http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/14/opinion/edgat.php


The return of Authoritarian Capitalists


By Azar Gat Tribune Media ServicesPublished: June 14, 2007


Today's global liberal democratic order faces a significant challenge from the 
rise of nondemocratic great powers - the West's old Cold War rivals, China and 
Russia, now operating under "authoritarian capitalist" rather than Communist 
regimes.

The category is not new - authoritarian capitalist great powers played a 
leading role in the international system up until 1945.

But they have been largely absent since then. The liberal democratic camp 
defeated its authoritarian, Fascist and Communist rivals alike in all of the 
three major great-power struggles of the 20th century - the two world wars and 
the Cold War.

It is tempting to trace this outcome to the special traits and intrinsic 
advantages of liberal democracy. But the reasons for the liberal democracies' 
victories were different for each type of adversary.

The Soviet Union failed because its economic systems limited it. But the 
nondemocratic capitalist great powers, Germany and Japan, were defeated in war 
fundamentally because they were medium-sized countries with limited resource 
bases. 

Thus contingency, not inherent advantages of liberal democracy, played a 
decisive role in tipping the balance against the non-democratic capitalist 
powers and in favor of the democracies.

The most decisive element of contingency was the United States.

Because of its continental size, no less than its democratic-capitalist system, 
the power of the United States consistently surpassed that of the next two 
strongest states combined throughout the 20th century, and this decisively 
tilted the global balance of power in favor of whichever side Washington was on.

So if any factor gave the liberal democracies their edge, it was above all the 
existence of the United States rather than any inherent advantage. In fact, had 
it not been for the United States, liberal democracy may well have lost the 
great struggles of the 20th century.

This is a sobering thought that is often overlooked in studies of the spread of 
democracy in the 20th century, and it makes the world today appear much more 
contingent and tenuous than linear theories of development suggest.

This is especially true in light of the recent emergence of nondemocratic 
powers, above all booming, authoritarian, capitalist China. Russia, too, is 
retreating from its post-Communist liberalism and assuming an increasingly 
authoritarian character as its economic clout grows.

Some believe these countries could ultimately become liberal democracies 
through a combination of internal development, increasing affluence and outside 
influence.

Alternatively, they may have enough weight to create a new non-democratic but 
economically advanced Second World. They could establish a powerful 
authoritarian-capitalist order that allies political elites, industrialists and 
the military; that is nationalist in orientation; and that participates in the 
global economy on its own terms, as imperial Germany and imperial Japan did.

By shifting from Communist command economy to capitalism, China and Russia have 
switched to a far more efficient brand of authoritarianism. Although the rise 
of these authoritarian capitalist great powers would not necessarily lead to a 
non-democratic hegemony or war, it might imply that the near-total dominance of 
liberal democracy since the Soviet Union's collapse will be short-lived and 
that a universal "democratic peace" is still far off.

Beijing and Moscow and their future followers might well become antagonists of 
the democratic countries - with all the potential for insecurity and conflict 
that this entails - while holding considerably more power than any of the 
democracies' past rivals ever did by virtue of being both large and capitalist.

The most important counterweight remains the United States. For all the 
criticism leveled against it, the United States and its alliance with Europe 
stands as the single most important hope for the future of liberal democracy.

As it was during the 20th century, the United States remains the greatest 
guarantee that liberal democracy will not be thrown on the defensive and 
relegated to a vulnerable position on the periphery of the international system.

Azar Gat is professor of national security at Tel Aviv University and the 
author of "War in Human Civilization." A longer version of this article appears 
in the July/August issue of Foreign Affairs


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kirim email ke