Conflict Resolution and the Concept of Democratisation
Democratisation is one of the most important concepts and trends in modern political science, but its significance is only now beginning to be fully understood by conflict-resolution practitioners. At its simplest, democratisation refers to the establishment of democratic political regimes, which are assumed by most scholars to be a prerequisite for peace and development. However, the processes involved are complex and the results difficult to predict. In many cases, democracy-building efforts have been undermined by other entrenched factors in society, such as traditions or ideologies (whether tribal or religious), that oppose or counterbalance it. In other cases, democracy-building efforts have been overwhelmed by violent disorder.
Despite the complexity of these issues, there is a broad consensus among political scientists that there are many paths to democracy. Some countries became democratic through long-term evolution (e.g. Great Britain), whereas others became democratic through rapid transitions (e.g. the Baltic states). In addition, some countries became democratic through foreign intervention, e.g. Japan and Germany in the immediate post-World War II period.
There is also a broad agreement that democracies are unlikely to fight each other, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as the democratic peace. Although there are a few ambiguous cases from the 19th century, it is generally accepted that established democracies do not go to war with each other.
Another area of general agreement is that the success of a democracy depends on its effectiveness, as measured by popular support. This legitimacy can be generated through economic development, which creates a growing middle class with the capacity to demand greater influence in governance decisions. Inevitably, this pressure builds until even the most repressive governments succumb to it.
Finally, there is general agreement that the timing of a democratic transition is highly contingent on contextual factors. Most successful transitions have been preceded by a period of political and social stability, allowing elites to gain experience with democratic institutions and procedures and decide to adopt them. This has been a crucial factor in the success of transitions in many parts of the world.
The difficulty of predicting the outcome of a democratic transition makes it difficult for policymakers to make concrete recommendations about how to promote democracy internationally. Nevertheless, there is some agreement on the general principle that it is best to promote democracy through a combination of policies, including economic development, education and conflict resolution. The United Nations Democracy Fund, for example, funds projects to empower civil society in countries in the transition and consolidation phases of democratisation, such as training women in conflict-resolution skills in Cote d’Ivoire or providing tools for citizen engagement in elections in Brazil.
There is also general agreement that it is crucial to avoid premature celebrations when a country becomes democratic, especially in cases where the process has been accompanied by ethnic or religious conflict. In addition, it is essential to recognise that a country’s path to democracy may be different from the paths of other countries and to avoid the temptation to compare. Finally, there is a need to identify and specify the various mechanisms that promote or hinder a country’s democratisation, as well as the conditions that affect their emergence.
Democratisation is one of the most important concepts and trends in modern political science, but its significance is only now beginning to be fully understood by conflict-resolution practitioners. At its simplest, democratisation refers to the establishment of democratic political regimes, which are assumed by most scholars to be a prerequisite for peace and development. However, the processes involved are complex and the results difficult to predict. In many cases, democracy-building efforts have been undermined by other entrenched factors in society, such as traditions or ideologies (whether tribal or religious), that oppose or counterbalance it. In other cases, democracy-building efforts have been overwhelmed by violent disorder. Despite the complexity of these issues, there is a broad consensus among political scientists that there are many paths to democracy. Some countries became democratic through long-term evolution (e.g. Great Britain), whereas others became democratic through rapid transitions (e.g. the Baltic states). In addition, some countries became democratic through foreign intervention, e.g. Japan and Germany in the immediate post-World War II period. There is also a broad agreement that democracies are unlikely to fight each other, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as the democratic peace. Although there are a few ambiguous cases from the 19th century, it is generally accepted that established democracies do not go to war with each other. Another area of general agreement is that the success of a democracy depends on its effectiveness, as measured by popular support. This legitimacy can be generated through economic development, which creates a growing middle class with the capacity to demand greater influence in governance decisions. Inevitably, this pressure builds until even the most repressive governments succumb to it. Finally, there is general agreement that the timing of a democratic transition is highly contingent on contextual factors. Most successful transitions have been preceded by a period of political and social stability, allowing elites to gain experience with democratic institutions and procedures and decide to adopt them. This has been a crucial factor in the success of transitions in many parts of the world. The difficulty of predicting the outcome of a democratic transition makes it difficult for policymakers to make concrete recommendations about how to promote democracy internationally. Nevertheless, there is some agreement on the general principle that it is best to promote democracy through a combination of policies, including economic development, education and conflict resolution. The United Nations Democracy Fund, for example, funds projects to empower civil society in countries in the transition and consolidation phases of democratisation, such as training women in conflict-resolution skills in Cote d’Ivoire or providing tools for citizen engagement in elections in Brazil. There is also general agreement that it is crucial to avoid premature celebrations when a country becomes democratic, especially in cases where the process has been accompanied by ethnic or religious conflict. In addition, it is essential to recognise that a country’s path to democracy may be different from the paths of other countries and to avoid the temptation to compare. Finally, there is a need to identify and specify the various mechanisms that promote or hinder a country’s democratisation, as well as the conditions that affect their emergence.