runs through July 31, with major entry dates in October and March. All fellows receive a monthly stipend, health insurance, travel assistance, and research support through the Forum's Democracy Resource Center and the Reagan-Fascell Research Associates Program. Full details here or visit us online here. Applications for fellowships in 2007-2008 must be received no later than November 1, 2006. Notification of the competition outcome is in April 2007.

Assistant Program Officer, Africa
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) seeks an Assistant Program Officer to work with its Africa team. The Assistant Program Officer will provide significant programmatic support to the Endowment's small grants activities in the Sudan, and will provide administrative support to other country programs as required. The position is based in Washington, D.C. but will entail travel to the Sudan approximately twice per year. Full details here. Send resume to jobs@ned.org (preferred). Specify APO- Sudan in the subject line or via postal mail to National Endowment for Democracy, 1101 15th Street N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20005 Fax: 202-223-6042 No phone calls please.

Program Coordination Assistant (PCA)
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) seeks an Assistant in its Programs section. The position is based in Washington, D.C. The Program Coordination Assistant will join a four person team in the Office of the Vice President for Programs, Planning and Evaluation. The team coordinates the quarterly proposal process, serves as a point of contact for core grantees of the NED, liaises with grants and other staff at the Endowment, coordinates the submittal of proposals and reports to the Department of State, and provides general support to NED Programs staff and to the Vice President's office. Full details here. Send resume to jobs@ned.org (preferred) - place the job title in the subject line - or via postal mail to National Endowment for Democracy, 1101 15th Street N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20005 Fax: 202-223-6042 No phone calls please.

Program Assistant, Africa
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) seeks a Program Assistant for its Africa section. The position is based in Washington, DC. The Program Assistant will provide administrative support to the Africa Program staff. Full details here. Send resume to jobs@ned.org (preferred) - place the job title in the subject line - or via postal mail to National Endowment for Democracy, 1101 15th Street N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20005 Fax: 202-223-6042 No phone calls please.

Assistant Program Officer, East Asia
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) seeks an Assistant Program Officer with its East Asia team. The position is based in Washington, DC. The Assistant Program Officer will work with program staff to provide programmatic and administrative support to NED's East Asia grants program, monitor program budgets, prepare reports and assist in the development of projects in the region. Full details here. Send resume to asiajobs@ned.org (preferred) - place the job title in the subject line - or via postal mail to National Endowment for Democracy, 1101 15th Street N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20005 Fax: 202-223-6042 No phone calls please.

The International Forum for Democratic Studies, the research arm of the National Endowment for Democracy, is a leading center for analysis of the theory and practice of democratic development worldwide. The forum offers internships to advanced undergraduate and graduate students during the fall and spring semesters and during the summer. Forum internships, which are unpaid, provide students an excellent opportunity to improve their knowledge of democratization and international affairs and to develop and improve their research, writing, and computer skills. Please send a cover letter, resume, two references, and brief writing sample to the contact below. Deadline for Fall 2006: July 15. Deadline for Spring 2007: November 15. Applications submitted after these dates will be considered only if positions are still available. Intern Coordinator, International Forum for Democratic Studies, National Endowment for Democracy. 1101 15th Street, NW Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005 202-293-0300 Fax: 202-293-0258 Forum@ned.org.

Program Officer, Middle East Programs - Washington DC
Freedom House
Freedom House seeks a Program Officer for its Middle East/North Africa department. The position is based in Washington, D.C. Under the direction of the Senior Program Manager, the Program Officer will assist in all aspects of MENA regional programming. The tasks of the Program Officer will include, but are not limited to: backstopping overseas projects, promoting the projects, assisting in the management of the projects, program design and implementation, financial management, fundraising, public relations, and other duties as assigned. Position is based in Washington, D.C. with possible international travel. Full details here. Please submit resume, cover letter, and salary history to: Mary Browse D. Blood, Human Resources Generalist Human Resources Department humanresources@freedomhouse.org, fax: 202-822-3893. Only candidates who have been selected for an interview will be notified.

Director of Programs, Center for Religious Freedom - Washington DC
Freedom House
Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom is seeking a Program Director. Under the direction of the Director of the Center for Religious Freedom, the Program Director will provide research, logistical, and administrative assistance to the staff. The candidate should have strong editing, writing and proofreading skills, and should be able to multi-task. Duties will include, but are not limited to: coordinating public outreach, providing research assistance for studies and reports, assisting in the administrative coordination of studies and reports, assisting with fundraising proposals, drafting press releases, updating the website, editing and laying out a quarterly newsletter, assisting with general office administration, and other duties as assigned. The ideal candidate will have knowledge of international affairs, with specific focus on religious freedom and human rights. Experience in research and writing on religious freedom and human rights issues preferred. A master's degree is required. Full details here. Please submit resume, cover letter, and salary history to: Mary Browse D. Blood, Human Resources Generalist Human Resources Department humanresources@freedomhouse.org, fax: 202-822-3893. Only candidates who have been selected for an interview will be notified. Applications will be accepted until July 28.

American Volunteers for International Development - Egypt
Freedom House
Freedom House seeks volunteers to work with civil society organizations in Egypt through the American Volunteers for International Development (AVID) program. Freedom House is seeking individuals with demonstrated professional experience for pro-bono assignments focused on capacity building for Egyptian watchdog organizations. Qualified candidates will have experience in organizational management. Freedom House covers international travel expenses and provides a housing allowance and daily living stipend for duration of volunteer assignment. Assignments may be in Cairo or other areas throughout Egypt. To learn more about the program go here. Candidates must submit a completed application, resume, and cover letter to: Mary Browse D. Blood Human Resources Generalist humanresources@freedomhouse.org, fax: (202) 822-3893. *Please write "AVID Application (Egypt)" in the subject line of your email.

Resident Country Director - Ulaanbataar, Mongolia
International Republican Institute
The International Republican institute (IRI) a non-profit organization dedicated to advancing democracy worldwide has an immediate opening for a Resident Country Director (RCD) in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. The IRI program in Ulaanbaatar is a dynamic program working to strengthen government institutions and increase participation in the political system. Elements of the program include political party building, women's participation in the political process, and legislative reforms. Full details here. Please send resume and cover letter to: IRI, HR Dept/RCD Mongolia, 1225 Eye St, NW, Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20005 or e-mail to: personnel@iri.org or Fax: 202-408-9462 Apply by: August 1, 2006

Chief of Party - Amman, Jordan
Partners for Democratic Change is seeking a Chief of Party to implement a USAID-funded program in Jordan to strengthen civil society. The Chief of Party will be responsible for program development and implementation, financial management, staff supervision, general oversight of daily office management, public relations, and providing technical assistance and training. For further information: contact Andrea Gibney Phone: 415-896-5000, agibney@partnersglobal.org Apply by: August 28, 2006

Legal Advisor
The International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL) has an immediate opening for a full-time Legal Advisor in the Washington, DC office. ICNL supports the development of civil society and provides technical assistance for the creation and improvement of laws and regulatory systems supporting and affecting non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in developing countries around the world ("NGO Law"). The Legal Advisor will serve in a key role in the support and development of ICNL's practice. Full details here. Submit resume and writing sample to hr@icnl.org. Reference "Legal Advisor-General" in subject line. Only finalists will be contacted.

Legislative Program Manager – Afghanistan
National Democratic Institute (NDI)
NDI seeks an experienced individual to conduct a parliamentary strengthening program based in Kabul, Afghanistan. The Legislative Program Manager will organize and conduct training activities, respond to requests for technical assistance and evaluate progress towards program objectives. Qualified candidates with teaching or training experience are encouraged to apply. Interested applicants can apply now using our on-line resume tool at www.ndi.org Full details available here. No phone calls please. Apply by: July 31, 2006

Women's Political Participation Specialist – Pakistan
National Democratic Institute (NDI)
NDI seeks a Women's Political Participation Specialist to manage a 12-month program aimed at increasing women's political participation in Pakistan. This program is designed to assist political parties in undertaking reforms that offer greater opportunities for women to advance in and contribute to the political process. The Specialist will organize and conduct training activities, respond to requests for technical assistance and evaluate progress towards program objectives. Full details available here. No phone calls please. Application Instructions Interested applicants can apply now using our on-line resume tool at www.ndi.org

Director of Programs/ Deputy Director of Programs - Washington, D.C. Freedom House
Freedom House seeks a Director of Programs to be based in its Washington, DC headquarters. The Director of Programs will assume a management role in relation to Freedom House's entire democratization program portfolio, which currently includes 24 programs and eight field offices. The primary task of the Director of Programs is to guide the focus and direction of Freedom House's democratization assistance efforts, including shaping and assisting with future program development. Full details of both positions available here. Please submit resume, cover letter, and salary history to: Mary Browse D. Blood, Human Resources Generalist humanresources@freedomhouse.org Fax: 202-822-3893

Venezuela Project Director - Mexico City, Mexico
Freedom House
Freedom House seeks a Director for its Venezuela Human Rights Defenders project to be based out of Mexico City, Mexico. The Project Director will take the lead role in directing and implementing the Venezuela Human Rights Defenders Program and managing the local staff and office. Extensive experience living and working in Latin America is a must. Please submit resume, cover letter, and salary history to: Mary Browse D. Blood @ humanresources@freedomhouse.org Fax: (202) 822-3893

UNDP Yemen - Governance & Gender Teamleader; Communications Officer; Programme Officer; Programme Associates; Research & Knowledge Management Associate
Visit http://www.undp.org.ye for detailed job descriptions. Contact Information: Vibeke Risa Phone: +9671448605 Email: vibeke.risa@undp.org

Regional Director, MENA Programs - Washington, D.C.,
IFES - Democracy at Large
The Director is responsible for the promotion of IFES' strategic agenda in the Middle East and North Africa. Specifically this will entail the growth of high-quality IFES programming through the identification and development of democratization opportunities. The Regional Director and his/her team will manage the process of program/project research, design and occasionally implementation for target region/countries. He/she will be proactive in identifying and cultivating potential sources and contacts for funding, and submit proposals for such funding. Applications will be accepted online only, through the IFES website at http://www.ifes.org/employment_dc.html.

Communications and Advocacy Manager - Kabul, Afghanistan
Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit
The purpose of the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit (AREU) is to conduct quality action-oriented research that will inform policy and improve practice in order to increase the quality, impact and accountability of development programmes in Afghanistan. The Communications and Advocacy Manager will be based in Kabul and will report to the AREU Deputy Director for Communications and Advocacy. Please send a CV and cover letter to applications@areu.org.af. For more information, please see www.areu.org.af or contact Anja Havedal Email: applications@areu.org.af

Program Associate - Washington, D.C.,
Women's Learning Partnership (WLP)
Women's Learning Partnership (WLP) is an international, non-governmental organization dedicated to women's leadership and empowerment. We are looking for a creative team-player, with strong writing skills, who likes to take the initiative and demonstrates commitment to advancing women's human rights and development. Please send your resume, an unedited writing sample, and a list of three references to: Search Committee Women's Learning Partnership 4343 Montgomery Avenue, Suite 201 Bethesda, MD 20814 Fax: (1) 301-654-2775 Email: wlp@learningpartnership.org Web: www.learningpartnership.org Apply by: July 21, 2006

Director of Development - Washington, D.C.
Atlantic Council of the United States
The Atlantic Council seeks a Director of Development to: lead overall development efforts, working closely with the President, the Board of Directors, and staff; lead and personally support the identification, cultivation and solicitation of top-level gifts by the President and leading Directors; actively participate in the cultivation and requests to major donors; plan and oversee gifts from foundations, corporations and individuals; manage all major gift functions: annual giving, principal gifts, donor prospecting, and the annual fundraising gala; cultivate relationships with the Board of Directors to promote sustained involvement in fundraising efforts. Salary commensurate with qualifications, plus excellent benefits. The Director of Development reports to the President and is a member of the Senior Staff. Job available immediately. Please send resume and cover letter to job@acus.org Apply by: August 1, 2006

Vice President and Director - Brussels, Belgium,
The EastWest Institute
EWI announces a search for a respected professional to lead its Global Security Program. The Vice President will be responsible for the strategic, conceptual and operational management of the Global Security Program (GSP), including its evaluation system and impact assessment, synergy with the other EastWest Institute programmatic activities, and its contribution to and use of the EWI network. S/he will provide overall direction and coordination for all activities within the GSP. The Vice President is a member of the EWI Management Committee, reporting directly to the President and CEO of the Institute. Applications including cover letter, CV and salary requirements to be sent through www.ewi.info/jobs Ref.560 FP, attention Ms. Dagmar Aserova, Director of Human Resources.

SAIS Center for Transatlantic Relations, Administrative Assistant
The SAIS Center for Transatlantic Relations plans to hire an administrative assistant with accounting and website management experience to work in our fast-paced office. For more information and application information contact Johns Hopkins University at https://hrnt.jhu.edu/jhujobs/ALos in reference to Requisition #24205.


Back To Top
Democracy Digest is a free, regular summary of analysis and information from the Transatlantic Democracy Network.

To Subscribe or Unsubscribe for Democracy Digest visit www.demdigest.net/archives.html

Democracy Digest Welcomes Your Cooperation

Democracy Digest welcomes cooperation from organizations and individuals in building circulation and in obtaining articles, speeches, web site addresses, organizational statements and other materials that may be of interest to readers. Cooperating organizations include: Aspen Institute Berlin; the Center for Study of Islam and Democracy; the Club of Madrid; Council for a Community of Democracies; Droits et Democratie (Canada); Europe XXI Foundation (Ukraine); FAES Fundacion (Spain); the Helsinki Citizens' Assembly (Turkey); the Institute for Political Studies at the Catholic University of Portugal; Israel Democracy Institute; No Peace Without Justice (Italy); People in Need Foundation (Czech Republic); Polish Helsinki Foundation on Human Rights.

The Transatlantic Democracy Network involves North Americans and Europeans in dialogue about cooperation to support those working for democracy elsewhere in the world, especially in the Greater Middle East. The Network is associated with the World Movement for Democracy. Editor of the Digest is Michael Allen (US). To comment, get more information, or send us material that may be of interest to other readers, please e-mail: Michael Allen at mailto:michaela@ned.org.

Democracy Digest is published by The Transatlantic Democracy Network, a cooperative effort of the World Movement for Democracy.