翻身做主後 民主化爲何會發生逆轉

The tide of global deMocratic change, which at the start of the new millennium looked like an unstoppable force of nature, has been turned back over the last decade. How serious and prolonged this reversal turns out to be is open to question. What cannot be doubted is the direction of travel. In its most recent annual survey, the respected think tank Freedom House recorded a net decline in world freedom for the eighth year in a row. While political rights and civil liberties improved in 40 countries, they deteriorated in 54.

在新世紀的開端，全球民主化變革大潮似乎是一股勢不可擋的自然力量，而在過去10年，這股浪潮卻發生了逆轉。逆轉的嚴重程度和持續時間還未可知。但其行進方向卻無可置疑。頗受尊敬的智庫自由之家(Freedom House)最近發表的一份年度調查顯示，世界的自由程度連續第8年淨下降。儘管40個國家的政治權利和公民自由得到了改善，54個國家的情況卻惡化了。

Perhaps the most vivid and significant example of this trend is the sight of a young, imperfect democracy – Ukraine – being brutalised by its large, authoritarian neighbour as the democratic world stands frozen on the sidelines. It isn’t a coincidence that Freedom House began to note the drift away from democracy a year after it downgraded Russia’s ranking from ‘partly free’ to ‘not free’. China already provided an attractive model of authoritarian modernisation for the power elites of developing nations, but Vladimir Putin went further by showing the world that democratisation is reversible.

這股逆流最鮮明和顯著的例子或許是，年輕、尚不完美的民主國家烏克蘭被龐大的威權主義鄰國欺凌，民主世界卻置身局外止步不前。自由之家在將俄羅斯的評級從“部分自由”調低到“不自由”一年後，開始注意背離民主的動向，這並非巧合。中國已經爲發展中國家的權力精英提供了一個威權主義現代化的誘人模式，而俄羅斯總統弗拉基米爾•普京(Vladimir Putin)更進一步，向這個世界展現了民主化也是可以逆轉的。

What he also provided is a more vocal and assertive expression of the new authoritarianism. Whereas policy-makers in Beijing have been careful to emphasise China’s peaceful rise and commercial priorities, their counterparts in Moscow are happy to present their approach as an open challenge to western norms and the prevailing world order. They have even given it a name – ‘sovereign democracy’. By associating sovereignty with the right to reject democratic standards, and inviting other countries to join them, Russia’s leaders have emboldened politicians across the world to impose their own forms of autocratic rule with the self-serving pretext that democracy needs to be ‘adapted’ to local conditions.

他還提供了一種描述新威權主義的更直白、更強硬的表達。北京的政策制定者謹慎地強調中國是和平崛起國家，商業是中國的優先事務，他們在莫斯科的同行則樂於將俄羅斯的策略描述成對西方準則和世界現行秩序的公開挑戰。他們甚至將這種路線命名爲“主權民主”(sovereign democracy)。俄羅斯的領導人們把主權和拒絕民主標準的權利聯繫在一起，並邀請其他國家加入俄羅斯的行列，這給世界各地的政客壯了膽，讓他們敢在民主需要“適應”當地條件的自利藉口下施行各自的威權統治。

The end of the presumption in favour of democracy that held sway in the decade following the dismantling of the Berlin Wall is at least one of the reasons why the Arab Spring failed to deliver the changes many hoped for. Unlike those who took power in central and eastern Europe after 1989, the leaders who replaced the old Arab despots haven’t look west for their inspiration. Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsi was criticised for ruling by decree and trying to impose his own constitution. The response when it came was not a popular democratic revolution, but a military takeover and a sharp deterioration in human rights. The coup leader turned President in a rigged ballot this year.

曾在柏林牆(Berlin Wall)倒塌後的10年中占主導地位、支持民主的假設終結了，這至少是“阿拉伯之春”(Arab Spring)沒有實現很多人期待的改變的原因之一。與1989年中歐和東歐上臺的領導人不同，取代了阿拉伯過去那些暴君的新領導人並沒有從西方尋求啓發。埃及前總統穆罕默德•穆爾西(Mohamed Morsi)被批靠法令來統治國家，並且試圖強施他自己制定的憲法。其引發的結果不是一場大衆民主革命，而是軍方接管權力和人權狀況嚴重惡化。這場軍方政變的領袖在今年通過一場被操縱的投票選舉當上總統。

In Asia, negative trends away from political pluralism are evident in Malaysia and Indonesia. The biggest setback this year, however, has been in Thailand where the military seized power in another coup. As with the overthrow of Thaksin Shinawatra’s government eight years ago, the military-backed elite acted to defend its privileges with force. Thaksin’s supporters wanted to continue policies that trebled growth, halved poverty and increased welfare. They won two electoral mandates before the tanks returned to the streets. Unable to stop Thaksin and his allies at the ballot box, the military is unlikely to take any more risks. The restoration of civilian rule, if it comes, will probably take the form of a Putin-style ‘managed democracy’.

在亞洲，馬來西亞和印度尼西亞表現出明顯的背離政治多元主義的消極趨勢。但今年最嚴重的倒退發生在泰國，軍方也在一場政變中奪取了權力。就和8年前他信•西那瓦(Thaksin Shinawatra)政府被推翻時一樣，得到軍方支持的精英羣體通過武力來維護自己的特權。他信的支持者希望繼續實行曾將經濟增長率提高2倍、將貧困水平減半、提高了福利的政策。在軍方的坦克再次出現在泰國街頭之前，他們贏得了兩次選舉委任。軍方無法在選舉投票中阻止他信和他的盟友，因此不太可能再冒任何風險。如果泰國能再次恢復文官掌權，很可能會採取普京的“有控制的民主”模式。

A decade ago Africa was being hailed as democracy’s emerging success story. The spread of political freedom appeared to be steady and sustained with the practices of electoral democracy gradually taking root in a number of countries. Africa has continued to suffer coups and political violence, yet it is the erosion of democratic standards in some of the countries that seemed to be making progress that is perhaps most troubling. Kenya introduced repressive media restrictions last year, Uganda has been criticised for suppressing the opposition and Tanzania has seen a rise in extra-judicial violence by the security forces. Zambia won praise for the transfer of power that followed its 2011 presidential election. But the new government of President Michael Sata has responded to rising dissent by arresting opposition leaders, restricting NGOs and intimidating journalists. It is increasingly difficult to envisage a peaceful transfer of power next time.

10年前，非洲被譽爲新近出現的民主化成功案例。政治自由的傳播似乎穩定而持久，選舉民主的做法逐漸在幾個國家中生根。非洲依然遭受政變和政治暴力的困擾，但一些國家日益加重的民主標準遭侵蝕或許是最令人擔憂的。肯尼亞去年出臺了壓制媒體的限制措施，烏干達因爲鎮壓反對派被批評，坦桑尼亞的安保力量使用司法外暴力的情況增多。贊比亞曾因2011年總統大選後的權力和平移交而受到讚譽。但總統麥克爾•薩塔(Michael Sata)領導的新政府通過逮捕反對派領袖、限制非政府組織(NGO)和恐嚇記者來應對增多的異議。越來越難以想象下一次的權力移交還能夠和平進行。

Even in Europe democracy is under pressure. Turkey has continued to move further away from European standards with the use of force against street protests, increased internet censorship and a rise in the number of journalists behind bars. In a number of the new EU member states problems to do with judicial independence, media freedom and the rule of law remain unaddressed and may even be getting worse. In western Europe there has been a sharp rise in support for parties of the hard right that openly identify with Putin’s autocratic methods. As one former European foreign minister said to me recently, EU enlargement was meant to export democracy from west to east. Instead we seem to be in danger of importing populism and authoritarianism in the opposite direction.

即使在歐洲，民主也承受着壓力。土耳其暴力鎮壓街頭抗議、加強網絡審查、關押更多記者，繼續遠離歐洲的標準。歐盟的幾個新成員國在司法獨立、媒體自由和法治方面的問題仍沒有解決，甚至可能正在惡化。在西歐，支持強硬右派政黨的人大幅增加，這些政黨公開對普京的威權手段表示認同。一位歐洲的前外長最近告訴我，歐盟的擴大旨在將西方的民主出口到東方。事實正好相反，我們似乎有把東方的民粹主義和威權主義引入西方的危險。

Some welcome the newfound ability of countries to resist pressure to democratise as a sign that the era of western domination has come to an end. But the self-determination it brings is for those at the top, not the bottom. The only real beneficiaries are the predatory elites who are free to enrich themselves and monopolise power in the absence of popular constraint. Promoting democracy has become harder, yet the moral imperative to act remains. Accountable government is the best guarantee of healthy social and economic development as well as a fundamental right in and of itself. So the west has to regroup and find better instruments to turn the tide against the new authoritarianism.

一些人對這些國家抵住民主化壓力的新能力表示歡迎，認爲這是西方主導的時代走到盡頭的標誌。但是這種抵制帶來的自決是那些處於頂端的人享受的，並不延及底層的人們。唯一的真正受益者是那些壓榨人民的精英，他們能夠在沒有大衆約束的情況下自由地中飽私囊，壟斷權力。推行民主變得更爲困難，然而推行民主依然有道德必要性。對人民負責的政府是社會和經濟良性發展的最好保證，本身也是一項基本權利。因此西方應該思考並找到一個更好的手段扭轉態勢，對抗新威權主義。

The framework principle for thinking about a strategic response should be democratic internationalism. Liberal democracies should see each other as their most important partners, privileging inter-democracy relations and seeking new and deeper forms of institutional co-operation. Membership of the group should bring economic and political benefits, including preferential trade access, economic support, diplomatic solidarity and collective security guarantees. The goal should be to create within the international community a democratic block strong and successful enough to act as a pole of attraction for emerging nations.

思考應對策略的框架性原則應該是民主國際主義。自由主義的民主國家應該視彼此爲最重要的夥伴，對民主國家間關係予以特別重視，尋找更深層次的機構合作新方式。成爲民主集團的一員應該能帶來經濟和政治上的好處，包括貿易准入的優待、經濟支持、外交上的團結和集體安保。目標應該是在國際社會中創建一個足夠強大和成功的民主聯盟以吸引新興國家。

What Larry Diamond has called the democratic recession has its origins in the loss of confidence and political cohesion that followed the war on terror and the global financial crisis. It will continue until the west and like-minded nations around the globe are once again able to prove by example that democracy holds the key to success in the modern world. It is a task of renewal that has barely started.

拉里•戴蒙德(Larry Diamond)所稱的“民主衰退”的根源是反恐戰爭和全球金融危機後發生的信心喪失和政治聚合。“民主衰退”將繼續下去，直到西方和全球範圍內持相似觀點的國家能再一次用實例證明，民主掌握着在現代世界中成