Advertisement

Democratization from the Outside In: NGOs and International Efforts to Promote Open Elections

  • Vikram K. Chand
Part of the International Political Economy Series book series (IPES)

Abstract

Until recently, the monitoring of elections in a sovereign country by outside actors was extremely rare. The United Nations (UN) had significant experience in conducting plebiscites and elections in dependent territories but did not monitor an election in a formally independent country until 1989 when it reluctantly became involved in the Nicaraguan electoral process. At the regional level, the Organization of American States (OAS) occasionally sent small delegations to witness elections in member states, but these missions were too brief to permit any real observation of the processes, and failed to criticize fraud.1 Since the 1980s election-monitoring has become increasingly common in transitional elections from authoritarian to democratic rule. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs), domestic and international, were the first to become involved in election-monitoring in the 1980s followed by international and regional organizations like the UN, the OAS and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in the 1990s. Election-monitors played a crucial role in transitional elections held in the Philippines (1986), Chile (1989), Panama (1989), Nicaragua (1990) and Haiti (1990). In addition, elections began to form a crucial element of UN ‘peacebuilding’ strategies in countries torn apart by civil strife such as Namibia (1989), Cambodia (1993) and El Salvador (1994).

Keywords

United Nations Electoral Process Mexican Government Observer Group Free Election 
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.

Notes

  1. 1.
    R. A. Pastor, ‘Elections, monitoring’, in Seymour Martin Lipset (ed.), Encyclopedia of Democracy (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1995), p. 409.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. D. Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), especially Chapter 6.Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    T. M. Franck, ‘The emerging right to democratic governance’, American Journal of International Law, 86 (1), 1992, pp. 66–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 5.
    A. Lake, ‘The enlargement of democracy’ in From Containment to Enlargement, US Department of State Dispatch, 3 (39), 27 September 1993, pp. 658–64.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    See F. Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Avon Books, 1992).Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    M. W. Doyle, ‘Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12 (3 and 4), Summer and Fall 1983, pp. 205–35 and 323–53. Doyle was not the first to point out the connection between peace and democracy.Google Scholar
  7. Earlier works on the topic are D. Babst, ‘A force for peace’, Industrial Research, April 1972, pp. 55–8; and R. J. Rummel, Understanding War and Conflict (Los Angeles: Sage, 1975–81). Doyle’s article provoked far greater interest in the topic.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. H. Levine, ‘Religion and politics, politics and religion: an introduction’, in Daniel H. Levine (ed.), Churches and Politics in Latin America (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1979;Google Scholar
  9. see also, S. P. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1989), p. 78.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. N. Rosenau, ‘Sovereignty in a turbulent world’, in G. Lyons and M. Mastanduno (eds), Beyond Westphalia: State Sovereignty and International Intervention (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), pp. 204–9.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    The Council of Freely-Elected Heads of Government, Observing Nicaragua’s Elections, 1989–1990 (Atlanta, Ga.: The Carter Center of Emory University, 1990), pp. 25–6.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Eguizábal, ‘Las Naciones Unidas y la consolidation de la paz en Centroamérica’, in O. Pellicer (ed.), La Seguridad International en América Latina y el Caribe (Mexico City: Instituto Matías Romero de Estudios Diplomáticos, 1995, pp. 119–27.Google Scholar
  13. 15.
    J. McCoy, L. Garber, and R. Pastor, ‘Pollwatching and peacemaking’, in L. Diamond and M. F. Plattner (eds), The Global Resurgence of Democracy (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993), p. 181.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    National Democratic Institute, Nation Building: The UN and Namibia, (Washington, DC: National Democratic Institute), 1990, pp. 26–34;Google Scholar
  15. see also L. Cliffe, The Transition to Independence in Namibia (Boulder Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1994), especially Chapters 4, 6–8.Google Scholar
  16. 18.
    See M. W. Doyle, UN Peacekeeping in Cambodia: UNTAC’s Civil Mandate (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1995).Google Scholar
  17. 19.
    On the relationship between the OAS and the UN in Latin America, see R. Greene, ‘El Debate ONU-OEA: nuevas competencias en el ambito de la paz y la seguridad international’, in O. Pellicer (ed.), Las Naciones Unidas: Visión de México (Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Economica, 1994), pp. 72–102;Google Scholar
  18. and S. N. MacFarlane and T. G. Weiss, ‘The United Nations, regional organizations, and human security: building theory in Central America’, Security Studies, 2 (1), Autumn 1992, pp. 6–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 20.
    A. K. Henrikson, ‘The growth of regional organizations and the role of the United Nations’, in L. Fawcett and A. Hurrell (eds), Regionalism in World Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), pp. 142–7.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    R. A. Pastor, Whirlpool: U.S. Foreign Policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), p. 282.Google Scholar
  21. 24.
    See, for example, Franck, ‘The emerging right to democratic governance’. See also, G. H. Fox, ‘The right to participation in international law’, Yale Journal of International Law, 17 (539), 1992, pp. 539–607;Google Scholar
  22. and F. Tesón, ‘Changing perceptions of domestic jurisdiction and intervention’, in T. J. Farer (ed.), Beyond Sovereignty: Collectively Defending Democracy in the Americas (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), pp. 29–51.Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    For a sceptical view of Western efforts to promote human rights in Asia, see B. Kausikan, ‘Asia’s different standard’, Foreign Policy, 92, Fall 1993, pp. 24–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 27.
    See National Democratic Institute and International Republican Institute for International Affairs, The May 9, 1989 Panamanian Elections (Washington, DC: NDI/IRI, 1990).Google Scholar
  25. 28.
    For a discussion of UN recognition practices and an argument in favour of democratic legitimacy as the standard for recognition see, G. H. Fox, ‘Multinational election monitoring: advancing international law on the high wire’, Fordham International Law Journal, 18 (5), May 1995, pp. 1658–67.Google Scholar
  26. 29.
    A. de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, ed. J. P. Mayer (Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1969), Vol. 1, Part I, pp. 62–84; Part II, pp. 174–95 and 262–311.Google Scholar
  27. 32.
    R. Pastor, in the Council of Freely-Elected Heads of Government, Mission to Haiti #3: Elections for Parliament and Municipalities (Atlanta, Ga.: The Carter Center of Emory University, 1995), p. 19.Google Scholar
  28. See also, Robert Maguire et al., Haiti Held Hostage: International Responses to the Quest for Nationhood 1986–1996 (Providence, RI: Watson Institute, 1996), Occasional Paper No. 23.Google Scholar
  29. 33.
    See, for example, R. Dahl, Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1971);Google Scholar
  30. S. M. Lipset, Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics (New York: Doubleday, 1960);Google Scholar
  31. see also, Z. Arat, ‘Democracy and economic development: modernization theory revisited’, Comparative Politics, 21, October 1988, pp. 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 34.
    R. A. Pastor, Integration with Mexico: Options for U.S. Policy (New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1993), especially pp. 27–8 and 65–7.Google Scholar
  33. 35.
    See Huntington, The Third Wave. See also L. Diamond, J. Linz and S. M. Lipset (eds), Politics in Developing Countries: Comparing Experiences with Democracy (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1990) and Diamond and Plattner (eds), The Global Resurgence of Democracy.Google Scholar
  34. 36.
    See Unidad de Asistencia Electoral, Posibilidades de Apoyo a Organizaciones No Gubernamentales de Observadores Electorales en Mexico (Mexico City: UN Mission, 23 May 1994).Google Scholar
  35. 39.
    Instituto Federal Electoral, Informe Sobre Observadores y Visitantes Extranjeros (Mexico City: Instituto Federal Electoral, 1994).Google Scholar
  36. 40.
    For the view of international observers (including this author) on the 1994 elections, see the Council of Freely-Elected Heads of Government, The August 21, 1994 Mexican National Elections: Fourth Report (Atlanta, Ga.: The Carter Center of Emory University, November 1994).Google Scholar
  37. On the views of Mexico’s most important domestic observer group, the Civic Alliance, see Alianza Civica, La Calidad de la Jornada Electoral del 21 de Agosto de 1994: Informe de Alianza Civica Observación ’94, (Mexico City: 19 September 1994).Google Scholar
  38. For the views of other domestic and international groups, see Instituto Federal Electoral, Proyecto de Informe a la Camara de Diputados, Addenda 21, 22 and 23 (Mexico City: Instituto Federal Electoral, 1994).Google Scholar
  39. 42.
    For examples from other countries on the possible functions of international observers, see J. McCoy, L. Garber and R. Pastor, ‘Pollwatching and peacekeeping’, Journal of Democracy, 2 (4), Fall 1994, pp. 102–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Third World Quarterly and Academic Council on the United Nations System 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vikram K. Chand

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations