The lecture meeting commenced with a Welcome Address by Dr. Reena Marwah, Secretary General, AAS. She also informed the audience of forthcoming AAS activities.

Prof. Pratap Bhanu Mehta introduced Prof. Larry Diamond as an expert on Democracy, and one who could provide a brilliant account of all the aspects which went into the making of a democracy.

Dr. Reena Marwah, Prof. Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Prof. Larry Diamond and Mr. Peter Eisenhauer.

Prof. Larry Diamond, at the outset, dwelt on the increase of democratization of countries and stated that over the last three decades, the proportion of electoral democracies--which choose and replace their leaders in free, fair, competitive, and meaningful elections--had risen from barely a quarter of all states in the world to more than half. He further added that the levels of political freedom and civil liberties have also risen sharply around the world, and several international actors had made unprecedented efforts to promote and support democratic development. In addition, he opined that cultures are changing in the direction of more democratic expectations and values, with a growing body of both expert and mass opinion regarding democracy, with transparency and accountability, as necessary to lift poor countries of the world out of poverty.

Despite best efforts, there were several new democracies and quasi-democracies of the world which remained quite illiberal and corrupt, while the Middle East remained particularly resistant to democratic change.

Prof. Larry Diamond.

Focusing his address on Asian countries, Prof. Larry Diamond spoke about the situation in Asia in the seventies and then compared it to the present. Reflecting on the 1970s, he stated that the only democracies in Asia were India, Sri Lanka and Japan. However, in the present time, there are nine or ten countries which had developed democratic institutions. He also added that democracy was also more legitimate and had developed with a greater momentum in Asia. However, democracies in Philippines, Indonesia, Nepal and Sri Lanka were not without their problems.

With respect to Mongolia, he said that it was difficult to locate the required economic and social conditions for democracies. He also highlighted the fact that in the Asian context it was the authoritarian and electoral-authoritarian states that were more dynamic and cited the cases of China and Singapore. He cited internal and external factors as determining the shaping of a democracy, and delineated the external variables as authoritarian success and authoritarian failure, and internal variables as legitimacy and power. China, he inferred, was a classic affirmation of the modernization theory.

Prof. Larry Diamond.

Singapore, he added, had elevated pragmatism to an ideology and some of its leaders would justify the perpetuation of authoritarian rule on the basis of performance; that it has developed Singapore, modernized it and made it one of the 25 richest societies in the world. Korea and Taiwan, Spain and Chile were other countries where authoritarian success had lead to democracy. All of these, he stated, were classic affirmations of the so-called modernization theory that high levels of economic development sustained over a long period of time, bring about higher levels of education, higher level of income, and the transformation of society with an autonomous civil society, with a valuing of autonomy.

He continued, "In Taiwan, there was a steady increase in the number of people affirming the desire for personal autonomy, and very powerful demands for democracy. There was significant value transformation and surveys highlighted the responses to pluralism in Taiwan, testing Confucian values. With every survey there has been a steady increase in the number of people affirming the desire for checks on authority and desire for freedom. Levels of political democracy changed with economic development and societal transformation. That is the combination of levels of political democracy with rule of law. Defining an effective democratization process he said, "the more economic development you get, the more you get value change, and the more you get value change, the greater is the progression towards a higher quality of democracy with civil rights, control of corruption and rule of law." These he pointed out were the internal dynamics of authoritarian success which can lead to democracy.

Participants during the lecture meeting.

Commenting on China, he said that there has been high economic growth but without any democratic change. He did concede, though, that the people of China enjoyed more freedom and greater personal freedom, with the prevalence of a looser society and more scope for the market. In his words, "The era of widespread terror is over since the reforms in 1978, the era of communists' ideology has largely passed as well. In the 1990s it appeared that democratic reforms had made a beginning with village elections and more scope for rule of law. It appeared as if China was opening up politically."

Participants during the lecture meeting.

Expressing skepticism about China's political system he asserted that the democratic processes have been completely stalled and China has pulled back from the elements of political reform. In his opinion, the Chinese political leadership was sitting on a volcano, which he also referred to as predatory governance. Sounding a caution he asserted, "The Chinese leadership cannot continue with this level of economic transformation, social transformation and value transformation with the present degree of authoritarian closure, without turmoil. This gap between economic transformation and political change has been referred to by other experts too. China is a fragile system, whereas India has a democracy with extraordinary resilience, and adopts new policies to relieve citizen frustration and correct abuses of power by the action of civil society along with the exposure and challenges of a free press. China has none of these conditions and is thus a political accident waiting to happen. China could find itself in the middle of an environmental crisis, a health crisis, financial crisis or even a crisis of large-scale corruption. When that happens and the political system does not allow competitive elections, there will be a massive upheaval."

In making a comparison between the European Union and Asia he referred to role played by the neighboring countries. While the European Union had a gravitational pull on Central and East European countries making 31 out of 33 countries electoral democracies, the Asian continent had no such country or sub-region with a similar gravitational pull.

Elucidating the case of Malaysia, he stated that there has been a situation of authoritarian success mainly because of the coherence of the ruling elite with ideological unity. Singapore, in his opinion, was a case of an extraordinary level of discipline and control, but not without the beginning of restiveness appearing with younger Singaporeans desiring change.

Facilitation of Prof. Larry Diamond.

Highlighting incidences of authoritarian failure, he referred to the ironical situation where authoritarian regimes which were marked by an absence of access to the world, allowing no pluralism or competition or development, were more likely to survive if they received resources from other countries. These, he cited were, the tragic examples of Myanmar and North Korea, which were authoritarian and without pluralism. He questioned what would happen to North Korea and Myanmar once China became a democracy as a high degree of closure always undermined prospects of development. He concluded by highlighting the importance of legitimacy, performance and institutions which combined together, could work to provide stability and order in a democracy. He also referred to the imperative for India to engage with other countries in the region in helping them move towards democracy.

Participants during the lecture meeting.

His concluding remarks were, "Because some democracies have low levels of legitimacy, there is a need for considerable caution about the long-term prospects for their stability. In many countries during the 1980s and early 1990s, political democratization occurred at the same time as a profound economic crisis. Such conditions have already caused the breakdown of democratization in a number of countries. To attain legitimacy, what new democracies need above all is efficacy, particularly in the economic arena, but also in the polity."

Participants during the lecture meeting.

Pro. Larry Diamond, Dr. E. Sridharan and Dr. Reena Marwah.

The lecture by Prof. Larry Diamond was followed by an interactive question-answer session, moderated by the Chairperson Prof. Pratap Bhanu Mehta. The lecture meeting concluded with a vote of thanks by Dr. Reena Marwah.

Report prepared by Dr. Reena Marwah for AAS.