Democracy Summit: Real Action or More Rhetoric?

The struggle between democracy and autocracy is often described as the defining challenge of our time. Yet, the world is moving away from democracy, not toward it. According to a new report from the research institute, Varieties of Democracy, 72 per cent of the world’s population now lives in autocracies, up from 46 per cent in 2012.

Against this backdrop, U.S. President Joe Biden’s second Summit for Democracy, held on March 29, 2023, sought to galvanize democratic countries to work toward advancing democracy within their borders. However, the expectations were modest, given the lack of concrete actions and the absence of a monitoring mechanism from the first Summit.

Background

The U.S. leader's address was one of the Summit's most important proceedings. Biden stated that democracy is "hard work" that must be continuously defended and safeguarded. The White House has announced its intention to allocate at least $690 million to achieve this objective. This quantity will be used to safeguard the media, free elections, and democracy. At the same time, despite the Summit's impressive number of speeches on the significance of protecting democracy, there was no unification among the participating nations.

The final declaration was supported by only 73 nations. Nonetheless, it should be noted that thirteen of them signed the document with reservations and disagreements on certain points. Armenia, India, Israel, Mexico, and others were among them. In particular, Yerevan was dissatisfied with the final statement's emphasis on the Russian special operation and omission of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.

The same is true of thematic programmes aimed at countering systemic threats to democracy, such as abuses of technology or corruption. While President Biden claims that the democracies of the world are getting stronger, the reality is far from it.

According to the latest report by Freedom House, a U.S.-based NGO that monitors political rights and civil liberties around the world, global democracy has suffered its worst decline in 15 years, with authoritarian regimes and populists gaining ground in many countries. The report notes that democratic values and norms are under attack not only from external forces but also from within, with democratic governments failing to deliver on their promises and populism and polarization undermining social cohesion.

Analysis

Given this context, the U.S.-led Summit for Democracy seems more like a desperate attempt to maintain American leadership and project its values onto the rest of the world. It ignores the diversity of democratic experiences and challenges faced by different countries and could risk further dividing the world into competing blocs and exacerbating tensions.

Some view the Summit as a forlorn attempt to maintain American leadership and project its values to the rest of the world. Critics argue that the Summit disregards the diversity of democratic experiences and challenges confronted by different nations and risks further dividing the world into competing blocs, thereby aggravating tensions. While President Biden campaigned on preserving democracy at home and abroad, his administration's foreign policy has not been as vigorous in defending democracy outside of the United States.

The administration has primarily organized summits for countries that are already committed to democracy, supported democratic reformers, and addressed broad, thematic threats to democracy, such as the use of technology to restrict individual liberties. This strategy avoids making difficult choices between values and interests when confronting autocracies, democracies in decline, or individual autocratic leaders.

By establishing programmes that support democratic reformers, the Biden administration has attempted to bridge the gap between its rhetorical commitment to defending democracy and the reality of its foreign policy. The Presidential Initiative for Democratic Renewal, which was unveiled at the first democracy summit in 2021, supports, among other things, independent media, marginalized groups, and free and fair elections. In addition, the administration has initiated a program to support democratic "bright spots," or countries undergoing democratic reforms. However, the administration's financial commitment to the democratic renewal initiative is modest, totalling only $424 million, which is roughly equivalent to what the United States spends annually to combat HIV/AIDS in Mozambique.

Additionally, the Biden administration has been criticized for prioritizing security and economic concerns over governance concerns, thereby avoiding confrontations with autocratic leaders in Turkey, Hungary, and Poland. In addition, U.S. support for democratic movements in Sudan and Myanmar has been inconsistent, and the administration has taken little action against countries such as Thailand and Vietnam that disregard fundamental democratic norms.

The Biden administration's efforts to support democracy through programmes that provide resources and assistance to activists and civil society organizations are ineffective due to the absence of policies that hold autocrats accountable for their actions. The provision of financial resources may assist in bolstering democratic movements, but it does little to deter autocrats from their nefarious conduct. Without using political leverage or taking actions to impose sanctions on autocratic leaders, the Biden administration's strategy to defend democracy may not be successful.

Autocratic leaders are aware of the vulnerabilities of U.S.-funded initiatives and know how to undermine them by persecuting dissidents and repressing the media. Therefore, the United States must provide political cover for democratic reformers by speaking out against abuses and imposing consequences. Without such measures, autocrats and reformers alike will perceive that Washington is unwilling to use its political capital to defend democracy, which can further erode the credibility of the United States as a champion of democratic values.

The United States-led Summit for Democracy has also been criticized domestically and internationally. By dividing the world into "democratic and non-democratic camps," the event appears to be an instrument for propagandizing the United States' "competition" agenda. However, the country's internal strife, including racial discrimination, corrupt politics, and frequent gun violence, has made its democratic values less appealing to international audiences. Consequently, the approach of the Summit may exacerbate tensions and divide the international community.