Log File For Chat Room 1

Log File For Chat Room 1

Sitnikov: Hello and welcome to the first chat session for IDL 105 " Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law" Today we will be talking to professor Larry Diamond. Larry, good evening and welcome!

sleptsova: Hi by everything, we from Yakutsk

Sitnikov: Hello Blago, Moscow and Yakutsk

Uadati: Good morning from Vladikavkaz!

Smirnova: Hello from Yaroslavl!

Sitnikov: I will be moderating this chat and the rules are the same. Each university askes one question at a time when its name is called. When the question is being answered-- no comments are made by universities. I think we will go East-to-West, starting from Blago, then Yakutsk etc.., until we reach Petrozavodsk

Levchuk: Hello to everyone! Chelyabinsk here, Southern Ural State University.

Besedin: Good morning everybody. Good morning Alexei!

Diamond: Good morning. I am now online and ready to respond as soon as you are ready. Larry Diamond

Sitnikov: OK, LET US BEGIN THE CHAT WITH THE FIRST QUESTION FROM BLAGOVESCHENSK.

Karina: Hello everyone!

sleptsova: The American government gave reasons for invasion into Iraq by necessity of an overthrow of the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein and installation of democracy? (Yakutsk)

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS, QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Agaltsova: Hello, dear participans! Hi, Moscaw, Vladikavkaz, Yakutsk, Saratov, Blago Yaroslavl, ans Alexsey Sitnikov

Diamond: I believe I am to respond to Sleptsova's question? If so: I am somewhat skeptical fo these reasons. The initial reasons were to disarm Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. The justification of democratization only really gained prominence later on.

Titova: What’s your attitude to the establishment of the Public Chamber in Russia? Can it contribute to the development of civic society?

Diamond: I have to confess that I am not versed on the specifics of this. I am, however, very worried about the new law that has passed parliament, even in its amended and watered down form, which I think is meant to diminish the autonomy and independent resources of civil society in Russia.

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM CHALYABINSK PLEASE

Agaltsova: According to your point of view about elements of democracy, what kinds of obstacles exist in Russian Federation that impede our country from building democracy?

Zhvalov: Larry, to what extent elections should be go? What is the criteria to decide that this officials should be elected and other should be set by other elected organs. Elections is an expensive event and sometimes maybe it's reasonable to let yet elected officials to delegate power (as it was made in Russia with local regional governers). Or if the elections are so important for democracy why not to elect the head of judicial body, ministers etc. if we speak about the separation of powers?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOU COMMENTS. 2 QUESTIONS ARE BEING ANSWERED. AGALTSOVA THEN ZHVALOV

Diamond: This is going to take a little while for me to answer so let me do it pieces and do not pose another question till I type END

Diamond: I think that if you are going to have effective federalism, popular government, and democracy in a country as large as Russia, the US, or Brazil, then officials at lower levels of government, regional and local, have to be elected, not appointed by the center

Diamond: In fact this is the way the world is going, very dramatically: Toward greater emphasis on elections to determine who will rule at lower levels of authority, and therefore more independent control of local and provincial government by demoratic c itizens.

Diamond: I am completely opposed to the election of judges, or having judges stand for reelection after they are appointed. This is one of the WORST aspecs of American democracy and it is much better if judges are only appointed for long terms of office, and then subject to impeachment by a special majority of the legislature if they violate their term of office.

Diamond: Democracy involves the principal office holders of executive and legislative power being directly or indirectly responsible to the people, but this can be indirectly for the executive, through appointed ministers. I just don't think it works well if the executive can also appoint lower levels of authority. Then there is no real accountability to the people,except at the Center. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM EKATERINBURG PLEASE

Karimova: Larry,in your opinion what would be the first step to the more democratic situation in Russia?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: I think perhaps there is no one "first step" but a series of them, and perhaps no particular order or sequence in them. Clearly one important one is more space for independent civil society to organize, operate and receive funding free of excessive state scrutiny, not to mention intimidation, and control. MORE

Diamond: Another step is to reduce the power of the security apparatus and subject it to independent control of parliamentary and other watchdog agencies. MORE

Diamond: Then the elected status of provincial and regional governors has to be restored if there is going to be real democracy outside the center in Russia.

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM VLADIKAVKAZ PLEASE.

Revazova: Are democracy, development and the rule of law interconnected? Is advanced development possible without democracy and the rule of law?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED.

Diamond: Also, a high priority has to involve greater fairness and integrity in the electoral system, truly independent administration of elections, so any fraud can be monitored and exposed, and a more proportional electoral system that would enable opposition parties to more easily win seats in parliament. END

Diamond: Let me answer this next question of Democ, Dev and ROL. MORE

Revazova: Thank you, Larry.

Diamond: Yes, I think they are tightly connected, and I can distributed to Professor Sitnikov after this session a paper that discusses this in detail. Briefly, if you don't have ROL you will not get an enbabling environment for foreign investment. MORE

Diamond: If you don't have a reasonably effective ROL, sustained by an independent and professional judiciary, you won't be able to control corruption, and thus the incentives will get distorted and much of the resources that could be invested to generate new public goods and humand and physical capital for development will be stolen. MORE

Diamond: Finally, for the moment, democracy provides a means to remove corrupt, ineffective public officials and to ensure that over time government officials have to serve the public good to at least some extent. There are very few instances (Singapore is one, but look how small it is) where a country gets really good governance for a long time without some mechanism of democratic eletions to discipline the leaders. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM SARATOV PLEASE

Kurganova: How to control the bad governance in case of lack of horisontal accountability?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: That is a tough question, because institutions of horizontal accountability are so crucial. MORE

Diamond: Basically, if the horizontal inst's don't work, then you need to focus on vertical accountability and external accoutnability. MORE

Diamond: Civil society is crucial here, and I include the mass media in this. NGOs, mass media and social movements and think tanks have to monitor what government does, expose wrongdoing, substitute temporarily for government agencies of restraint, and then lobby for reforms to create stronger institutions of horiz accountability. External donors and partners should join with civil society in lobbying for good governance reforms. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM YAROSLAVL PLEASE

Yaroshenko: Hello from Yaroslavl!!! There is an opinion. that due to Russian specific characteristics: huge territory, great amount of population, lack of "democractic culture" among the grassroots we need more strong executive power than other Western countries, that'why hybrid democracy is more preferable for Russia than liberal democracy in its pure sence. Could you comment upon this fact.

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED.

Kurganova: Saratov. Thank you, Larry.

Diamond: I just don't buy this. I am not inmpressed with cultural arguments that some societies are less fit for democracy, and so need a diminished form of it. This easily slips into a self-serving justification on the part of (semi)authoritarian rulers for (semi)authoritarian rule. MORE

Diamond: Moreover, it is precisely the huge territory of Russia that requires more grassroots democracy and democratic means for the people to monitor government and hold it accountable at the provincial and local levels. How can Moscow really know what the people of Siberia want? Local communities have to be able to hold their rulers accountable, or you will not even get "hybrid democracy" but rather local tyranny and very bad, corrupt, ineffective governance. I think this is why China's economic development is so endangered now.

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM MOSCOW PLEASE

Yaroshenko: Thank you!!!

Subochev: Scientific observations show a positive correlation between a level of democracy and a level of economic and human development. But there is a controversy as to what causes what. Is it democracy that causes economic and social success, which means we should focus on political change and promotion of democracy in order to achieve economic goals? Or is it economic prosperity that conditions a democratic form of government, which means the politicians and the people should forget about democracy for a while and focus on economic development instead (an argument widely used by the politicians of the post-Soviet countries)?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: This is one of the biggest, most important questions today in comparative politics. I believe the answer is that there is reciprocal causation, but let me explain. MORE

Diamond: Clearly, economic development generates conditions more favorable to the emergence and consolidation of democracy. Of the top 25 richest countries, only Singapore is not a democracy, and it is a city-state. MORE

Diamond: However, the relationship has eroded at the other end. That is, today, of the "low human development" coutnries, the 50 or so least developed countries as measured by the UNDP, about 40 percent of these are democracies, and some of them have been democratic for more than a decade. MORE

Diamond: So I conclude from this that countries should not wait to become demcratic. There is a lot of evidence from Africa and elsewhere that in the past 15 years, democracies have been outperforming dictatorships in economic development, precisely because they have better means for controlling corruption and generating a favorable climate for investment, rule of law, and so on. If this is so, then it means that the best path of democracy and development is through democracy, because it is the most viable and sustainable, and because even if you might be able to get there with either sequence (and I am sure Africa won't, for example, without democracy) why wouldn't any country want democracy and human rights as soon as possible. Why defer it? END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM PETROZAVODSK PLEASE.

Larichev: Professor Diamond, an active civil society with responsible citizens is an important requirement for good democracy. But imagine one country does not have an active civil society (like the present-day Russia). And it might take years and years to create one. Then how do you believe it is possible to sustain democracy in this interim period? Thank you.

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: Well in the case of Russia the challenge is not to sustain democracy but to recover it after a period of serious assault. MORE

Diamond: I think there are only three paths to reform. One is from within the system, the ruling party and elite. If you think you can penetrate them and make them more democratic and accountable, good luck. I doubt it. MORE

Diamond: The second path is through organizing more effective political party opposition, working through political parties to mobilize greater popular support and making opposition parties, more effective and responsive to popular constituencies. Drawing opposition parties together and reducing their fragmentation is also crucial, but then you have the ruling elite artificially fragmenting the opposition landscape. MORE

Diamond: The third road is by refusing to accept that because civil society is dormant or weak, it is hopeless to try to reactivate, and to work creatively, courageously and patiently to reconstruct it, to use new technology to reach people, and new ideas and concerns to make it relevant to the real concerns of people's lives. I think that the damage to democracy in Russia in recent years has been so deep that only this kind of basic, deep reconstruction through new civil society innovation and mobilization is going to succeed in reviving it, but this kind of work carries risks, for reasons that I hardly need to explain. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. WE HAVE COMPLETED ONE ROUND FROM EAST TO WEST. WE HAVE TIME FOR ANOTHER ROUND. QUESTION FROM BLAGOVESCHENSK PLEASE.

Titova: Professor Diamond, Can a Muslim state be a democracy or is Islam ( as it’s presupposes no separation of religion from the state) something opposite to democracy?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: I think it is quite possible for Muslim countries to be democracies. Look at Turkey for example, which is now ruled by a moderately Islamic but democratic party (in the same way as Christian Democratic parties in Germany and Italy were democratic. Or look at Indonesia, which is also Muslim. These are two of the biggest Muslim countries, and each has become significantly more democratic in recent years. MORE

Diamond: The problem is really in the Arab world, where ruling states are corrupt and dependent on oil revenue or the external community, and where historical traditions have converged to create strong national security establishments, and where the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been used to justify nationalist authoritarian Arab dictatorships. I think this justification is breaking down, but there is also the distinctive problem of Islamic fundamentalism, and that can't just be wished away. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM YAKUTSK PLEASE

sleptsova: In your opinion, whether it is possible in general "establish" or "create" democracy? Especially by power methods?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: Yes I think democracy can be established or created, even where it has never existed before. But not by the pure power means of imposition from above, or by an external power. It is a contradiction in terms to impose democracy by authoritarian means. The people have to be involved. The successful cases of constitution making after conflict, for example, have taken place where the people were extensively involved in debating and making recommendations on their new constitution. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM CHELYABINSK PLEASE.

Levchuk: Dear Mr.Diamond As Zbignev Bzhezinsky said : " the World simultaneously unipolare and manypolare. America as the unique superstate, obviously takes prevailing positions, but is not omnipotent, it depends on democratization of Russia " I think, that it had in view of that fact, that than more likely Russia will have a democratic mode that it will be easier to subordinate to its geopolitic ambitions of the USA. Whether you agree with this statement though in what that to a measure?Thank you.

Izmailova: Professor Diamond, did the strategy of democratization provide any positive results? How could you explain events in Palestine? Why did strategy of democratization in the Near East fail? I appreciate the opportunity to discuss so interesting topic with you. Thank you.

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: Let me answer Levchuk first. I think it is exactly wrong to arguel that Russia will be a stronger state geopolitically if it is not democratic. MORE

Diamond: People around the world increasingly want democracy and human rights, even if they are (understandably) fed up with the arrogance and impulse to domination that the US government sometimes exhibits. MORE

Diamond: If Russia and China really want to compete for international dominance, not just politically but economically and culturally (with culture increasingly being a salient dimension of power), they need to become democratic. It is the openness and freedom of the American system that gives it a critical edge in global competition. MORE

Diamond: Finally, if Russia is a democracy, that means the Russian people can choose. Logically, Russia would be more inclined to yield to American pressure if it has a government that is not accountable to its own people than a government that is. Shall I answer Izmailova's question now? END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM EKATERINBURG PLEASE

Berenov: Professor Diamond, do you consider the political situation now in Russia as the "regress of democracy"? Thank you.

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: Yes, I think it is. It is not just that independent organizations like Freedom House see this. Take objective measures, like, what percentage of the seats in parliament are held by true opposition parties? What percentage of the media space in newspapers and time on TV and radio is given to criticism of the government position or real debate in which opponents acan challenge the government. All of these trends point downward. Now briefly to Izmailova> END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM VLADIKAVKAZ PLEASE.

Alikova: If we just copy the US governance system to Russia, would it work? Would it take long for Russia to become one of the world's advanced democracies then? And secondly, what is the official position of Iraq towards iran's nuclear programme?

Sitnikov: IZMAILOVA, THEN VLADIKAVKAZ

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: I think you asked about Palestine and the Middle East. I think the problem there is partly in Palestine there was a very unfair electoral system used, and so Hamas won a large majority of seats with only a little mroe than 40 percent of the vote. And the other problem is radicalization produced by the conditions of conflict and occupation. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM VLADIKAVKAZ PLEASE

Diamond: On Alikova: I don't think any country should "just copy" the US system. THere are things I don't like about the US system, for example how expensive our election campaigns are. You can do better: Give free media time to competing parties in elections. MORE

Diamond: I think that it will take some time for Russia to become "one ofthe world's advanced democracies," but it can only get there by first becoming one of the world's democracies. With Russia's natural and human wealth, it could really take off economically and with its long history of cultural leadership and richness, it could become a leader again--an admired country on the world stage--if it were a democracy. Then it would quickly become a real partner in the G8 rather than a pseudo one. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM SARATOV PLEASE

Kurganova: Saratov: Larry, what are your prediction about developing democracy in the world? What stages of developing will take place in the countries with hybrid types of democracy?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: First,I am somewhat worried about the next few years. I think the US failure to promote democracy in Iraq, and the possibly slippage of that country into civil war, will create a backlash against democratization efforts in that region temporarily. Then there are a lot of problems with democratic governance now in Latin America (Bolivia for example) the Philippines and so on. But I think democracy will continue to be the only really legitimate form of government in the world for two reasons. MORE

Diamond: First, it is really the only form that works in the long run. Other than Singapore (Again!) what other instances of really successful and developed authoritarian states are there in the world. The Chinese communist leaders think their country can become one big Singapore, with a billion people being dictated to by teh Communist Party. I think that notion is ridiculous. They will fail. Second, people want to be free and to have some ability to choose and replace their leaders andhold them accountable. This is the story of modern history. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM YAROSLAVL PLEASE

Yaroshenko: Do you think there is any correlation between the stability of democracy and the way how it was introduced? For example, don't you think that democratic processes introduced into Iraq by outside power the US due to its geopolitic ambitions and in a military way tend to be less stable or even not stable at all in comparison with the democracies that appear from the entire desire within a society without "outside help".

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: Yes, I think there is a correlation in that sense. The post-WWII experiences of Germany and Japan, democratizing through US occupation, were anomalous, and each country had prior democratic or semidemocratic conditions. Generally, demoracy works best and lasts longest where there is an indigenous movement for it and strong popular participation the shaping of it. When popular movements struggle for it from below, when the people participate in the writing of their own constitution, when the society feels some sense of ownership over its own democratic institutions, then democracy is more legitimate and more enduring. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION FROM MOSCOW PLEASE

Subochev: Moscow: Does economic globalization undermine democracy? For instance, it was written as early as in 1970 that a free trade regime poses a threat to democracy. Do you agree with the arguments of those antiglobalists who present themselves as the defenders of democracy?

Sitnikov: PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS. QUESTION IS BEING ANSWERED

Diamond: No I don't agree with the critics who say globalization threatens democracy. I think in general that economic openness and free movement of people, goods, and ideas across borders will favor democracy. But we have to be mindful of the adjustment costs. People will be thrown out of work. Countries will be forced to adapt. new inequalities will be created. Governments have to be transparent and responsive in managing these challenges and buffering the costs of adjustment to global competition, or there will be popular reactions in some countries that could undermine democratic stability. END

Sitnikov: THANK YOU. AND THE LAST QUESTION FROM PETROZAVODSK PLEASE.

Larichev: Professor Diamond, is there an opportunity to reform national electoral vote in the US in the upcoming years? After the recent electoral crises many people believe Americans should elect the President directly. What is your opinion? How can this reform be done? Thank you.

Diamond: SInce this is the last question, I would like to say first that it has been a pleasure corresponding with you and I hope we can do it again. A lot of the questions you have raised today are addressed in various papers on my webpage, and so I invite you all to visit it: www.stanford.edu/~ldiamond. MORE

Diamond: I strongly favor direct election of the United States. I hate the electoral college. This is why I say: We have a lot of problems; don't copy our system uncritically. MORE

Diamond: The problem is that some democracy institutions are very difficult to change. We call these "birth defects" because once these emerge early on, they may become permanent, the body develops around them. MORE

Diamond: in the case of the electoral college: To amend the US consitution, you need ratification of the amendment by 3/4 of the state legislatures, after a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress. At least 1/4 of the states will block this change because they are small and will become much less influential if they lose their special weight in the electoral college. Montana, with less than a million people, has three electoral votes. Politicians in a close election may need those three votes. But in a direct election, probably no presidential candidate is ever going to visit the state of Montana. So what is good for Montana may be not so good for theoverall quality of democracy in America, but I think we are stuck with it. Thank you.

Sitnikov: THANK YOU LARRY FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR ANSWERES TO THESE TOUGH QUESTIONS OF DEMOCRACY IN RUSSIA AND OTHER PLACES AROUND THE WORLD. THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING AND PARTICIPATING AND BRINGING UP INTERESTING ISSUES. THE CHAT LOG WILL BE POSTED ON THE IDL WEBSITE SO YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO GO BACK AND REVIEW THE ANSWERES. IF PROFESSOR DIAMOND AGREES- WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER CHAT SESSION LATER ON IN THE COURSE. ---FROM MOSCOW--GOOD BYE

Izmailova: Professor Diamond, thank you for your attention and consideration.

Besedin: Professor Diamond, thank you very much for coming and sharing your opinin with the students!

Diamond: I would be delighted. Good day and good luck, Larry Diamond

Yaroshenko: Yaroslavl: Thank you very much, Professor Diamond. Good-bye!!! See you the next chat!!!

Subochev: Professor, thank you very much from Moscow Higher School of Economics!

Alikova: Many thanks, Professor Diamond!

Revazova: Thank you, Mr. Diamond!

sleptsova: Thank you

Larichev: Thank you, Professor Diamond. Thanks Alexei and others. Goodbye!

Levchuk: Dear Larry sometimes you was absolutely right. Thank you. Good luck to all!!!