Princeton Project on National Security – Concert of Democracies
Thanks very much to Chris Preble for introducing the Princeton Project report on a national security framework for our country’s future. Considering that our current direction seems to be mightily off course, this effort was sorely needed. Although there are many useful subjects to discuss in the report, today I’d like to look at the proposal that I expected to have most suspicion of – the Concert of Democracies. It turns out that despite my initial wariness, I’ve come to see this idea in a more positive light. I’m guessing that this proposal is one that also makes many UN supporters a bit nervous. However, I’ll describe here why I think that this potentially could be a good idea.
The Princeton Project reports describes the Concert of Democracies:
This alternative body would be a global “Concert of Democracies.” Its purpose would be to strengthen security cooperation among the world’s liberal democracies and to provide a framework in which they can work together to effectively tackly common challenges – ideally within existing regional and global institutions, but if those institutions fail, then independently, functioning as a focal point for efforts to strengthen liberty under law around the world. It would serve as the institutional embodiment and ratification of the “democratic peace”.
With this proposal, the devil is in the details. Many might be skeptical that this Concert of Democracies might be more akin to the “coalition of the willing” that was supportive of the Iraq invasion. However, looking back on that coalition, we must remember that clearly democratic countries such as France and Germany were not supportive of the invasion, and therefore the Concert of Democracies would not have been simply a rubber stamp on that action.
However, this Concert of Democracies could act in a situation such as Darfur that is being held up by Russian and Chinese unwillingness to compel Sudan to accept an international peacekeeping force. In this situation, I believe, that the Concert of Democracies would be more willing to intervene in such a dire humanitarian disaster. Since pledging to support the concept of “responsibility to protect” would be one of the requirements to be a member of the Concert of Democracies, it seems likely that such a group could take collective action in Darfur.
However, there is a cost to forming such a group, and we must be careful to take this into consideration. I believe that our first stop in getting international support for multilateral action should, of course, be the UN. UN support of a policy/intervention would certainly give it much greater legitimacy in the eyes of the international community. However, we must also recognize, that there are some times when the UN simply is not able to act. This is a fact of the power of the permanent members of the Security Council – two of which are clearly not Democracies – Russia and China.
One of the most important aspects to consider in this Concert of Democracies is the criteria by which states are allowed in. Although the Princeton Project suggests that countries would self select in by adhering to strict pledges concering elections and other democratic institutions, at some point there has to be a criteria by which such countries are judged. None of the democracies out there are perfect. In fact, many would point to recent infringes on civil liberties in the US as examples of how it would be difficult to determine which countries truly should be admitted. This would be a major challenge, but not insurmountable. However, I do agree with the report that there should be a substantial incubation period for young democracies, since we have all seen plenty of examples of young democracies that have made strides towards greater democratization, but have eventually backslid on that progress.
No related posts.
Concert of Democracies? why don’t u name it ” we are better than some part of the world” “we don’t need to work 24/7 to gain our food” ” we’re the new noble class”
Comment on October 22, 2006 @ 7:33 pm
It’s better to have a starting point that the United States would not, in her power, let liberal democratic states back paddle, while supporting these other moderate governments against extremists’ governments.
Comment on October 23, 2006 @ 9:49 pm
I think a Concert of Democratic nations is a grand vision that counters the malevolent idea of a Caliphate. I am in favor of it, and I think anyone who does not want to live under Shari’a law should be too.
Comment on December 8, 2006 @ 10:33 am
I am interested in the unexplored association to concert in the musical sense — reinforced by the image above which looks at first sight like a symphony orchestra. Indeed if we want to talk about harmony, it would be good to look at the insights offered by music and its widespread communicability. I have explored these possibilities in: A Singable Earth Charter, EU Constitution or Global Ethic? (http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/singchart.php) where I comment on the Princeton Project
Comment on December 10, 2006 @ 3:11 am
While Russia might be having a new look on its foreign policy, China, like India, has no desire to serve as world cop like the US does, or at least not at the present time. Its internal issues are a lot more pressing than external ones as is well known, and thus, self-care/interests and self-corrections come first.
However, the US and its allies, notably Japan, would like to see China function as they do in that, at least ODA (Official Development Assistance) should be made transparent and with conditions, be it political, economical or otherwise, in line with the US and its allies’ demands. So that the recipients of ODA from US and its allies would have to abide by their conditions if no other sources of aid would come in while the need is real. China could be blamed as the other source of aid to make the recipients, for example, African nations not conform to US and its allies’ demands.
There are pros and cons in this dilemma, but China’s policy of not interfering with other countries’ internal affairs with or without ODA is not likely to change in the near future. However, as friends, sincere and frank dialogues are possible, and that is perhaps a useful vehicle for peace, stability and prosperity as well.
Comment on December 30, 2006 @ 12:37 am
While Russia might be having a new look on its foreign policy, China, like India, has no desire to serve as world cop like the US does, or at least not at the present time. Its internal issues are a lot more pressing than external ones as is well known, and thus, self-care/interests and self-corrections come first.
However, the US and its allies, notably Japan, would like to see China function as they do in that, at least ODA (Official Development Assistance) should be made transparent and with conditions, be it political, economical or otherwise reforms, in line with the US and its allies’ demands. So that the recipients of ODA from US and its allies would have to abide by their conditions if no other sources of aid would come in while the need is real. China could be blamed as the other source of aid to make the recipients, for example, African nations not conform to US and its allies’ demands.
There are pros and cons in this dilemma, but China’s policy of not interfering with other countries’ internal affairs with or without ODA is not likely to change in the near future. However, as friends, sincere and frank dialogues are possible, and that is perhaps a useful vehicle for peace, stability and prosperity as well.
Comment on December 30, 2006 @ 12:54 am
On Containmant
In response to an article published on Japan Times – http://search.japantimes.co.jp/mail/eo20070108a2.html,
In this day and age, before the multipolar new world order is shaped with the presence of one superpower – the US, UN resolutions and sanctions as a whole is equivalent to the containment strategy per se, and not in an old cold war sense and/or mentality.
Comment on January 8, 2007 @ 8:16 am
Originally posted on forum of The Pravda (http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?threadid=187804),
______________________________________________________
On Containmant
In response to an article published on Japan Times – http://search.japantimes.co.jp/mail/eo20070108a2.html
In this day and age, before the multipolar new world order is shaped with the presence of one superpower – the US, UN resolutions and sanctions as a whole is equivalent to the containment strategy per se, and not in an old cold war sense and/or mentality.
Comment on January 8, 2007 @ 8:18 am
China is heeding international community calls to improve its human rights practices much like that of Russia’s actions. Self-correction is on the way starting from 2007 and onward. It’s difficult to preach on something that one does not have on hand, for example, on the Myanmar’s human rights issues. But when they start to preach, self-correction, in their own right, is being conducted.
Comment on January 12, 2007 @ 10:48 am
Now that the FTA between ASEAN and China is signed, there is need for them to ensure the security of the blue highway between the two, for safe and convenient passages. That responsibility lies primarily on the shoulders of ASEAN and Chinese navies, while possible FTAs further northward, and westward are likely.
Comment on January 16, 2007 @ 7:55 am
Democracy is a good thing, but spreading democracy with conditions that are self-serving is not. NGO is a good thing but privately sponsored NGO which massively use poisoned victims who are remote-controlled is not.
That is probably why some countries do not welcome NGOs or qualified and preconditioned democracy.
Comment on February 24, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
Long long time ago, an article on the Reader’s Digest (Chinese Edition) described the life of Mr. Nikita Khrushchev after his resignation. In which it mentioned that his house was implanted with plenty of speakers and microphones (in the walls), and he was often annoyed by it, with the walls talking to him, playing music to him etc.
Nowadays, that technique may have been greatly improved by modern technologies using satellites and the like, and may have been much more annoying compared to the old technique, along with the deprivation of sleep.
Comment on February 25, 2007 @ 4:47 am
Ting-Shiang Lee really needs to stop blathering on. Get a hobby.
The Concert of Democracies is an interesting idea. The only real question I have is: How do we prevent it becoming the gloved hand of western interests, an agent of iniquity and exploitation? It needs a liberal constitution and plenty of checks and balances. Plenty more carrots than sticks. Ill-will will be enough to stop it working.
It’s a fine idea, but I fear it would all too soon be pushing oil pipelines, doing deals for foreign military bases, promoting western corporate interests and issuing hypocritical, self-serving judgements on those who point out its shortcomings.
Not something to rush into.
Comment on June 7, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
The Concert of Democracies is an interesting idea. The only real question I have is: How do we prevent it becoming the gloved hand of western interests, an agent of iniquity and exploitation? It needs a liberal constitution and plenty of checks and balances. More carrots than sticks. Ill-will will be enough to stop it working.
It’s a fine idea, but I fear it would all too soon be pushing oil pipelines, doing deals for foreign military bases, promoting western corporate interests and issuing hypocritical, self-serving judgements on those who point out its shortcomings.
Not something to rush into.
Comment on June 7, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
Put it bluntly, US leadership will fade away and fail miserably if US leadership can not be seen by other powers of the world as a transparent spirit that they all should follow and take on as their own duties and responsibilities.
Comment on June 8, 2007 @ 5:04 pm
U.S. machine should change its way of operations, since as is, its not working and U.S. is fast becoming a failed States. Look at machines of Canada and Taiwan , they operate using U.S. Standard Operating Procedures word for word, practically speaking, and thus Canada is fast becoming a failed State while Taiwan is fast becoming a failed Province of China.
When a full blown war is in the making, there is no room for games, pep talks, let alone diplomatic courteousness.
Comment on July 1, 2007 @ 2:21 am
Lawlessness of U.S. machine breeds lawless machines worldwide whereby they do exactly as U.S. machine does. That will undermine U.S. eventually.
Without the rule of law, where is democracy ?
Publish in real names means one knows, has had real experiences and has confidence in what’s written compared to Johns.
Comment on July 1, 2007 @ 4:45 am
[...] Failed Princeton Project [...]
Pingback on May 25, 2009 @ 7:27 pm
[...] (13)Princeton Project on National Security – Concert of Democracies [...]
Pingback on September 11, 2010 @ 12:25 am
[...] (Originally published on Partnership for a Secure America, January 16, 2007 @ 7:55 am) [...]
Pingback on November 10, 2010 @ 7:28 pm