There's plenty of reason to engage the world's democracies
In 1998, former diplomat and academic James Robert Huntley wrote a little book entitled "Pax Democratica - Toward an Intercontinental Community of Democracies."
The Cold War had ended, the Soviet Union had dissolved and Francis Fukuyama had declared "the end of history," i.e., the triumph of liberal democracy and market-based systems. Could these gains be consolidated?
Secretary of State Madeline Albright was all in. She worked with the Polish Foreign Minister to negotiate the Warsaw Declaration and establish the Community of Democracies. It still exists and still functions, after a fashion, though it is largely a talk shop and some of its signatories, like Egypt, are far from paragons of democracy.
The Community certainly has not done anything to slow the steady decline of the institutional underpinnings of democracy around the globe, even in Poland, where it is headquartered, as the current government is being sanctioned by the EU for its attacks on the independence of its courts. Indeed, much of the democratic backsliding we have seen globally has come from within.
It is against this backdrop that President Biden will host a two-day virtual Democracy Summit this week with 110 countries and the European Union invited, including Taiwan, sticking a finger in the eye of China. A quarter of the invitees are micro island states. Another quarter, according to Freedom House, are only partially free. Some of the uninvited - such as Hungary and Turkey - have fumed, though Victor Orbán's Hungary still sits on the Governing Council of the Community of Democracies.
The critics of this diplomatic exercise have been quick to pounce. They have pointed out that creating divides is counterproductive to solving global problems. We have to deal with Russia and China whether we want to or not. They have called the promotion of democracy, human rights and the fight against corruption Biden's new "grand strategy" or "doctrine" when it is neither. However, for this president, these things are clearly a reflection of American values and American interests.
The other criticism is that the U.S. is no longer a model to be emulated. A global poll found that less than 20 percent of respondents see America that way. Restrictive election laws, gerrymandering, Jan. 6, dark money, as well as the general dysfunction of our society are held up as evidence. Better for America to get its own house in order, the critics say.
It's a fair point.
The question is, after all the high-sounding words, what can democratic nations do to stop the abuse of the Uyghurs in China, or the pro-democracy forces in Hong Kong, or anyone who opposes Syria's Assad or Iran's Supreme Leader or Venezuelans at the hands of Maduro's Russian and Cuban-trained thugs, or desperate migrants cruelly used by Belarus' Lukashenko - or stop the online interference in American elections? As Anne Applebaum has asserted, "the Bad Guys are winning" and their impunity and the absence of a cost that truly bites only encourages more such behavior.
It would be easy to dismiss the president's initiative as a lot of blather, but that would be a mistake. We can't let the bad guys win without putting up a fight. Can we increase press freedom? Can technology be an instrument of truth and not a tool of disinformation and division? Can human rights organizations be given stronger backing? Can those who fight for democracy and human rights be given support and hope - without exposing them to the charge that they are tools of the West? Can coalitions of the willing act together to compel autocrats to think twice? Does shame still matter? Can cynicism be rolled back?
And, most importantly, can American political leaders straighten up our own house?
• Keith Peterson, of Lake Barrington, served 29 years as a press and cultural officer for the United States Information Agency and Department of State.