The 60th anniversary celebration at SAIS in 2004 brought together the broad community of faculty, administration, students, alumni and friends to share in an event that extended beyond the boundaries of any particular concentration or, indeed, class year. Those of us who are permanently here enjoyed that connection and excitement, and we resolved to look for ways to infuse that sense of renewal and discovery into each academic year. Naturally at SAIS, that meant looking at the world around us to find themes that fit squarely within our educational mission and also would engage us with global leaders.
After our 60th came our “Year of Energy,” and then our “Year of China.” The importance of energy challenges in international affairs—and the overarching effects of China’s emergence as a major player on the global stage—are themes that hold the interest of anyone engaged in “advanced international studies” today. As I write, our students are about to arrive for the fall semester at our three campuses for academic year 2007–08, which we hope will be similarly enlivened by a broad array of activities around the theme of “Elections and Foreign Policy.” Most of our SAISPHERE readers will reasonably assume that we particularly have in mind the hectic schedule of campaigning and primaries in the United States that will fill the months of September to May. Indeed, by the time the next year’s class joins us, the U.S. elections will be in their very last lap of a marathon race. In the midst of this academic year, the primary calendar will culminate with the nomination of the two major party candidates or perhaps brokered conventions and an independent ticket. We shall see—and follow it all with interest.
But the idiosyncratic truth is that the theme for the year began with Russia. For decades of SAIS graduates, the Soviet Union and the Cold War were dominant elements of the international system that we were studying. With the end of that era and the period of economic transition and distress, Russia faded from the limelight. Soaring demand for commodities (especially oil and gas), which is the byproduct of the rise of China and other emerging markets as well as of America’s war in the Middle East, has changed the fortunes of Russia. And that change, in turn, has given substance and influence to Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy. As Russia looks forward to the end of the (formal) Putin era, or some constitutional accommodation to his continued leadership, the elections there seemed worthy of the whole school’s attention. Perhaps we should devote a year to understanding the new Russia? What did others think?
As we consulted across the community, it became clear that some of us were looking at the potential changes in Korea as a result of its upcoming elections; others were wondering about the stability of Prime Minister Abe and the LDP in Japan. As I write this in early September, General Musharraf is facing a strengthened independent judiciary with sympathetic interest in allowing former civilian leaders the right to return to Pakistan, with all that implies for the upcoming election period. China is preparing for its major Party Congress and for the “election” of the cadre of leaders who will hold political power in the important final term of Hu Jintao’s leadership. India’s coalition is under great stress over the nuclear deal with the United States, which was meant to be a centerpiece of the Bush administration’s vision for a foreign policy predicated on alignments with democracies, new and old alike. All this, in Asia alone, without even touching on Southeast Asia or Central Asia.
It’s for the volume, not this introduction, to provide a glimpse at the range of recent and upcoming elections around the globe, and how the world anticipates these will affect the foreign relations amongst states and the overall international system. Suffice to say that if elections are of interest, at SAIS we need to look well beyond the United States or Russia—with a global focus. But the theme we have chosen is meant to provide much more than just a survey of elections around the world, interesting though those may be. As befits SAIS, during this year we plan to slice and dice this fascinating topic to learn from history and peer into the future.
From history, for example, we can learn the degree to which political choices within a country can overcome geographic and other constraints. It’s a familiar question to SAIS alums: the extent to which a country’s foreign relations are determined by their geopolitical reality. The enduring need for France to contend with Germany, and China with Japan, are popular themes for analysts of international politics. Reading Tony Judt’s masterful volume, Postwar, dealing with Europe since 1945, one is reminded again of the fascinating paradox of international affairs, where leadership is crucial—especially because the constraints are so severe and the potential costs of miscalculations so high.
The question of wartime leadership under the discipline of constitutionally mandated elections is another staple of diplomatic history, not least because we citizens like reading about our courageous and heroic leaders helping us through the most trying of times (especially if we can do so in a comfortable chair during an era of peace). But the broader question of how to lead democracies into war, and sustain their effort, is of great importance to the United States as it makes its crucial decisions regarding Iraq while in the midst of a presidential election. Doris Kearns Goodwin’s much acclaimed Team of Rivals describes exquisitely how President Lincoln led his nation to both unity and an end to the abomination of slavery by respecting his countrymen, democracy and the embedded wisdom of the constitution he was pledged to defend. Seeing where a country must go and then holding that vision until the people are ready; finding the right metaphor and anecdote to make the argument resonate; and understanding how to keep rivals within the reach of compromise—these are among the qualities of effective wartime leaders. But, of course, leadership can only win the battle that is within grasp. It is leadership of another sort that knows when and how to withdraw from the field. Clearly, there is much to both learn and debate for SAIS in this academic year.
Elections and foreign policy also provide an opportunity to examine a host of interesting issues such as monitoring elections, electoral systems and democratic practice, the importance of public opinion and the feedback effects of polling, the role of special groups—immigrants, ethnic groups and gender biases, to name just a few. Modern technology is emerging as a powerful means of organizing and expressing political preferences. The year ahead should give us the opportunity to learn what scholars and pundits think about the future of electoral politics in the new information era.
We are hoping for a wonderful year of engagement with our SAIS community and our three campuses as we explore the expansive theme of “Elections and Foreign Policy.” We are fortunate, indeed, to have our great faculty and graduates anchor us with this volume of essays which it is my privilege to introduce.
We open with Sunil Khilnani’s insightful examination of the role of elections in the politics of our era. He offers a provocative conclusion on how elections within states will affect the capacity of the international system to make progress on global challenges.
Walter Andersen surveys the landscape of South Asia to describe how both global and regional relations play back into the domestic debates on foreign policy in each country. It is interesting to read, in particular, how “friendship” with the United States can put rulers and ruling coalitions in jeopardy when they are dependent on fragile coalitions (as in India) or are in a frontline position in the “war on terrorism” (as in Pakistan).
Esther Brimmer explains how foreign policy—in particular, national security—can affect the outcome of democratic elections. Citizens want to be physically and economically secure in their nation, and they weigh the competence of rival candidates to provide this security before casting their votes.
Our interest in elections and foreign policy brings to mind the broader subject of democracy promotion as a central plank of American foreign policy. Thomas Carothers says the Bush administration has shattered public consensus in this country on democracy promotion through its rhetoric and its actions. He outlines a plan for the next president to get democracy promotion as a foreign policy goal back on track with a three-pronged assault on a legacy of challenges.
Any comprehensive discussion of elections and foreign policy needs to consider the intersection of Islamist political parties and free elections. The process by which secular Turkey came to elect the Islamist party AKP with such resounding support is explored by Svante Cornell and Kemal Kaya. Ironically, the same democratic reforms that please the European Union and the United States may open the door to a more Islamic society with ambivalence about its aspiration to join the EU.
Marius Deeb zeroes in on the Bush administration’s attempts to foster democracy in Iraq, Egypt and Lebanon. In a brief overview, he sees a “somewhat consistent” policy on democracy promotion but says the results have been mixed.
Francis Fukuyama explores the abstract debate about the linkages between democracy and economic development. He proposes an alternative understanding that looks at concrete situations and seeks progress in both areas.
Then Jakub Grygiel takes a geopolitical perspective to explain how “location trumps elections.” He reminds us that a popular mandate does not alter either the international system or the neighborhood in which a country must contend in its foreign relations.
In the upcoming 2008 U.S. presidential elections, the war in Iraq is the No. 1 issue. As founder of the Center on Politics and Foreign Relations at SAIS, Robert Guttman reports from his ringside seat on the foreign policy match-up among Democratic and Republican candidates.
The new American president will need to manage relations with Russia in the context of its growing wealth and its anti-democratic trend, according to Andrew Kuchins. He describes the source of President Putin’s popularity in Russia and the likelihood of his continuing leadership.
David Lampton explores the interconnections and risks that arise from the proximity in electoral calendars in the United States and Taiwan, against the background of the 17th Party Congress and the National People’s Congress on-going these months in the People’s Republic of China. The serious tensions across the Straits require tempered rhetoric from all parties; unfortunately, that is in shortest supply at the height of a campaign season.
An elections report from Africa is equally troubling. Peter Lewis draws on his expertise as a scholar as well as his experience as an election observer to describe the recent voting in Nigeria. This pivotal country in Africa suffered one of the most “flawed elections” in that continent’s recent history, resulting in a conundrum for U.S. policy.
Matthias Matthijs surveys foreign policy challenges facing Gordon Brown’s government in the United Kingdom and sees more style than substance changes emanating from Downing Street. Reaching out to Germany’s Merkel and France’s Sarkozy and staying politely distant from Bush do not portend changes in fundamental tenets governing relations with the United States and Europe.
Azar Nafisi asks that we look beyond the gradations of political leadership in Iran and place our bets on the Iranian people. Our most effective weapons are ideological and cultural, expressed through the activities of NGOs and the broader civil society.
Mitchell Orenstein offers an illuminating review of the roller-coaster ride of electoral politics in Poland this fall. While explaining both the historical roots and the contemporary controversy surrounding the era of the Kaczynski brothers, Orenstein joins in welcoming the new government’s repudiation of both foreign and domestic economic policies of the recent past.
Elsewhere in Europe, Gianfranco Pasquino, writing from Bologna, analyzes the role of foreign policy in elections in Italy. Overall, he finds that political groupings are so stable in their alignments on international affairs that foreign policy has an insignificant impact on electoral outcomes.
Riordan Roett surveys the outcome of elections across Latin America in the last two years to explain how heterogeneous our hemisphere has become in its political ideology. At the same time, the salience of trade and immigration issues in U.S. politics promises to weaken the hand of a new president as he or she tries to fashion a foreign policy for this complex region.
Jae-Jung Suh provides a vivid illustration of how elections affect foreign policy by looking back on U.S./South Korea/Japan relations over the past eight years. Nonsynchronous elections in the three countries have resulted in volatile alliance relations as each country shifts its policy regarding engagement with North Korea.
Ruth Wedgwood takes the ideals of democratic elections and examines them both in the context of our own tradition of political thought and in the cold light of today’s hardest cases. She notes that elections alone cannot produce concord; indeed, they can give legitimacy to the tyranny of a majority.
Individual Southeast Asian nations are not of a size to influence global relations and, thus, the interactions between elections and foreign policy are overlooked, writes Bridget Welsh. By contrasting the Cold War years with the years since 9/11, she demonstrates the crucial feedback from the international system into electoral politics across the region.
William Zartman explores the ways in which conflict resolution can be served by elections, as well as how elections can provide the opportunity for a lessening of conflict. His many illustrations from post-World War II history offer a fascinating glimpse of these rich interactions.
Finally, you may notice the thoughts and insights on elections from some of our alumni scattered throughout this issue of SAISPHERE. Not only do these contributions add context to this year’s theme, they also are indicative of the breadth and engagement of our dedicated alumni network. In the coming months, SAIS will see a reinvigorated focus on cultivating and partnering with the diverse and talented alumni the school is so fortunate to have.
We are pleased to welcome a new director of Alumni Relations who will usher in a spirited revival of the programs and outreach our alums deserve. Additionally, you will hear more of SAIS’s new strategic plan to strengthen Admissions and Career Services, expand the role of technology, improve competitiveness through substantial increases in financial aid and enhance the overall SAIS experience with activities outside the classroom. The success of these crucial initiatives depends on the continued engagement of you, our alumni community. As the world around us grapples with change, SAIS must rely on the expertise, time, gifts and support of its graduates to continually adjust and solidify its position as the global leader in international relations education.
We sincerely hope you join us for this incredible journey.
Jessica P. Einhorn ’70 |
