Barack loves democracy and promotes
it. He championed democracy promotion. Obama
supported to those seeking democracy. He opposed dictators, anti-democracy and
military rulers. Rhetoric was converted into
action during presidency. He took this position as an opportunity for democracy
promotion. So, he flagged it as the most important agenda of his administration
and foreign policy. This he made clear in his inaugural address on January 20,
2009.
President Barack said in his inaugural, “We
will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense. And for those who seek to advance their aims
by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our
spirit is stronger and cannot be broken–you cannot outlast us, and we will
defeat you. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the
silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that
we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”
Dating back to about 500 B.C.E.,
democracies existed in both Greece and Italy.
The
term democracy comes from the Greek words demos, the people, and craits,
to rule. Today, democracy is an abstract term that is difficult to define and
can have different meanings, depending on the speaker and context. In the most
common understanding, democracy generally refers to a political system with
certain minimum elements: effective participation by the people (either
directly or through representation) under a constitution, respect for human
rights, and political equality before the law for both minorities and the
majority.
The lack of a clear definition of
democracy and a comprehensive understanding
of
its basic elements may have created multiple problems for U.S. policy making,
according to some. Arguably, the lack of clear definition has hampered the
formulation of democracy promotion policy and effective prioritizing of
democracy promotion activities over the years. Also the lack of definition can
complicate coordination of democracy programs and the assessment of U.S.
government activities and funding. Further, without a consensus on the
definition of democracy, what criteria will determine when a country has
attained an acceptable level of democratic reform and no longer needs American
assistance?
9/11
attack jolted USA from inside. It was a historical turning point. The effects of the 9/11 attacks have been
profound. The attacks had an extensive economic impact for the United States of
America. The US government gave New York City US $20 billion as costs for the cleanup
and another US $5 billion was given to the families of the victims. In addition
to this, the ensuring ‘War on Terror’ has cost the US government approximately
$3 trillion as Economist Josepn Stiglitz stated in 2008.
In 2007, the Pew Institute’s Global
Attitudes polls showed that the US was viewed unfavourably by majorities in
Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil, most Western European countries and all Muslim
Middle Eastern countries except for Kuwait. This poll alone shows just how much
anti-US sentiment exists around the world and a large majority of the negative
sentiment stemmed from the US’ reaction to the 9/11 attacks in 2001.
Attack awarded Osama Bin laden public enemy
No. 1. Terror and terrorist activities got the highest importance in USA
priorities. Overnight counterterrorism became one of the main agenda of the
administration. Prior to this, it was not. When U.S. administrations encouraged
democratic reform, they have claimed that benefits for the country, its neighbours,
the United States, and the world will result. Many experts believe that
extending democracy can reduce terrorism while encouraging global political
stability and economic prosperity.
President Bush, in his second inaugural address,
on January 20, 2005 said “There is only one force of history that can break the
reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and
reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human
freedom. We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival
of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other
lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in the
entire world. So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the
growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture,
with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.”
In its 2006 National Strategy for Combating
Terrorism, the Bush Administration cites democracy promotion as a long-term
solution for winning the War on Terror. The ADVANCE Democracy Act of 2007, or,
by its more cumbersome title, the Advance Democratic Values, Address Nondemocratic
Countries, and Enhance Democracy Act of 2007,was passed in August 2007 as Title
XXI of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007.
The
ADVANCE Act was the culminating moment in a struggle extending back at least
three years to institutionalize democracy promotion within the Bush
administration. Nonetheless, in the
area of democracy promotion the Bush administration has bequeathed to the Obama
administration a legacy worth building upon and extending.
Delivering a speech in UN general assembly on
September 25, 2012, President Obama spoke “It has been less than
two years since a vendor in Tunisia set himself on fire to protest the
oppressive corruption in his country, and sparked what became known as the
Arab Spring. And since then, the world has been captivated by the
transformation that’s taken place, and the United States has supported the
forces of change. We were inspired by the Tunisian protests that toppled a dictator”
Barack
further said “We supported a transition of leadership in Yemen. We intervened
in Libya alongside a broad coalition, and with the mandate of the United
Nations Security Council. And as we meet here, we again declare that the regime
of Bashar al-Assad must come to an end so that the suffering of the Syrian
people can stop and a new dawn can begin.”
He
continues “These are not simply American values or Western values -- they are universal
values. I am convinced that ultimately government of the people, by the
people, and for the people is more likely to bring about the stability,
prosperity, and individual opportunity that serve as a basis for peace in our
world.”
So
let us remember that this is a season of progress. For the first time in
decades, Tunisians, Egyptians and Libyans voted for new leaders in elections
that were credible, competitive, and fair. This democratic spirit has not
been restricted to the Arab world.
Over
the past year, we’ve seen peaceful transitions of power in Malawi and Senegal,
and a new President in Somalia. In Burma, a President has freed political
prisoners and opened a closed society, a courageous dissident has been elected
to parliament, and people look forward to further reform. Around the
globe, people are making their voices heard, insisting on their innate dignity,
and the right to determine their future.
In
recent, on November 17, 2012, US President
Barack Obama’s visited to both Thailand and Myanmar went symbolically well. He
did all the right things in Thailand and in spite of all the reservations about
Obama’s Myanmar visit, he may have sent all the right messages, particularly
through the way the visit was orchestrated and his speech at Rangoon University
where he talked strongly about inclusiveness. Local news reports in local
papers warmly reported the visit.
In
a briefing for reporters, Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said the
White House sees the Asia Pacific as critical “to the future of the United
States, both economically and in terms of our political and security objectives
in the world.” By this visit with
Hillary, Barack wanted to accelerate and expedite promotion of democratic
reforms in the region.
America
is a nation composed almost entirely of immigrants. Immigrants began arriving
in the Americas since at least 1492 and in what is today the United States
since the early 1500s; immigrants continue to arrive five hundred and fifteen
years later.
Foreign policy is one yardstick among many to
measure the performance of a president. Barack made democracy promotion an
integral part and priorities it at top of his foreign policy. He practices it
rigorously. As a result, many dictators and military rulers got mixed in dust
and penalized. He proved his intention of democracy promotion on ground. Hence,
he developed this issue as political product.
He won third debate which was based
on foreign policy. USA being an immigrant’s country, his this result-oriented
effort made him popular among these voters inside the country. Outside he
became liking of people and countries because he developed and sold this
political product of democracy promotion. This product of democracy system is
liked by mostly worldwide.
Barack utilized presidency as an
opportunity to become democracy promotion champion. This he developed as a
political product for himself to sell. He sold it in 2012 reelection- in third
debate. Obama mustered more esteem worldwide as a real democrat than before
presidency. He proved it in practice. His promotional efforts helped him a lot
in building election environment all around world in his favor. And finally these
democracy promotional efforts brought him flying colors.
Heera
Lal (Views are personal and based on different sources)
Ref:
