MINISTER FOR DEVELOPMENT SØREN PIND SEMINAR ON ”RENEWING OR CHALLENGING DEMOCRACY AS WE KNOW IT” ÅRHUS 12 – 14 MAY 2011

Many a speech I have begun with the sentence: “I am a child of 9/11”. I wonder, if I should rephrase the sentence to: “I am adult of May 2nd”. Certainly I have grown older over the past ten years. But what I mean is, the last decade – from Bin Laden’s attack on the World Trade Center in 2001 to his final hour in Abbottabad 11 days ago – has taught me the power of ideas. That the sharpest weapon we have in our hands is the ideas and the values we believe in. It is highly symbolic that Bin Laden died at a time when the Middle East is being swept by relentless movements toward freedom and democracy.
---
When I took up office as Minister for Development Cooperation, I pronounced myself “Minister for Freedom”. It caused the usual knee-jerk reaction from the leftists in Denmark – “Pind is politicising development aid”, “Pind is taking the poor hostage in his liberal crusade”. But when I visit developing countries, like just last week Indonesia, no one questions. They understand.

We tend to underestimate in the West – in the free world – the value of freedom. We take it for granted, and rely on it as if it exists by necessity. As a law of nature rather than by choice. Individual freedom and the individual human rights is, in essence, a key Western contribution to human civilisation on this planet. Today, as ever, freedom rights continue to be an aspiration, to inspire hope and to initiate change towards democratic rule. There is a reason why we have fought with such determination for human rights in the past 250 years, and why we must continue to do so persistently. And that reason has been captured well by the American political thinker, Reinhold Niebuhr, who once said: “Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.”
---
To my eye the finest task of development aid is to work for human freedom. To foster the universal idea of man’s capacity to provide for himself, when given the chance. Poverty is when man is unable to take destiny into his own hands.

Consequently, the new Danish Development Strategy, which was approved by Parliament last May, is titled “Freedom from Poverty, Freedom to Change” and throughout it has freedom and responsible government of, for and by the people as its point of reference.

Last year, Denmark spent more than 3 billion Danish kroner in direct aid to human rights, democracy and responsible governance. Earlier this year, I launched a “Freedom Fund” to counter radicalism and strengthen the freedom movements in developing countries. For years, Denmark has worked in a “Partnership for Dialogue and Reform Programme” with Arab partners. More than 220 Danish civil society organisations and public institutions have worked with more than 400 Arab partners. And today, some of those partners – young people, women’s and human rights activist, academics, journalists – are at the forefront of the demonstrations in Tunis, Cairo and Damascus.

My first argument today is this: Freedom and democracy are a universal good – a universal value. They are not confined to any particular people, culture or religion. They are “unalienable rights” as Thomas Jefferson put it in the Declaration of Independence from 1776. Democracy is the best possible form of government known to man. Or, as Winston Churchill put it, democracy is the worst form of government, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. Why? Because democracy responds to the universal human call for participation, justice and dignity.

For too long, autocrats, leftist intellectuals and so called [neo-]realists have resisted or belittled our support for democracy and human rights, using various forms of hollow cultural relativism. What happened then? The Arab populations took to the streets for exactly the same kind of freedom and human dignity that we also had to fight long and hard for in the Western world. No dictator, no autocrat, no one-party ruler, no ideologue should any longer be able to brush off aspirations for democracy, justice and human dignity as simply a Western product.

Let me be clear. I am of course not talking about what could be called “window-dressed democracy” – that is staged elections, curtailment of freedoms disguised in governmental regulations and rubberstamp parliaments. If this is the case, it matters little, if people get the chance to vote every once in a while.

All too often, window-dressed democracies leave the same ruling class in command of government and with a free hand to loot their people. You have formal democratic institutions, but of course no real democracy.

When I talk about democracy, I talk about government of, for and by the people. Democracy must be based on human rights, the rule of law and responsible governance ensuring freedom, transparency and justice.

My second argument is that democracy and development are closely linked. Or to put it more provocatively, that democratic societies will prevail.

Look to the statistics. Most free and democratic countries are also socially and economically well-developed. This is evident from The Economist’s Democracy Index – by looking at the countries at the top and at the bottom. It is interesting to look at the “strong developers”, which have moved up in the rankings. Some of the strongest economic developers in Latin America are also some of the most democratic – Uruguay, Brazil, Mexico and Argentina. In Africa, countries like Mauritius, Botswana and South Africa – three of the best economic performers over time in Africa – are also among the most developed democracies. With the exception of Israel, the Middle East starts a long way down the democracy index and most countries fall into the bottom category as the most authoritarian regimes in the world.

It follows from the numbers, that development failures are predominantly to be found among authoritarian states. Why is democracy better from a development perspective? Because the alternative is all too often linked with state-sponsored theft and a ruling class narrowly focused on maintaining their own privileges. In a recent op-ed Greg Mills, the director of the South African based Brenthurst Foundation, said it in plain terms, and I quote. “Why are Africans poor? Because their leaders have wanted it so!” The lack of democracy has meant that many African leaders for years have managed to get away with disastrous, selfish decisions, blocking growth and development.

What about China then? What about those countries that attain impressive development results, massive economic growth and still remain autocratic? My answer is simple: I firmly believe that countries, which develop economically, will eventually move towards democracy. Sooner or later, the Chinese people will demand political freedom as well. I believe, the next step for an enlightened middle class with access to education and considerable financial resources, is to demand freedom at the political level.

In that respect, Tunisia is an excellent example. It was autocratic, but also one of the most developed and diversified non-oil economies in the Middle East with a larger middle class than its neighbouring countries. It is no coincidence that the sea of change sweeping the Middle East started in Tunisia. And, however rocky the road might become, Tunisia is now moving towards democracy.

My third argument is that development cooperation has a key role to play in fostering change in undemocratic countries. Cooperation can help foster and promote the idea of freedom and democracy and make it possible. Through partnerships with developing countries, we – in this case Denmark – can help empower individuals and organisations to initiate change; and subsequently support them in their efforts to establish their own democratic institutions.

I am under no illusions about the effect of development aid. In fact, I have launched a research programme with the sole aim to answer the question: Does development aid work? I am, however, in no doubt about the power of ideas, as should be clear by now. The challenge is to go from idea to action.

During my travels as minister, I have seen the difference that our development cooperation can make. How it can help foster the conditions which allow individuals to be successful in their demands for change. Through the Partnership for Dialogue and Reform, Denmark has trained activists, opinion makers, judges, journalists and advocates, helped them access valuable information and form partnerships. And it has been fantastic to see how many of these people have taking the lead in the current movement for change in the Middle East.

Cooperation at the level of civil society may play an important role in ensuring popular participation in the advancement of democracy. Partnerships between civil societies across borders strengthen a global conversion towards universal aspirations. I firmly believe that by promoting people’s rights to organize, to express their views and to formulate demands to governments, we are helping to build democracy. Human rights organizations, trade unions, women’s organizations and school boards are good examples. They work in different areas, but they are united in their goal to improve the lives of their constituencies.

Development cooperation can also play a vital role in dealing with rogue states and terrorist threats that emanate from failed states. The Danish Government has decided to increase our development assistance for fragile states as part of a broader Danish strategy towards the world’s 43 fragile states, where around 600 million people live in miserable conditions. The new strategy for fragile states argues that the international community must put aside its usual risk aversion and actively support democracy and political reforms alongside efforts to improve basic living conditions.

Zimbabwe is a case in point. Only three days after my appointment as Minister for Development Cooperation, I made an official visit to Zimbabwe. I wanted to get an impression of the political reform process in the country. And I had to acknowledge that reform and democracy in settings like Zimbabwe are fragile and may experience severe setbacks. Voltaire famously said, “The best is the enemy of the good”. If we keep searching for the best, we will get lost. Often times we must accept the imperfection and search for the best alternative. Accept temporary solutions and remain focused on the long term goal.

Looking to the Middle East, the ongoing transformation is fragile and reversible. Every day there are clashes. Between individual freedom and Islamic fanaticism. The fear of what might come, is widespread in Europe and America. Yet, we must not be afraid of placing our confidence in the populations, who have fought so bravely against their own autocratic regimes. The alternative is far worse. Change, even democratic change, moves in phases. Looking at our own societies in Europe, neither did we move directly from despotism/absolutism to democracy. I shall revert to this in my final remark.

My fourth argument is that democracy is a call for opportunity, politically and economically. The massive protests against authoritarian rule in the Middle East is inspired by the lack of political rights, but sparked by widespread lack of economic opportunity.

Mohammad Bouazizi, the young Tunisian, who had his vegetable cart confiscated, who cried out in desperation but wasn’t heard, and who then set fire to himself, has become the symbol of all the repressed people in the region. At heart, the Arab Spring is a call for democracy and freedom, but it is also a call for jobs and a better life. The strong link between autocracy and low development coupled with millions of unemployed youth makes for an explosive cocktail that is bound to go off. It did in Tunesia and spread across the Middle East. I am convinced we have not seen the end of it.

The lesson to be drawn is that in our approach to the post-revolution situation in the Middle East we need to actively support democratic transitions as well as economic opportunity. Opening the access to jobs and enabling people to create a decent living for themselves is a cornerstone in the peaceful transition to democracy. And here development cooperation has a role to play.
End March, I had the chance to visit Tunisia. In my conversations with politicians, civil society activists and young people, one message emerged time and again: They were deeply proud of their accomplishment! They had restored their dignity. They were determined, Tunisia should embrace an open, inclusive democracy, despite the problems they saw. A group of women’s rights activist told me frankly about their fear of the Islamists. But they had no doubt that democracy should allow everyone to participate. The young called for jobs, jobs, jobs. We must support these people who stand for change. And we must do so in words and in deeds, that is with development aid, trade and investment.

My final argument is this: What we currently see in the Middle East is not the beginning of the end of autocracy, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning [to paraphrase Churchill]. There have been revolutions, but also counter-revolutions. The Middle East in 2011 is not Eastern Europe in 1989. I would contend it is more like Europe in 1849. Europe witnessed revolutionary turmoil and democratic upheavals in the 1840s and 50s, and it took decades, before the aspirations for democracy were firmly entrenched in Europe. Change moves in phases. We should bear this lesson of history in mind, as we try to understand the situation in the Middle East today.

Some countries will be successful in their pursuit of democracy, some less so and others will experience backlashes and a worsening situation. I have high hopes for Tunisia, I am concerned about the situation in Egypt and I am deeply distressed by the events in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain. But we cannot let fear take us out. “Angst essen Seele auf” as Rainer Werner Fassbinder wrote, remember?
---
The strongest weapon in our hand is the ideas, we believe in. Our values. The last decade was blindfolded by the fear of Bin Laden and the appeal of Islamism as a totalitarian ideology. The fear caused us to overlook the deep felt urge for freedom and democracy in the Arab population. For the same freedom and democracy that we enjoy in our societies.

We lead by example. By the power of ideas. And development cooperation is a tangible expression hereof. It is one way of heeding the call heard from populations around the world for freedom and democracy. We should listen and act. The alternative is far worse.

Thank you.