By Kim Sang-woo
During the 2020 U.S. presidential campaign, Democratic candidate Joe Biden pledged that he would, if elected, host a summit of democracies. He argued that confidence in democratic systems has declined over the last 15 years with the rise of authoritarianism.
Biden presented the summit as a way to "strengthen our democratic institutions, honestly confront nations that are backsliding, and forge a common agenda." It is part of the Biden administration's broader effort to prove that democratic systems can still deliver for their citizens, a reflection of Biden's assessment that "Democracy doesn't happen by accident. We have to defend it, fight for it, strengthen it, renew it."
To those who watched President Biden's first year in office, marred by the aftermath of the Jan. 6 insurrection, the struggle to reestablish American global leadership and the human rights crisis following the hasty U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, a virtual summit with leaders of countries with varying degrees of democracy might seem like a small thing. However, it is not meant to be the end of the fight for democracy, but rather just one important step.
In a rare joint op-ed, the Chinese and Russian ambassadors to the United States criticized the summit, calling it evidence of Washington's "Cold War mentality," adding that democracy in China and Russia is simply manifested differently. These arguments appeared in a white paper released by the Chinese Communist Party days before the summit, entitled "China: Democracy that works."
The essay boasts the virtues of China's system, the "unity of democracy and dictatorship to ensure the people status as masters of the country," it was released at the International Forum on Democracy held in Beijing. However, these attempts to denounce the summit only exposed the inherent contradictions in their self-proclaimed system of "people's democracy," which flagrantly ignores the rule of law and human rights.
The Biden administration achieved at least two of its goals at the summit: first, it sounded the alarm on the state of global democracy, and second, it showed that there is a global audience interested in discussing strategies to tackle this decline. The summit hashtags had over 1 billion impressions on social media, and equally as important, the summit demonstrated that countries are still willing to engage when the United States issues an invitation.
Despite concerns about the guest list, more than 100 of the 110 summit invitees showed up. The unexpectedly strong reaction by Russia and China to the summit only reinforced the significance of the gathering.
The global defense of freedom and democracy requires a major multilateral effort, and if done properly, the summit will help mobilize the will and resources to curb the spread of authoritarianism and strengthen democratic institutions. It is an immense and urgent undertaking, and ultimate success is not guaranteed.
But, just as major threats to freedom were defeated in the past, democracies must now show the same resolve to counter authoritarianism in the 21st century. Complacency in the face of this urgent global challenge could be disastrous.
Asian democracies do not usually integrate democracy into their foreign policy. Such non-intervention in other countries' domestic politics, which is the norm, often results in indifference to other countries' undemocratic practices. Now, however, Asian democracies such as Japan and South Korea should assist developing countries to build both governmental and nongovernmental democratic institutions, as efforts to contribute to the success of the Summit for Democracy.
For U.S. allies and democracies in Asia, the renewed U.S. effort to promote democracy and reinforce collective efforts to balance Chinese influence in the region should be welcomed.
Coordinating responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, setting digital standards, and ensuring supply chain consistency can be areas for Asian democracies to establish rules-based principles through openness, freedom and transparency.
China has been seeking to change the existing global governance system for some time now. Attracting countries in the region to the democracy camp and keeping them there through the summit helps ensure that China's efforts fail.
The year of action must launch a long-term and sustained process to mobilize global citizens in the fight to preserve and strengthen democracy, to bolster democratic activists in backsliding nations, and to help human rights defenders, labor activists and those working to advance justice and the rule of law around the world.
Democracy is never perfect, requiring constant vigilance and regular maintenance. Each country attending the summit has work to do at home in this regard. There is no moral equivalence between a democratic government that is working to strengthen its institutions and rights, and an authoritarian regime that suppresses its citizens' voices for its own gains and self-preservation.
For the summit process to be a success, the United States should encourage other participating governments to take leadership roles in follow-up activities across summit sub-themes and within regions, as well as to make concrete domestic and foreign policy commitments.
The real test for the summit will be whether the countries participating want to come back. Because, ultimately, for a summit to be successful, attending it should feel like a reward, and those that weren't invited should feel left out.
The Biden administration should ensure tangible results that make countries want to be included and invited to future summits. It acknowledged that this year's virtual summit is just the start, and will be used to kick off a "year of action," leading to an in-person summit next year, depending on the pandemic situation.
Kim Sang-woo (swkim54@hotmail.com) is a former lawmaker and is currently chairman of the East Asia Cultural Project. He is also a member of the board of directors at the Kim Dae-jung Peace Foundation.
 |
Biden presented the summit as a way to "strengthen our democratic institutions, honestly confront nations that are backsliding, and forge a common agenda." It is part of the Biden administration's broader effort to prove that democratic systems can still deliver for their citizens, a reflection of Biden's assessment that "Democracy doesn't happen by accident. We have to defend it, fight for it, strengthen it, renew it."
To those who watched President Biden's first year in office, marred by the aftermath of the Jan. 6 insurrection, the struggle to reestablish American global leadership and the human rights crisis following the hasty U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, a virtual summit with leaders of countries with varying degrees of democracy might seem like a small thing. However, it is not meant to be the end of the fight for democracy, but rather just one important step.
In a rare joint op-ed, the Chinese and Russian ambassadors to the United States criticized the summit, calling it evidence of Washington's "Cold War mentality," adding that democracy in China and Russia is simply manifested differently. These arguments appeared in a white paper released by the Chinese Communist Party days before the summit, entitled "China: Democracy that works."
The essay boasts the virtues of China's system, the "unity of democracy and dictatorship to ensure the people status as masters of the country," it was released at the International Forum on Democracy held in Beijing. However, these attempts to denounce the summit only exposed the inherent contradictions in their self-proclaimed system of "people's democracy," which flagrantly ignores the rule of law and human rights.
The Biden administration achieved at least two of its goals at the summit: first, it sounded the alarm on the state of global democracy, and second, it showed that there is a global audience interested in discussing strategies to tackle this decline. The summit hashtags had over 1 billion impressions on social media, and equally as important, the summit demonstrated that countries are still willing to engage when the United States issues an invitation.
Despite concerns about the guest list, more than 100 of the 110 summit invitees showed up. The unexpectedly strong reaction by Russia and China to the summit only reinforced the significance of the gathering.
The global defense of freedom and democracy requires a major multilateral effort, and if done properly, the summit will help mobilize the will and resources to curb the spread of authoritarianism and strengthen democratic institutions. It is an immense and urgent undertaking, and ultimate success is not guaranteed.
But, just as major threats to freedom were defeated in the past, democracies must now show the same resolve to counter authoritarianism in the 21st century. Complacency in the face of this urgent global challenge could be disastrous.
Asian democracies do not usually integrate democracy into their foreign policy. Such non-intervention in other countries' domestic politics, which is the norm, often results in indifference to other countries' undemocratic practices. Now, however, Asian democracies such as Japan and South Korea should assist developing countries to build both governmental and nongovernmental democratic institutions, as efforts to contribute to the success of the Summit for Democracy.
For U.S. allies and democracies in Asia, the renewed U.S. effort to promote democracy and reinforce collective efforts to balance Chinese influence in the region should be welcomed.
Coordinating responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, setting digital standards, and ensuring supply chain consistency can be areas for Asian democracies to establish rules-based principles through openness, freedom and transparency.
China has been seeking to change the existing global governance system for some time now. Attracting countries in the region to the democracy camp and keeping them there through the summit helps ensure that China's efforts fail.
The year of action must launch a long-term and sustained process to mobilize global citizens in the fight to preserve and strengthen democracy, to bolster democratic activists in backsliding nations, and to help human rights defenders, labor activists and those working to advance justice and the rule of law around the world.
Democracy is never perfect, requiring constant vigilance and regular maintenance. Each country attending the summit has work to do at home in this regard. There is no moral equivalence between a democratic government that is working to strengthen its institutions and rights, and an authoritarian regime that suppresses its citizens' voices for its own gains and self-preservation.
For the summit process to be a success, the United States should encourage other participating governments to take leadership roles in follow-up activities across summit sub-themes and within regions, as well as to make concrete domestic and foreign policy commitments.
The real test for the summit will be whether the countries participating want to come back. Because, ultimately, for a summit to be successful, attending it should feel like a reward, and those that weren't invited should feel left out.
The Biden administration should ensure tangible results that make countries want to be included and invited to future summits. It acknowledged that this year's virtual summit is just the start, and will be used to kick off a "year of action," leading to an in-person summit next year, depending on the pandemic situation.
Kim Sang-woo (swkim54@hotmail.com) is a former lawmaker and is currently chairman of the East Asia Cultural Project. He is also a member of the board of directors at the Kim Dae-jung Peace Foundation.
![[INTERVIEW] Bae Suzy shows another side in 'Anna'](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/784d86bfce77453ba381374ff3189b49.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] Filmmaker points lens at North Korea's political prison camps](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/2fe5c7df5dba4805b27e81389e53807a.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
