Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Trans-national Actors in Democratizing States: The Case of German Political Foundations in Ukraine

2007; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 23; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/13523270701317562

1743-9116

Matthias Brucker,

Abstract The Orange Revolution halted an increasingly undemocratic tendency in Ukraine, but it remains unclear whether this was generated wholly within Ukraine or was in part stimulated from outside. Evidence suggests that trans-national actors, such as German political foundations, influenced this change. As norm entrepreneurs, agents of socialization and pro-active elements in the democratization process itself, they have fostered democratic tendencies over a long period, and this has had a positive influence on the development of civil society and the values needed to sustain democracy. Notes 1. As quoted in Konrad Schuller, ‘Jugendrevolte, nationale Erweckung. Was hielt die “orangene Orgie” der Opposition in der Ukraine zusammen?’, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 9 Dec. 2004. 2. Adam Przeworski, Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991). 3. Democracy is defined following Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan, The Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America and Post-Communist Europe (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), p.3: a democratic transition is complete when sufficient agreement has been reached about political procedures to produce an elected government, when a government comes to power that is the direct result of a free and popular vote, when this government de facto has the authority to generate new policies, and when the executive, legislative and judicial power generated by the new democracy does not have to share power with other bodies de jure. 4. Przeworski, Democracy and the Market, p.55. 5. Ibid., p.72. 6. Geoffrey Pridham, ‘International Influences and Democratic Transition: Problems of Theory and Practice in Linkage Politics’, in Geoffrey Pridham (ed.), Encouraging Democracy: The International Context of Regime Transition in Southern Europe (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991), pp.1–28. 7. See Dankwart A. Rustow, ‘Transitions to Democracy. Toward a Dynamic Model’, Comparative Politics, Vol.2, No.3 (1970), pp.337–63 (p.346), and Guillermo O'Donnell, Phillippe C. Schmitter and Laurence Whitehead (eds.), Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Prospects for Democracy (Baltimore, MD and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), p.iv. 8. Samuel P. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman, OK and London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991), p.34. 9. Linz and Stepan, The Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, p.74. 10. Huntington, The Third Wave, p.86. 11. Laurence Whitehead, ‘International Aspects of Democratization’, in Guillermo O'Donnell, Phillippe C. Schmitter and Laurence Whitehead (eds.), Transitions from Authoritarian Rule Prospects for Democracy (Baltimore, MD and London: John Hopkins University Press, 1986), pp.3–46 (pp.4–9). 12. Whitehead, ‘International Aspects of Democratization’, p.19. 13. Linz and Stepan, The Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, pp.73–4. 14. Huntington, The Third Wave, p.101. 15. Gabriel A. Almond, ‘Approaches to Developmental Causation’, in Gabriel A. Almond, Scott C. Flanagan and Robert J. Mundt (eds.), Crisis, Choice and Change: Historical Studies of Political Development (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1973), pp.1–42 (p.28). 16. Robert Gilpin, The Political Economy of International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987). 17. Geoffrey Pridham, ‘The International Dimension of Democratisation: Theory, Practice, and Inter-regional Comparisons’, in Geoffrey Pridham, Eric Herring and George Sanford (eds.), Building Democracy? The International Dimension of Democratisation in Eastern Europe (London: Leicester University Press, 1994), pp.7–31 (pp.10–12). 18. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Trans-national Relations and World Politics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), p.xi. 19. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence (New York and London: Longman, 2001). 20. Ibid., p.21. 21. Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, ‘International Norm Dynamics and Political Change’, International Organization, Vol.52, No.4 (1998), pp.887–917 (p.891). 22. Ibid., p.895. 23. D.A. Snow, E.B. Rochford, S.K. Worden and R.D. Benford, ‘Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation’, American Sociological Review, Vol.51, No.4 (1986), pp.464–81 (p.464). 24. Finnemore and Sikkink, ‘International Norm Dynamics’, p.904. 25. Thomas Risse and Kathryn Sikkink, ‘The Socialization of International Human Rights Norms into Domestic Practices: Introduction’, in Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp and Kathryn Sikkink (eds.), The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp.1–38 (p.18). 26. Jutta Joachim, ‘Framing Issues and Seizing Opportunities: The UN, NGOs and Women's Rights’, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.47, No.2 (2003), pp.247–74. 27. Ibid., p.251. 28. See also Thomas Risse-Kappen, Bringing Trans-national Relations Back In: Non State Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995). 29. Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998), p.12. 30. Hans-Peter Schmitz, ‘Domestic and Trans-national Perspectives on Democratization’, International Studies Review, Vol.6, No.3 (2004), pp.403–26 (p.412). 31. Clifford Bob, ‘Marketing Rebellion: Insurgent Groups, International Media, and NGO Support’, International Politics, Vol.38, No.3 (2001), pp.311–33. 32. Dorota Dakowska, ‘Les fondations politiques allemandes en Europe centrale’, Critique internationale, Vol.24 (2004), special issue ‘Promouvoir la démocratie?’, pp.139–57; Beate Kohler, Political Forces in Spain, Greece and Portugal (London: Butterworths Scientific, in association with the European Centre for Political Studies, 1982); Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, ‘Foreign Political Aid: The German Political Foundations and their US Counterparts’, International Affairs, Vol.67, No.1 (1991), pp.33–63. 33. Franz Nuscheler, ‘Denkfabriken und diplomatische Hilfstruppen. Die Politischen Stiftungen der Parteien und ihre Auslandsarbeit’, in Dieter Weirich (ed.), Auftrag Deutschland – Nach der Einheit: Unser Land der Welt vermitteln (Mainz and Munich: von Hase & Koehler, 1993), pp.223–40 (p.224). 34. BMZ, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Wege und Akteure, p.2, at < http://www.bmz.de/de/wege/bilaterale_ez/akteure_ez/polstiftungen/index.html>, accessed 13 Aug. 2005. 35. Nuscheler, ‘Denkfabriken und diplomatische Hilfstruppen’, p.232; Dakowska, ‘Les fondations politiques allemandes’, p.148. 36. Maximilian Schürmann, Zwischen Partnerschaft und politischem Auftrag. Fallstudie zur entwicklungspolitischen Tätigkeit der Konrad-Adenauer-Stifung (Saarbrücken and Fort Lauderdale, FL: Verlag breitenbach Publishers, 1989), pp.61–2. 37. Nuscheler, ‘Denkfabriken und diplomatische Hilfstruppen’, pp.230–31. 38. Pinto-Duschinsky, ‘Foreign Political Aid’, p.35. 39. Lucan A. Way, Pluralism by Default: Challenges of Authoritarian State-building in Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine (Glasgow: University of Strathclyde, Centre for the Study of Public Policy, 2003). 40. Keith A. Darden, ‘Blackmail as a Tool of State Domination: Ukraine under Kuchma’, East European Constitutional Review, Vol.10, No.2/3 (2001), p.3, at < http://www.law.nyu.edu/eecr/vol10num2_3/focus/darden.html>, accessed 20 June 2005. 41. Paul Kubicek, Unbroken Ties: The State, Interest Associations, and Corporatism in Post-Soviet Ukraine (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000); Larry Diamond, ‘Elections without Democracy: Thinking about Hybrid Regimes’, Journal of Democracy, Vol.13, No.2 (2002), pp.21–35. 42. Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way, ‘The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, Vol.13, No.2 (2002), pp.51–65 (p.55). 43. Paul D'Anieri, Robert Kravchuk and Taras Kuzio, Politics and Society in Ukraine (Boulder, CO and Oxford: Westview, 1999), p.132. 44. Ibid., p.91. 45. Way, Pluralism by Default, p.9. 46. D'Anieri et al., Politics and Society in Ukraine, p.105. 47. Ibid., pp.106–9. 48. Darden, ‘Blackmail as a Tool of State Domination’. 49. Civil society is understood here in Linz and Stepan's terms as the ‘arena of the polity where self-organizing groups … relatively autonomous from the state, attempt to articulate values … and advance their interests’: The Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, p.7. 50. Astrid Sahm, ‘Zwischen Selbstbehauptung und Unterdrückung. Zum Verhältnis von Staat und Gesellschaft in der Ukraine’, in Günther Ammon and Michael Hartmeier (eds.), Zivilgesellschaft und Staat in Europa. Ein Spannungsfeld im Wandel (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2001), pp.92–110 (pp.98–9). 51. D'Anieri et al., Politics and Society in Ukraine, p.6. 52. Lucan A. Way, ‘Ukraine's Orange Revolution; Kuchma's Failed Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, Vol.16, No.2 (2005), pp.131–45 (p.136). 53. Political pluralism is defined in opposition to the plenipotentiary state; social life comprises multiple sources of authority, which strive to control government through a stable and institutionalized political competition: see Paul Q. Hirst, The Pluralist Theory of the State. Selected writings of G.D.H. Cole, J.N. Figgis, and H.J. Laski (London and New York: Routledge, 1989). 54. Way, Pluralism by Default, p.39. 55. Andrew Wilson, Ukraine's Orange Revolution (New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 2005), pp.58–69. 56. D'Anieri et al., Politics and Society in Ukraine, pp.148–9. 57. Przeworski, Democracy and the Market. 58. Kubicek, Unbroken Ties, p.2. 59. D'Anieri et al., Politics and Society in Ukraine, p.151. 60. Kubicek, Unbroken Ties, p.8. 61. Kubicek, Unbroken Ties, p.20, understands corporatism as ‘a noncompetitive form of interest representation in which officially sanctioned groups have guaranteed access to processes of policy formation and implementation but are subject to control from above’. 62. Jerzy Maćków, Am Rande Europas? Nation, Zivilgesellschaft und außenpolitische Integration in Belarus, Litauen, Polen, Russland und der Ukraine (Freiburg: Herder, 2004), p.214. 63. Kubicek, Unbroken Ties, pp.209–10. 64. Ibid., p.201. 65. Taras Kuzio, ‘From Kuchma to Yushchenko’, Problems of Post-Communism, Vol.52, No.2 (2005), pp.29–44 (p.35). 66. Way, ‘Ukraine's Orange Revolution’, pp.134–5; Kuzio, ‘From Kuchma to Yushchenko’, p.31. 67. Way, ‘Ukraine's Orange Revolution’, p.132. 68. Gerhard Simon, ‘Neubeginn in der Ukraine. Vom Schwanken zur Revolution in Orange’, Osteuropa, Vol.55, No.1 (2005), pp.16–33 (p.23). 69. Michael McFaul, ‘Transitions from Postcommunism’, Journal of Democracy, Vol.16, No.3 (2005), pp.5–19 (p.9). 70. Kuzio, ‘From Kuchma to Yushchenko’, p.33. 71. Ibid., p.40. 72. Dominique Arel, ‘The “Orange Revolution”: Analysis and Implications of the 2004 Presidential Election in Ukraine’, third annual Stasiuk Cambridge Lecture on Contemporary Ukraine, Cambridge University (25 Feb. 2005), p.5, at < http://www.ukrainianstudies.uottawa.ca/pdf/Arel_Cambridge.pdf>, accessed 22 June 2005. 73. Kuzio, ‘From Kuchma to Yushchenko’, p.40. 74. Arel, ‘The “Orange Revolution”’, p.6. 75. Taras Kuzio, ‘Ukraine: Splits Emerging in Pro-presidential Ranks’, Oxford Analytica, 4 July 2003, pp.15–16, at < http://www.artukraine.com/buildukraine/kuzio5.htm>, accessed 20 June 2005. 76. Ibid., p.15. 77. OSCE Kyiv, press release, ‘Widespread Campaign Irregularities Observed in Ukrainian Presidential Election, 1 Nov. 2004, at < http://www.osce.org/odihr-elections/item_1_8702.html>, accessed 20 June 2005. 78. Walter Mayr and Christian Neef, ‘Revolution in Orange’, Der Spiegel, 29 Nov. 2005. 79. When not indicated otherwise, this section is based on the respective foundations' Ukrainian websites. 80. Gerhard Michels, Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung Ukraine, by e-mail to author, 14 July 2005. 81. Swetlana W. Pogorelskaja, Die politischen Stiftungen in der deutschen Außenpolitik. Überlegungen am Beispiel der Tätigkeit der Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung und der Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung in der Gemeinschaft der Unabhängigen Staaten und in den baltischen Staaten (Bonn: Holos Verlag, 1997), p.101. 82. Helmut Kurth (spokesman), Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Ukraine, 20 July 2005, interview with author. 83. Ralf Wachsmuth (spokesman), Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Ukraine, 27 July 2005, interview with author. 84. Michels, by e-mail (n.79). 85. Wachsmuth interview. 86. Kurth, Michels, and Wachsmuth interviews. 87. Pogorelskaja, Die politischen Stiftungen, p.150. 88. Pogorelskaja, Die politischen Stiftungen; Michels e-mail; Wachsmuth interview. 89. Wachsmuth interview. 90. Pogorelskaja, Die politischen Stiftungen, p.96. 91. Ibid., p.154. 92. Ibid., pp.152–3. 93. Joachim, ‘Framing Issues and Seizing Opportunities’. 94. Wachsmuth interview. 95. Kurth interview; Michels e-mail; Wachsmuth interview. 96. Kuzio, ‘From Kuchma to Yushchenko’, p.40. 97. Thomas Carothers, In the Name of Democracy: U.S. Policy toward Latin America in the Reagan Years (Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 1991). Additional informationNotes on contributorsMatthias Brucker Matthias Brucker has worked at the European Commission in the unit in charge of the European Neighbourhood Policy, and in Tajikistan for the United Nations Development Programme. Currently, he is Economic Analyst for the German Foundation for World Population in Brussels, Belgium. The article is the result of research undertaken at the London School of Economics in 2005.