POL/INTAFF-TED Talks-Rory Stewart: How to Rebuild Democracy

The following information is used for educational purposes only.

























Transcript:




So little Billy goes to school,and he sits down and the teacher says,"What does your father do?"And little Billy says, "My father plays the pianoin an opium den."So the teacher rings up the parents, and says,"Very shocking story from little Billy today.Just heard that he claimed that you play the pianoin an opium den."And the father says, "I'm very sorry. Yes, it's true, I lied.But how can I tell an eight-year-old boythat his father is a politician?" (Laughter)

Now, as a politician myself, standing in front of you,or indeed, meeting any stranger anywhere in the world,when I eventually reveal the nature of my profession,they look at me as though I'm somewhere betweena snake, a monkey and an iguana,and through all of this, I feel, strongly,that something is going wrong.Four hundred years of maturing democracy,colleagues in Parliament who seem to me, as individuals,reasonably impressive, an increasingly educated,energetic, informed population, and yeta deep, deep sense of disappointment.My colleagues in Parliament include, in my new intake,family doctors, businesspeople, professors,distinguished economists, historians, writers,army officers ranging from colonels down to regimental sergeant majors.All of them, however, including myself, as we walk underneaththose strange stone gargoyles just down the road,feel that we've become less than the sum of our parts,feel as though we have become profoundly diminished.

And this isn't just a problem in Britain.It's a problem across the developing world,and in middle income countries too. In Jamaica,for example -- look at Jamaican members of Parliament,you meet them, and they're often people who areRhodes Scholars, who've studied at Harvard or at Princeton,and yet, you go down to downtown Kingston,and you are looking at one of the most depressing sitesthat you can see in any middle-income country in the world:a dismal, depressing landscapeof burnt and half-abandoned buildings.And this has been true for 30 years, and the handoverin 1979, 1980, between one Jamaican leader who wasthe son of a Rhodes Scholar and a Q.C. to anotherwho'd done an economics doctorate at Harvard,over 800 people were killed in the streetsin drug-related violence.

Ten years ago, however, the promise of democracyseemed to be extraordinary. George W. Bush stood upin his State of the Union address in 2003and said that democracy was the force that would beatmost of the ills of the world. He said,because democratic governments respect their own peopleand respect their neighbors, freedom will bring peace.Distinguished academics at the same time argued thatdemocracies had this incredible range of side benefits.They would bring prosperity, security,overcome sectarian violence,ensure that states would never again harbor terrorists.

Since then, what's happened?Well, what we've seen is the creation, in places like Iraqand Afghanistan, of democratic systems of governmentwhich haven't had any of those side benefits.In Afghanistan, for example, we haven't just had one electionor two elections. We've gone through three elections,presidential and parliamentary. And what do we find?Do we find a flourishing civil society, a vigorous rule of lawand good security? No. What we find in Afghanistanis a judiciary that is weak and corrupt,a very limited civil society which is largely ineffective,a media which is beginning to get onto its feetbut a government that's deeply unpopular,perceived as being deeply corrupt, and securitythat is shocking, security that's terrible.In Pakistan, in lots of sub-Saharan Africa,again you can see democracy and elections are compatiblewith corrupt governments, with states that are unstableand dangerous.And when I have conversations with people, I rememberhaving a conversation, for example, in Iraq,with a community that asked mewhether the riot we were seeing in front of us,this was a huge mob ransacking a provincial council building,was a sign of the new democracy.The same, I felt, was true in almost every single oneof the middle and developing countries that I went to,and to some extent the same is true of us.

Well, what is the answer to this? Is the answer to justgive up on the idea of democracy?Well, obviously not. It would be absurdif we were to engage again in the kind of operationswe were engaged in, in Iraq and Afghanistanif we were to suddenly find ourselves in a situationin which we were imposinganything other than a democratic system.Anything else would run contrary to our values,it would run contrary to the wishes of the peopleon the ground, it would run contrary to our interests.I remember in Iraq, for example, that we went througha period of feeling that we should delay democracy.We went through a period of feeling that the lesson learnedfrom Bosnia was that elections held too earlyenshrined sectarian violence, enshrined extremist parties,so in Iraq in 2003 the decision was made,let's not have elections for two years. Let's invest invoter education. Let's invest in democratization.The result was that I found stuck outside my officea huge crowd of people, this is actually a photographtaken in Libya but I saw the same scene in Iraqof people standing outside screaming for the elections,and when I went out and said, "What is wrongwith the interim provincial council?What is wrong with the people that we have chosen?There is a Sunni sheikh, there's a Shiite sheikh,there's the seven -- leaders of the seven major tribes,there's a Christian, there's a Sabian,there are female representatives, there's every political party in this council,what's wrong with the people that we chose?"The answer came, "The problem isn't the peoplethat you chose. The problem is that you chose them."I have not met, in Afghanistan, in even the mostremote community, anybody who does not wanta say in who governs them.Most remote community, I have never met a villagerwho does not want a vote.

So we need to acknowledgethat despite the dubious statistics, despite the fact that84 percent of people in Britain feel politics is broken,despite the fact that when I was in Iraq, we did an opinion pollin 2003 and asked people what political systems they preferred,and the answer came back thatseven percent wanted the United States,five percent wanted France,three percent wanted Britain,and nearly 40 percent wanted Dubai, which is, after all,not a democratic state at all but a relatively prosperousminor monarchy, democracy is a thing of valuefor which we should be fighting. But in order to do sowe need to get away from instrumental arguments.We need to get away from saying democracy mattersbecause of the other things it brings.We need to get away from feeling, in the same way,human rights matters because of the other things it brings,or women's rights matters for the other things it brings.Why should we get away from those arguments?Because they're very dangerous. If we set about saying,for example, torture is wrong because it doesn't extractgood information, or we say, you need women's rightsbecause it stimulates economic growth by doubling the size of the work force,you leave yourself open to the position wherethe government of North Korea can turn around and say,"Well actually, we're having a lot of success extractinggood information with our torture at the moment,"or the government of Saudi Arabia to say, "Well,our economic growth's okay, thank you very much,considerably better than yours,so maybe we don't need to go ahead with this program on women's rights."

The point about democracy is not instrumental.It's not about the things that it brings.The point about democracy is not that it deliverslegitimate, effective, prosperous rule of law.It's not that it guarantees peace with itself or with its neighbors.The point about democracy is intrinsic.Democracy matters because it reflects an idea of equalityand an idea of liberty. It reflects an idea of dignity,the dignity of the individual, the idea that each individualshould have an equal vote, an equal say,in the formation of their government.

But if we're really to make democracy vigorous again,if we're ready to revivify it, we need to get involvedin a new project of the citizens and the politicians.Democracy is not simply a question of structures.It is a state of mind. It is an activity.And part of that activity is honesty.After I speak to you today, I'm going on a radio programcalled "Any Questions," and the thing you will have noticedabout politicians on these kinds of radio programsis that they never, ever say that they don't know the answerto a question. It doesn't matter what it is.If you ask about child tax credits, the future of the penguinsin the south Antarctic, asked to hold forth on whether or notthe developments in Chongqing contributeto sustainable development in carbon capture,and we will have an answer for you.We need to stop that, to stop pretending to beomniscient beings.Politicians also need to learn, occasionally, to say thatcertain things that voters want, certain things that votershave been promised, may be thingsthat we cannot deliveror perhaps that we feel we should not deliver.

And the second thing we should do is understandthe genius of our societies.Our societies have never been so educated, have neverbeen so energized, have never been so healthy,have never known so much, cared so much,or wanted to do so much, and it is a genius of the local.One of the reasons why we're moving awayfrom banqueting halls such as the one in which we stand,banqueting halls with extraordinary images on the ceilingof kings enthroned,the entire drama played out here on this space,where the King of England had his head lopped off,why we've moved from spaces like this, thrones like that,towards the town hall, is we're moving more and moretowards the energies of our people, and we need to tap that.

That can mean different things in different countries.In Britain, it could mean looking to the French,learning from the French,getting directly elected mayors in placein a French commune system.In Afghanistan, it could have meant instead of concentratingon the big presidential and parliamentary elections,we should have done what was in the Afghan constitutionfrom the very beginning, which is to get direct local elections goingat a district level and elect people's provincial governors.

But for any of these things to work,the honesty in language, the local democracy,it's not just a question of what politicians do.It's a question of what the citizens do.For politicians to be honest, the public needs to allow them to be honest,and the media, which mediates between the politiciansand the public, needs to allow those politicians to be honest.If local democracy is to flourish, it is about the activeand informed engagement of every citizen.

In other words, if democracy is to be rebuilt,is to become again vigorous and vibrant,it is necessary not just for the publicto learn to trust their politicians,but for the politicians to learn to trust the public.Thank you very much indeed. (Applause)