Post on 24-Dec-2015
Obama, U.S. Foreign Policy, and the Quest to Strengthen Democratic Governance
Jeremy M. WeinsteinDepartment of Political Science
Stanford University
The Critics“Mitt Romney believes in the march of freedom. Like Ronald Reagan. Barack Obama doesn’t get it. He hasn’t kept faith with those people who seek freedom for themselves and their children and that has been a disappointment to our heritage, to who we are, and to those brave people who are struggling for freedom.”-- Senior Aide to Romney
Is Romney Correct?
Outline
• President Obama’s Agenda on Democracy and Human Rights
• Why Focus on Transparency and Democratic Accountability
• The Origins and Impact of the Open Government Partnership
• Transparency=Accountability? A Case Study
The Inheritance
• A seriously damaged state of democracy promotion– Democracy promotion=invasion/occupation of Iraq– Legal abuses in the war on terrorism (e.g. detainees, prisoners
in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay)– Suspicion of the U.S. democracy agenda in the Middle East– Reluctance of U.S. allies to cooperate on these issues– Declining support for democracy promotion at home
A Democratic Recession
Poor Democracies Struggling
The Early Days
• A change in rhetoric, distinguish from the “Freedom Agenda”• Adjustments to the mission in major wars• Repairing America’s standing on human rights• Reinvigoration of global diplomatic engagement
– Two-track approach – Russia as the exemplar
In short, a pragmatic, progressive agenda - finding a more effective way to pursue the ideal of universal rights.
To critics, an abandonment of the democracy promotion agenda.
A Summary Scorecard – in 2012
Obama=Bush=Clinton=Bush=Reagan
•Increasingly strong, pro-democracy rhetoric•Critical role in a set of democratic transitions (Honduras, Haiti, Kenya, Ivory Coast)•Rising support for democracy assistance•Continuing close relationships with a set of autocratic allies
What is Distinctive about Obama’s Approach?
1. Rehabilitation of U.S. democracy promotion agenda2. Doubled down on investment in multilateral institutions3. Able management of democratic change in the region where it
was least expected (Middle East/North Africa)4. A concerted focus on the long game, modernizing the enterprise
of democracy promotion– Role for emerging democracies– Focus on democratic accountability, anti-corruption– Linking democracy and development– Internet freedom and new technologies
What is Distinctive about Obama’s Approach?
1. Rehabilitation of U.S. democracy promotion agenda2. Doubled down on investment in multilateral institutions3. Able management of democratic change in the region where it
was least expected (Middle East/North Africa)4. A concerted focus on the long game, modernizing the enterprise
of democracy promotion– Role for emerging democracies– Focus on democratic accountability, anti-corruption– Linking democracy and development– Internet freedom and new technologies
Overcoming Misconceptions
• People in the region do not care about democracy• The regimes in the region are stable• Pressuring for democratic change will cost us cooperation on
other priorities• Pressuring for democratic change will not have any impact• The rise of Islamists will set back U.S. foreign policy interests
The Challenge of Promoting Democracy during the Arab Spring
Democratic change (potentially) in competition with other U.S. objectives
Democratic change (potentially) complementary to other U.S. objectives
High opposition to the regime
BahrainEgyptIranJordan MoroccoYemen
LibyaSyriaTunisia
Low opposition to the regime
OmanQatarSaudi ArabiaUAE
IraqKuwaitLebanonPalestinian territories
What is Distinctive about Obama’s Approach?
1. Rehabilitation of U.S. democracy promotion agenda2. Doubled down on investment in multilateral institutions3. Able management of democratic change in the region where it
was least expected (Middle East/North Africa)4. A concerted focus on the long game, modernizing the enterprise
of democracy promotion– Role for emerging democracies– Focus on transparency, accountability, and anti-corruption– Linking democracy and development– Internet freedom and new technologies
Outline
• President Obama’s Agenda on Democracy and Human Rights
• Why Focus on Transparency and Democratic Accountability
• The Origins and Impact of the Open Government Partnership
• Transparency=Accountability? A Case Study
Motivation
• A shared challenge – making democratic institutions work• Powerful innovations around the world, especially in emerging
democracies• Evidence that these innovations improve development outcomes
Will Democracy Deliver?
• Managing diversity, competing interest groups; absence of programmatic parties; uninformed voters; money in politics; short-term incentives; etc.
Powerful Innovations
Early Evidence of Impact
• Reducing leakage in education funds (Uganda)• Improving rates of infant mortality (Indonesia, Uganda)• Reducing corruption, improving service delivery (India)• Promoting greater political competition (Brazil)
Outline
• President Obama’s Agenda on Democracy and Human Rights
• Why Focus on Transparency and Democratic Accountability
• The Origins and Impact of the Open Government Partnership
• Transparency=Accountability? A Case Study
Tools to Promote Transparency and Accountability
• Diplomacy• Foreign assistance• Conditionality• Domestic legislation• Global leadership
Open Government Partnership Launch: September 20, 2011
Capturing the Essence
With all the chaos of the Palestinian bid this week, The New York Times probably didn’t have the bandwidth to cover this story; at any rate, they didn’t. I’m hoping the paper will in time. This is global news about a new petrie dish for international democratic progress. It is a new model: a forum, not a court; a nudging engine, not a ranking system; a mashup of personal initiative and entrepreneurship with the stately dance of foreign relations. It is multistakeholderism on steroids, in that governments are acting in real partnership with civil society groups; indeed, governments are acting in partnership with governments – at the same time, they’re eying one another in an implicit contest for bragging rights.
-- Susan Crawford
September 2010 United Nations General Assembly
“In all parts of the world, we see the promise of innovation to make government more open and accountable. And now, we must build on that progress. And when we gather back here next year, we should bring specific commitments to promote transparency; to fight corruption; to energize civic engagement; to leverage new technologies so that we strengthen the foundations of freedom in our own countries, while living up to the ideals that can light the world.”
Reformers Need High-Level Support
An Open Government Partnership
• Engage a large and diverse group of countries in a fresh conversation about governance in which all countries have an equal voice at the table
• Showcase the leadership and innovation of both developed and developing countries, highlighting innovations and creative approaches and creating opportunities to learn from one another
• Secure concrete commitments from governments that signal an individual and collective commitment to reform
• Partner with non-governmental actors to develop reforms and drive implementation
Core Elements of OGP
• Minimum Standards for Participation• Open Government Declaration• National Action Plans, with Consultation• Independent Monitoring and Reporting• Seats for Civil Society at the Table• Partnerships with the Private Sector
How Did OGP Come About?• January 2011—Small meeting of ministerial officials from 9
governments (Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Norway, Philippines, South Africa, United States, UK) and international experts to share open government experiences and discuss how to move the transparency, accountability and civic engagement agenda forward. Group decides to create OGP.
• February 2011—Initial group of governments and civil society form a Steering Committee and begin developing the architecture of OGP, including criteria for participation. US and Brazil become co-chairs.
• July 2011—The Steering Committee holds an international outreach meeting for all OGP eligible countries (79 + 3) in Washington DC, co-hosted by Secretary Clinton and Foreign Minister Patriota of Brazil.
Challenging Issues
• Appropriate balance of political commitments and action steps, given international stage
• Tension between inclusion and maintaining credibility• Degree of independent, external oversight of domestic
commitments/actions
What Happened to India?Barack Obama lauds efforts in Indian villages to empower citizensPTI Sep 21, 2011, 02.03pm ISTTags:•US administration| •united statesNEW YORK: US President Barack Obama lauded efforts being made in villages across India to empower citizens and promote transparency in governance at a global forum here, which incidentally India has decided not to join.
Mubai, November 2010
The Launch
The Open Government Declaration
Together, we declare our commitment to:
•Increase the availability of information about governmental activities•Support civic participation•Implement the highest standards of professional integrity throughout our administrations•Increase access to new technologies for openness and accountability
Action Plans - Highlights
• 45 countries, 790 commitments• 70% of action plans are graded as specific,
measureable, actionable, measurable, and timebound by Global Integrity
Types of Commitments
Top 10 Focus AreasCommitment Activity Focus Area CountE-government 199Open Data 190Citizen Engagement 131Access to Information/ Freedom of Information93Budgets & Financial Planning 79Sub-national governance 57Public Servants/Civil Service 50Anti-Corruption 34Procurement 29Capacity building/ Training 28
Open Government vs. Open Data
Is there conceptual confusion?
Will governments avoid accountability but get credit for it through open data commitments?
Evidence of Impact
Are governments taking steps that they would not have taken in the absence of OGP?
•United States•Brazil•Philippines
United States
September 20, 2011, 4:31 PM ET US Joins Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative Amid Open Government Launch
Brazil
Philippines
“All but overshadowed by the Wednesday meeting between Presidents Benigno Aquino 3rd and Barack Obama was the submission of what could be one of the most important documents framed by the Aquino Administration. At the Open Government Partnership (OGP) launching in New York on Sept. 21, PNoy submitted the draft Philippine Government Action Plan (PGAP) intended to institute broad and deep participation by the people in governance.”
-- Manila Times
•Online publication of budget and procurement decisions•Participation by civil society in budgeting at the national, regional, and local levels•600 community-level poverty reduction strategies•Community oversight of public works projects•Freedom of information bill
Challenges going forward
• Managing expectations• Ensuring follow-through• Recognizing that transparency does not equal accountability• Broadening beyond the executive branch of government• Measuring impact• Figuring out what comes next
Outline
• President Obama’s Agenda on Democracy and Human Rights
• Why Focus on Transparency and Democratic Accountability
• The Origins and Impact of the Open Government Partnership
• Transparency=Accountability? A Case Study
Dissemination Materials
Resistance from Parliament
James Kakooza: “I have arrested the Box!”
Empirical Results
• Do voters update their attitudes and intentions?• Do MPs improve their performance?• Does transparency affect electoral outcomes?
Empirical Results
• Do voters update their attitudes and intentions?
Yes, but effects are short-lived and we cannot rule out Hawthorne effects.
• Do MPs improve their performance?
No, though there is weak evidence of aggregate change over time and adverse effects.
• Does transparency affect electoral outcomes?
No.
Possible Explanations1. Implementation failure.
2. Lack of political competitiveness.
3. MP attention to parties, and not to voters.
4. Political interference.