Advertisement

Comparing EU and US Democracy Promotion in the Mediterranean and the Newly Independent States

  • Vera van Hüllen
  • Andreas Stahn
Part of the Governance and Limited Statehood Series book series (GLS)

Abstract

‘Think globally, act locally.’ Considering the recent trend to open the ‘black box’ of external democracy promotion, this could be the new slogan for international actors engaged in promoting democracy in different parts of the world. Both practitioners and scholars alike have begun to consider different country contexts in which external democracy promotion can take place (cf. European Commission 2003b, 2006g; McFaul, Magen and Stoner-Weiss 2008; White House 2006). They are especially interested in knowing the chances of success of different strategies. A first step towards a comprehensive impact assessment is to investigate the link between domestic, country-specific conditions and international democracy promotion efforts. So, how do democracy promotion efforts of external actors relate to the varying political situations on the ground? In this chapter, we systematically compare democracy promotion efforts of the United States (US) and the European Union (EU) across countries in the Mediterranean and the post-Soviet space since the early 1990s. Beyond a comparison between the two ‘powers’ (cf. Kagan 2003), our analysis seeks to capture if and how their efforts vary according to the specific political settings of Morocco, Tunisia, Belarus and Ukraine.

Keywords

European Union Political Dialogue Cooperative Approach Foreign Assistance European Neighbourhood Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Armitage, R. (2004) ‘U.S. Watches Ukraine Elections with Concern’, Financial Times, 20 October 2004.Google Scholar
  2. Åslund, A. and M. A. McFaul (2006) ‘Introduction: Perspectives on the Orange Revolution’ in A. Åslund and M. A. McFaul (eds) Revolution in Orange: The Origins of Ukraine’s Democratic Breakthrough. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  3. BBC News (2005) Rice names ‘toutposts of tyranny’, 19 January 2005, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4186241.stm, date accessed 15 August 2008.
  4. Beichelt, T. (2004) ‘Autocracy and Democracy in the European CIS’, Democratization, 11, 113–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bendel, P., A. Croissant and F. Rüb (eds) (2002) Zwischen Demokratie und Diktatur. Zur Konzeption und Empirie demokratischer Grauzonen. Opladen: Leske und Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brumberg, D. (2003) ‘The Trap of Liberalized Autocracy’ in L. Diamond, M. F. Plattner and D. Brumberg (eds), Islam and Democracy in the Middle East. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Carothers, T. (2000) ‘Struggling with Semi-Authoritarians’ in P. Burnell (ed.), Democracy Assistance. International Co-operation for Democratization. London: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  8. Carothers, T. (2002) ‘The End of the Transition Paradigm’, Journal of Democracy, 13, 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carothers, T. and M. S. Ottaway (2005) ‘The New Democracy Imperative’ in T. Carothers and M. S. Ottaway (eds), Uncharted Journey. Promoting Democracy in the Middle East. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  10. Dalacoura, K. (2005) ‘US Democracy Promotion in the Arab Middle East since 11 September 2001: A Critique’, International Affairs, 81, 963–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawisha, K. and B. Parrot (ed.) (1997) Democratic Changes and Authoritarian Reactions in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Del Sarto, R. and T. Schumacher (2005) ‘From EMP to ENP. What’s at Stake with the European Neighbourhood Policy towards the Southern Mediterranean?’ European Foreign Affairs Review, 10, 17–38.Google Scholar
  13. Diamond, L. (2002) ‘Elections Without Democracy. Thinking about Hybrid Regimes’, Journal of Democracy, 13, 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. European Commission (1995) The inclusion of respect for democratic principles and human rights in agreements between the Community and third countries, COM(1995) 216 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  15. Diamond, L. (2001a) Country Strategy Paper 2002–2006/ National Indicative Programme 2002–2003 Ukraine (Brussels).Google Scholar
  16. Diamond, L. (2001b) Maroc. Document de Stratégie 2002–2006. Programme Indicatif National 2002–2004 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  17. Diamond, L. (2002) Tunisie. Document de Stratégie 2002–2006. Programme Indicatif National 2002–2004 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  18. Diamond, L. (2003a) National Indicative Programme Ukraine 2004–2006 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  19. Diamond, L. (2003b) Governance and Development, COM (2003) 615 final (Brussels).Google Scholar
  20. Diamond, L. (2004a) ENP Country Report Tunisia. SEC (2004) 570 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  21. Diamond, L. (2004b) Country Strategy Paper. National Indicative Programme Belarus 2005–2006 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  22. Diamond, L. (2005a) Morocco. National Indicative programme 2005–2006 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  23. Diamond, L. (2005b) Tunisia. National Indicative programme 2005–2006 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  24. Diamond, L. (2006a) ENP Progress Report Tunisia. SEC (2006) 1510 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  25. Diamond, L. (2006b) ENP Progress Report Morocco. SEC (2006) 1511/2 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  26. Diamond, L. (2006c) ENPI Country Strategy Paper 2007–2013. National Indicative Programme 2007–2010 Belarus (Brussels).Google Scholar
  27. Diamond, L. (2006d) ENPI Country Strategy Paper Ukraine 2007–2013 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  28. Diamond, L. (2006e) ENPI National Indicative Programme Ukraine 2007–2010 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  29. Diamond, L. (2006f) ENP Progress Report Ukraine (Brussels).Google Scholar
  30. Diamond, L. (2006g) Governance in the European Consensus on Development. Towards a harmonised approach within the European Union, COM (2006) 421 final (Brussels).Google Scholar
  31. Diamond, L. (2006h) Strengthening the European Neighbourhood Policy, COM (2006) 726 final (Brussels).Google Scholar
  32. Diamond, L. (2006i) What the EU could bring to Belarus. A non-paper (Brussels).Google Scholar
  33. Diamond, L. (2007a) Annual Report 2007 on the European Community’s development policy and the implementation of the external assistance in 2006. (Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities).Google Scholar
  34. Diamond, L. (2007b) Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner visits Rabat, press release IP/07/1647 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  35. Diamond, L. (2007c) EU-Ukraine start negotiations on new Enhanced Agreement. EU Press Releases 02/03/2007 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  36. Diamond, L. (2007d) ENPI. Morocco. 2007–2010 National Indicative Programme (Brussels).Google Scholar
  37. Diamond, L. (2007e) ENPI. Morocco. Strategy Paper 2007–2013 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  38. Diamond, L. (2007f) ENPI. Tunisia Strategy Paper 2007–2013 and National Indicative Programme 2007–2010 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  39. Diamond, L. (2008a) Rapport de Suivi Maroc. SEC (2008) 398 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  40. Diamond, L. (2008b) Rapport de Suivi Tunisie. SEC (2008) 401 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  41. Diamond, L. (2008c) Sanctions or restrictive measures in force (measures adopted in the framework of the CFSP), http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/cfsp/sanc-tions/measures.htm, date accessed 5 September 2008.
  42. European Parliament (2004) Resolution on Ukraine. P6_TA (2004) 0074 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  43. Ferrero-Waldner, B. (2006) The European Approach to Democracy Promotion in Post-Communist Countries, speech delivered at an International Conference at the Institute for Human Sciences, SPEECH/07/29, 19 January 2006 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  44. Fried, D. (2005) Ukraine: Developments in the Aftermath of the Orange Revolution. Testimony Before the House International Relations Subcommittee on Europe and Emerging Threats, July 27, 2005. Washington DC: US State Department.Google Scholar
  45. Haddadi, S. (2002) ‘Two Cheers for Whom? The European Union and Democratization in Morocco’, Democratization, 9, 149–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Huber, D. (2008) ‘Democracy Assistance in the Middle East and North Africa. A Comparison of US and EU Policies’, Mediterranean Politics, 13, 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jünemann, A. and M. Knodt (2006) ‘Externe Demokratieförderung der Europäischen Union — die Instrumentenwahl der EU aus vergleichender Perspektive’, Integration, 29, 287–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kagan, R. (2003) Of Paradise and Power. America and Europe in the New World Order. New York: A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  49. Kaldor, M. and P. Wilke (1997) Final Report. Evaluation of the PHARE and TACIS Democracy Programme. Brighton: ISA Consult.Google Scholar
  50. Karkutli, N. and D. Bützler (1999) Final Report. Evaluation of the MEDA Democracy Programme 1996–1998 (Brussels).Google Scholar
  51. Krushelnycky, A. (2004) Ukraine’s Opposition Wins Vote, But Rival To Contest Results, http://rfe.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/12/1DF71BF1-3646-4F61-84D8-DE7E4B8FFEF9.html, date accessed 15 August 2008.
  52. Lavenex, S. (2004) ‘EU External Governance in “Wider Europe”’, Journal of European Public Policy, 11, 680–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Magen, A. (2006) ‘The Shadow of Enlargement. Can the European Neighbourhood Policy achieve Compliance?’ Columbia Journal of European Law, 12, 383–427.Google Scholar
  54. MCC (2008) Millennium Challenge Corporation, www.mca.gov (home page), date accessed 7 July 2008.
  55. McFaul, M. (2007) ‘Ukraine Imports Democracy: External Influences on the Orange Revolution’, International Security 32, 45–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. McFaul, M., A. Magen and K. Stoner-Weiss (2008) Evaluating International Influences on Democratic Transitions. Concept Paper. Stanford: CDDRL.Google Scholar
  57. Mihalisko, K. J. (1997) ‘Belarus: Retreat to Authoritarianism’ in K. Dawisha and B. Parrot (eds) Democratic Changes and Authoritarian Reactions in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Offe, C. (1991) ‘Capitalism by Democratic Design? Democratic Theory facing the Triple Transition in East Central Europe’, Social Research 58, 865–92.Google Scholar
  59. Ottaway, M. (2003) Democracy Challenged. The Rise of Semi-Authoritarians. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  60. Ottaway, M. S. and T. Carothers (2004) Greater Middle East Initiative. Off to a False start. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  61. Pierros, F., J. Meunier and S. Abrams (1999) Bridges and Barriers. The European Union’s Mediterranean Policy. 1961–1998. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  62. Pifer, S. (2004) ‘Ukraine’s Future and U.S. Interests’. Testimony Before the House International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Europe 12 May 2004. Washington DC: US State Department.Google Scholar
  63. Schimmelfennig, F. and U. Sedelmeier (eds) (2005) The Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Sharp, J. M. (2006) ‘U.S. Foreign Assistance to the Middle East. Historical Background, Recent Trends, and the FY 2006 Request’. CRS Report for Congress. Washington DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  65. Silitski, V. (2006) ‘Contagion Deterred: Preemptive Authoritarianism in the Former Soviet Union (the Case of Belarus)’. CDDRL Working Paper 66. Stanford: CDDRL.Google Scholar
  66. Smith, K. E. (2005) ‘The Outsiders. The European neighbourhood policy’, International Affairs, 81, 757–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2006) ‘Western Influence’ in A. Åslund and M. McFaul (eds) The Origins of Ukraine’s Democratic Breakthrough. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  68. US State Department (2003) Supporting Human Rights and Democracy. The U.S. Record 2002–2003. (Washington DC).Google Scholar
  69. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2004) Supporting Human Rights and Democracy. The U.S. Record 2003–2004 (Washington DC).Google Scholar
  70. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2005) Supporting Human Rights and Democracy. The U.S. Record 2004–2005 (Washington DC).Google Scholar
  71. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2006) Supporting Human Rights and Democracy. The U.S. Record 2005–2006 (Washington DC).Google Scholar
  72. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2008a) Background Note: Morocco, www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5431.htm, date accessed 5 September 2008.
  73. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2008b) DRL Programs, Including Human Rights Democracy Fund (HRDF), www.state.gov/g/drl/p/, date accessed 5 September 2008.
  74. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2008c) HRDF Projects 1998-present, www.state.gov/g/drl/p/c12440.htm, date accessed 5 September 2008.
  75. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2008d) Middle East Partnership Initiative: Countries, http://mepi.state.gov/c10128.htm, date accessed 5 September 2008.
  76. USAID (2007) Congressional Budget Justif icat ion, www.usaid.gov/policy/ budget/ cbj2007/ane/ma.html, date accessed 5 September 2008.
  77. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2008) Morocco, www.usaid.gov/locations/asia_near_east/countries/morocco/, date accessed 5 September 2008.
  78. Warkotsch, A. (2008) ‘Non-compliance and instrumental variation in EU democracy promotion’, Journal of European Public Policy, 15, 227–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. White House (1992) Freedom Support Act of 1992. Fact Sheet. Press Release, www.fas.org/spp/starwars/offdocs/b920401.htm, date accessed 1 September 2008.
  80. Sushko, O. and O. Prystayko (2006) The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington DC).Google Scholar
  81. Wittes, T. C. a nd S. E. Yerkes (2004) The Middle East Partnership Initiative. Progress, Problems, and Prospects. Washington DC: Saban Center.Google Scholar
  82. Woehrel, S. (2007) Belarus: Background and U.S. Policy Concerns. CRS Report for Congress. Washington DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  83. Youngs, R. (2002) ‘The European Union and Democracy Promotion in the Mediterranean. A New or Disingenuous Strategy?’ Democratization, 9, 40–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Vera van Hüllen and Andreas Stahn 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vera van Hüllen
    • 1
  • Andreas Stahn
    • 2
  1. 1.Otto-Suhr-Institute of Political ScienceFreie Universität BerlinGermany
  2. 2.Freie Universität BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations